Abstract:To better understand discriminations and the effect of affirmative actions in selection problems (e.g., college admission or hiring), a recent line of research proposed a model based on differential variance. This model assumes that the decision-maker has a noisy estimate of each candidate's quality and puts forward the difference in the noise variances between different demographic groups as a key factor to explain discrimination. The literature on differential variance, however, does not consider the strategic behavior of candidates who can react to the selection procedure to improve their outcome, which is well-known to happen in many domains. In this paper, we study how the strategic aspect affects fairness in selection problems. We propose to model selection problems with strategic candidates as a contest game: A population of rational candidates compete by choosing an effort level to increase their quality. They incur a cost-of-effort but get a (random) quality whose expectation equals the chosen effort. A Bayesian decision-maker observes a noisy estimate of the quality of each candidate (with differential variance) and selects the fraction $\alpha$ of best candidates based on their posterior expected quality; each selected candidate receives a reward $S$. We characterize the (unique) equilibrium of this game in the different parameters' regimes, both when the decision-maker is unconstrained and when they are constrained to respect the fairness notion of demographic parity. Our results reveal important impacts of the strategic behavior on the discrimination observed at equilibrium and allow us to understand the effect of imposing demographic parity in this context. In particular, we find that, in many cases, the results contrast with the non-strategic setting.

Exclusion of Extreme Jurors and Minority Representation: The Effect of Jury Selection Procedures

Female and Jury

Detecting Racial Bias in Jury Selection

The Importance of Voting Order for Jury Decisions by Sequential Majority Voting

Revisiting the Minority Threat Perspective: Examining the Main and Interactive Effects of Segregation on Sentencing Severity

Towards Just, Fair and Interpretable Methods for Judicial Subset Selection.

Optimizing voting order on sequential juries: a median voter theorem and beyond

Fairness in Selection Problems with Strategic Candidates

Evidence of Herding and Stubbornness in Jury Deliberations

Optimizing Voting Order on Sequential Juries: A Sealed Card Model

Condorcet's Jury Theorem with Abstention

A Multilevel Test of Minority Threat Effects on Sentencing

The Plaintiff Bias in Mock Civil Jury Decision Making: Consensus Requirements, Information Format and Amount of Consensus

The Interaction between Legal Representation and Extralegal Factors on Nonviolent Misdemeanor Case Outcomes

Mosaic or Melting Pot? Race and Juror Decision Making in Canada and the United States

Legal Techniques for Rationalizing Biased Judicial Decisions: Evidence from Experiments with Real Judges

A jury evaluation theorem

Explicit vs. statistical targeting in affirmative action: Theory and evidence from Chicago's exam schools

The Moderating Effect of Instant Runoff Voting

Optimal Decision Mechanisms for Committees: Acquitting the Guilty

Judging the Judges: A Systematic Investigation of Position Bias in Pairwise Comparative Assessments by LLMs