Abstract:Extensive literature probes labor market discrimination through correspondence studies in which researchers send pairs of resumes to employers, which are closely matched except for social signals such as gender or ethnicity. Upon perceiving these signals, individuals quickly activate associated stereotypes. The Stereotype Content Model (SCM; Fiske 2002) categorizes these stereotypes into two dimensions: warmth and competence. Our research integrates findings from correspondence studies with theories of social psychology, asking: Can discrimination between social groups, measured through employer callback disparities, be predicted by warmth and competence perceptions of social signals? We collect callback rates from 21 published correspondence studies, varying for 592 social signals. On those social signals, we collected warmth and competence perceptions from an independent group of online raters. We found that social perception predicts callback disparities for studies varying race and gender, which are indirectly signaled by names on these resumes. Yet, for studies adjusting other categories like sexuality and disability, the influence of social perception on callbacks is inconsistent. For instance, a more favorable perception of signals like parenthood does not consistently lead to increased callbacks, underscoring the necessity for further research. Our research offers pivotal strategies to address labor market discrimination in practice. Leveraging the warmth and competence framework allows for the predictive identification of bias against specific groups without extensive correspondence studies. By distilling hiring discrimination into these two dimensions, we not only facilitate the development of decision support systems for hiring managers but also equip computer scientists with a foundational framework for debiasing Large Language Models and other methods that are increasingly employed in hiring processes.

Lowering the Playing Field: Discrimination through Sequential Spillover Effects

LinkedOut? A Field Experiment on Discrimination in Job Network Formation

Audits as Evidence: Experiments, Ensembles, and Enforcement

Perceived warmth and competence predict callback rates in meta-analyzed North American labor market experiments

Discrimination in the Venture Capital Industry: Evidence from Field Experiments

Is Discrimination Widespread or Concentrated? Evaluating the Distribution of Anti-Black Discrimination in Judicial, Hiring, and Housing Decisions

Identifying causal effects in experiments with spillovers and non-compliance

Monitoring hiring discrimination through online recruitment platforms

Downstream Effects of Affirmative Action

Fairness in Selection Problems with Strategic Candidates

Double Jeopardy?: The Interaction of Gender and Race on Earnings in the United States

Potential bias when using social media for selection: Differential effects of candidate demographic characteristics, race match, perceived similarity, and profile detail

A Short-term Intervention for Long-term Fairness in the Labor Market

Algorithmic Bias? An Empirical Study of Apparent Gender-Based Discrimination in the Display of STEM Career Ads

Predicting unequal treatment : From social perception to societal outcomes

Does Fair Ranking Improve Minority Outcomes? Understanding the Interplay of Human and Algorithmic Biases in Online Hiring

What You See Is What You Get? The Impact of Representation Criteria on Human Bias in Hiring

Interventions That Affect Gender Bias in Hiring: A Systematic Review

Rationally Inattentive Statistical Discrimination: Arrow Meets Phelps

Impression formation of majority and minority applicants during resume screening—Does processing more information reduce prejudice?

Don't let Ricci v. DeStefano Hold You Back: A Bias-Aware Legal Solution to the Hiring Paradox