Essays in Behavioral and Experimental Economics

1 citations

Abstract

This dissertation consists of three essays on behavioral and experimental economics. Chapter 1 examines if a temporary affirmative action policy can improve representation of women beyond the immediate scope of the policy in settings where employers hold biased beliefs about performance of women. I experimentally elicit employer beliefs and hiring choices for worker performance in two experimental treatments: a control with no restriction on hiring and a temporary affirmative action for women. I find that while hiring choices and beliefs are biased against women in the control treatment, temporary affirmative action treatment leads to improvement in representation of women even after the policy is lifted. Further, employers who are most likely to discriminate against women show the fastest reduction in gender bias in beliefs which in turn help explain their hiring choices. Chapter 2 presents a comprehensive review of 317 papers in the experimental economics literature studying gender differences in economic behavior to assess the empirical validity of the assertion than women are more sensitive to changes in experimental conditions. We find that there does not exist a discernible pattern with respect to whether men or women drive gender differences in responsiveness. We further find that the female-sensitivity assertion gets selective positive reinforcement in the literature which many in turn lead to over generalization of this claim. Chapter 3 presents work from a study where we compare five populations commonly used in experiments in economics and other social sciences: undergraduate students at a physical location (lab), and virtually over Zoom (V-lab), Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk), Cloud Research approved MTurk workers (Cloud-R), and Prolific. Our results are threefold - first, MTurk is dominated both in terms of noise as well as elasticity of response towards a treatment intervention. Second, Prolific offers greater inferential power due to low cost and low noise but has almost zero elasticity of respon

1
Citations
Research
Paper Only
Relevant for

Study specs

Authors
N Gupta
Year
2023
Human Data Platform
Prolific

Peer Review & Critical Discussion

3 threads

Potential Selection Bias in 2023 Cohort

DSJDr. Sarah J.
Verified PhD Candidate
12 replies

The participant pool shows a concerning overrepresentation of users from high-income demographics. Looking at Table 3, we can see that 78% of respondents had annual incomes above $75k, which significantly limits the generalizability of these findings to broader populations.

2 hours ago

Non-naive Participants Issue

MCM. Chen (OpenAI)
Data Scientist
8 replies

I've noticed a methodological concern regarding participant naivety. Given that Prolific users often complete multiple studies, there's a real risk that participants had prior exposure to similar experimental paradigms, which could confound the results.

5 hours ago

RLHF Applicability to This Study Design

PRWProf. R. Williams
Verified Researcher
15 replies

The implications for RLHF training pipelines are understated. If we accept the authors' conclusions about preference stability, this has direct consequences for how we should structure reward model training. The temporal decay effect described in Section 4.2 is particularly relevant.

1 day ago

Verify your expertise to join discussion

Create an account and verify your credentials to participate in peer discussions.