Author:
(1) Anuar Assamidanov, Department of Economics, Claremont Graduate University, 150 E 10th St, Claremont, CA 91711. (Email: anuar.assamidanov@cgu.edu). Table of Links Abstract Background Data Methodology Results Discussion and Conclusion, and References A Appendix Tables and Figures A Appendix Tables and Figures Notes: Table A1 presents a difference in differences estimate of gender bias using regression of Equation 1. This table reports the coefficient on the interaction of Male Artist and Male Coach from the regression of Choice on indicators for coach gender, artist gender, and the interaction term. The reported coefficients are for ”own-gender coach” using data subsets by country indicated in columns. Each specification includes coach and country fixed effects, the order of the performance fixed effects, genre-fixed effects, the number of males relative to females in the team, the failure rate of the coach for female artists, and the failure rate of the coach for male artists. Standard errors are clustered by coach. ∗ p < 0.1, ∗∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗∗ p < 0.01 Notes: Table A2 presents a difference in differences estimate of gender bias using regression of Equation 1. This table reports the coefficient on the interaction of Male Artist and Male Coach from the regression of Choice on indicators for coach gender, artist gender, and the interaction term. The reported coefficients are for ”own-gender coach” using data subsets by gender composition in the team indicated in columns. X < −2 means that difference in the number of women and men in the team is 3 or higher. Similarly, X > 3 means that difference in the number of men and women is 4 or higher. Each specification includes coach and country fixed effects, the order of the performance fixed effects, genre-fixed effects, the failure rate of the coach for female artists, and the failure rate of the coach for male artists. Standard errors are clustered by coach. ∗ p < 0.1, ∗∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗∗ p < 0.01 This figure summarizes the results from the causal forest by approach in Athey and Wager (2019), where each estimate shown represents the effect of own-gender and opposite-gender interactions on selecting the artists in the case controlling for the gender of the coach and coach fixed effects. From left to right, the outcome of interest is a set of indicators for the failure rate of coaches for male artists. This is the rate at which a coach wanted an artist of a particular gender on their team, and the artist did not choose the coach. This result effectively yields the estimates of own and opposite gender bias in selections that are specific to variation by the failure rate of coaches for male artists. Standard errors clustered by coach. This figure summarizes the results from the causal forest by approach in Athey and Wager (2019), where each estimate shown represents the effect of own-gender and opposite-gender interactions on selecting the artists in the case controlling for the gender of the coach and coach fixed effects. From left to right, the outcome of interest is a set of indicators for the failure rate of coaches for female artists. This is the rate at which a coach wanted an artist of a particular gender on their team, and the artist did not choose the coach. This result effectively yields the estimates of own and opposite gender bias in selections that are specific to variation by the failure rate of coaches for female artists. Standard errors clustered by coach. This figure summarizes the results from the causal forest by approach in Athey and Wager (2019), where each estimate shown represents the effect of own-gender and opposite-gender interactions on selecting the artists in the case controlling for the gender of the coach and coach fixed effects. From left to right, the outcome of interest is a set of indicators for each audition episode. Each 10th order of ten performances aggregates into the episodes in the same order. This result effectively yields the estimates of own and opposite gender bias in selections that are specific to variation by the grouped order of performance. Standard errors clustered by coach. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Author: (1) Anuar Assamidanov, Department of Economics, Claremont Graduate University, 150 E 10th St, Claremont, CA 91711. (Email: anuar.assamidanov@cgu.edu). Author: Author: (1) Anuar Assamidanov, Department of Economics, Claremont Graduate University, 150 E 10th St, Claremont, CA 91711. (Email: anuar.assamidanov@cgu.edu). Table of Links Abstract Abstract Background Background Data Data Methodology Methodology Results Results Discussion and Conclusion, and References Discussion and Conclusion, and References A Appendix Tables and Figures A Appendix Tables and Figures A Appendix Tables and Figures Notes: Table A1 presents a difference in differences estimate of gender bias using regression of Equation 1. This table reports the coefficient on the interaction of Male Artist and Male Coach from the regression of Choice on indicators for coach gender, artist gender, and the interaction term. The reported coefficients are for ”own-gender coach” using data subsets by country indicated in columns. Each specification includes coach and country fixed effects, the order of the performance fixed effects, genre-fixed effects, the number of males relative to females in the team, the failure rate of the coach for female artists, and the failure rate of the coach for male artists. Standard errors are clustered by coach. ∗ p < 0.1, ∗∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗∗ p < 0.01 Notes: Table A2 presents a difference in differences estimate of gender bias using regression of Equation 1. This table reports the coefficient on the interaction of Male Artist and Male Coach from the regression of Choice on indicators for coach gender, artist gender, and the interaction term. The reported coefficients are for ”own-gender coach” using data subsets by gender composition in the team indicated in columns. X < −2 means that difference in the number of women and men in the team is 3 or higher. Similarly, X > 3 means that difference in the number of men and women is 4 or higher. Each specification includes coach and country fixed effects, the order of the performance fixed effects, genre-fixed effects, the failure rate of the coach for female artists, and the failure rate of the coach for male artists. Standard errors are clustered by coach. ∗ p < 0.1, ∗∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗∗ p < 0.01 This figure summarizes the results from the causal forest by approach in Athey and Wager (2019), where each estimate shown represents the effect of own-gender and opposite-gender interactions on selecting the artists in the case controlling for the gender of the coach and coach fixed effects. From left to right, the outcome of interest is a set of indicators for the failure rate of coaches for male artists. This is the rate at which a coach wanted an artist of a particular gender on their team, and the artist did not choose the coach. This result effectively yields the estimates of own and opposite gender bias in selections that are specific to variation by the failure rate of coaches for male artists. Standard errors clustered by coach. This figure summarizes the results from the causal forest by approach in Athey and Wager (2019), where each estimate shown represents the effect of own-gender and opposite-gender interactions on selecting the artists in the case controlling for the gender of the coach and coach fixed effects. From left to right, the outcome of interest is a set of indicators for the failure rate of coaches for female artists. This is the rate at which a coach wanted an artist of a particular gender on their team, and the artist did not choose the coach. This result effectively yields the estimates of own and opposite gender bias in selections that are specific to variation by the failure rate of coaches for female artists. Standard errors clustered by coach. This figure summarizes the results from the causal forest by approach in Athey and Wager (2019), where each estimate shown represents the effect of own-gender and opposite-gender interactions on selecting the artists in the case controlling for the gender of the coach and coach fixed effects. From left to right, the outcome of interest is a set of indicators for each audition episode. Each 10th order of ten performances aggregates into the episodes in the same order. This result effectively yields the estimates of own and opposite gender bias in selections that are specific to variation by the grouped order of performance. Standard errors clustered by coach. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. available on arxiv

Part of HackerNoon's growing list of open-source research papers, promoting free access to academic material.

Uncovering Gender Bias in Talent Shows: Insights from The Voice

Discrimination and Constraints: Evidence from The Voice

Precedent Tech 

Too Long; Didn't Read

Make resilience your competitive advantage

Exploring Own-Gender Bias in Talent Selections

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

ChatGPT's Macroeconomic Predictions

What 'The Voice' Auditions Reveal About Gender Bias in Hiring

Blind Auditions of 'The Voice' Expose Gender Bias in Hiring Practices

Revealing Gender Bias: Insights from Blind Auditions on 'The Voice

Using Causal Forests to Unveil Gender Bias in Hiring

ChatGPT's Macroeconomic Predictions

What 'The Voice' Auditions Reveal About Gender Bias in Hiring

Blind Auditions of 'The Voice' Expose Gender Bias in Hiring Practices

Revealing Gender Bias: Insights from Blind Auditions on 'The Voice

Using Causal Forests to Unveil Gender Bias in Hiring

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps