The incentive effects of affirmative action in a real-effort tournament

被引:47
作者
Calsamiglia, Caterina [1 ,2 ]
Franke, Joerg [3 ]
Rey-Biel, Pedro [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Dept Econ & Hist Econ, E-08193 Barcelona, Spain
[2] Barcelona GSE, Barcelona, Spain
[3] TU Dortmund, Dept Econ & Social Sci, D-44227 Dortmund, Germany
关键词
Affirmative action; Tournament; Real-effort; Experiment; Sudoku; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpubeco.2012.11.003
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Affirmative action policies bias tournament rules in order to provide equal opportunities to a group of competitors who have a disadvantage they cannot be held responsible for. Its implementation affects the underlying incentive structure which might induce lower performance by participants, and additionally result in a selected pool of tournament winners that is less efficient. In this paper, we study the empirical validity of such concerns in a case where the disadvantage affects capacities to compete. We conducted real-effort tournaments between pairs of children from two similar schools who systematically differed in how much training they received ex-ante on the task at hand. Contrary to the expressed concerns, our results show that the implementation of affirmative action did not result in a significant performance loss for either advantaged or disadvantaged subjects: instead it rather enhanced the performance for a large group of participants. Moreover, affirmative action resulted in a more equitable tournament winner pool where half of the selected tournament winners came from the originally disadvantaged group. Hence, the negative selection effects due to the biased tournament rules were (at least partially) offset by performance enhancing incentive effects. Crown Copyright (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier BM. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:15 / 31
页数:17
相关论文
共 27 条
[11]   A theory of affirmative action in college admissions [J].
Fu, Qiang .
ECONOMIC INQUIRY, 2006, 44 (03) :420-428
[12]   Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences [J].
Gneezy, U ;
Niederle, M ;
Rustichini, A .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2003, 118 (03) :1049-1074
[13]   GARP for kids: On the development of rational choice behavior [J].
Harbaugh, WT ;
Krause, K ;
Berry, TR .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2001, 91 (05) :1539-1545
[14]   Children's altruism in public good and dictator experiments [J].
Harbaugh, WT ;
Krause, K .
ECONOMIC INQUIRY, 2000, 38 (01) :95-109
[15]  
Hickman B.R., 2010, Effort, race gaps and affirmative action: A game-theoretic analysis of college admissions
[16]   Discrimination, social identity, and durable inequalities [J].
Hoff, K ;
Pandey, P .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2006, 96 (02) :206-211
[17]   Assessing affirmative action [J].
Holzer, H ;
Neumark, D .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, 2000, 38 (03) :483-568
[18]   Bid Preference Programs and Participation in Highway Procurement Auctions [J].
Krasnokutskaya, Elena ;
Seim, Katja .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2011, 101 (06) :2653-2686
[19]   RANK-ORDER TOURNAMENTS AS OPTIMUM LABOR CONTRACTS [J].
LAZEAR, EP ;
ROSEN, S .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1981, 89 (05) :841-864
[20]   Are bid preferences benign? The effect of small business subsidies in highway procurement auctions [J].
Marion, Justin .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2007, 91 (7-8) :1591-1624