| Literature DB >> 29503461 |
Giovanni Busetta1, Maria Gabriella Campolo1, Demetrio Panarello2.
Abstract
Types of discrimination are usually distinguished by economic theory in statistical and taste-based. Using a correspondence experiment, we analyze which of the two affects Italian labor market the most. In this respect, we studied the difference in discrimination reserved to first- and second-generation immigrants, taking gender differences into account. Even if we want to admit a rational discrimination based on perceived productivity differences (statistical discrimination) against first-generation immigrants (concerning language and education gaps), the same would not be reasonable for second-generation ones. Since they are born and educated in Italy, where they have always lived, the associated discrimination must be taste-based.Entities:
Keywords: Experimental economics; First- and second-generation immigrants; Labor market discrimination; Net discrimination; Statistical and taste-based discrimination
Year: 2018 PMID: 29503461 PMCID: PMC5823953 DOI: 10.1186/s41118-018-0030-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genus ISSN: 0016-6987
Descriptive statistics—percentages of all variables by nationality considering the full sample, the restricted sample, and the callback rate
| Italian | First generation | Second generation | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full sample | Restricted sample | Callback rate | Full sample | Restricted sample | Callback rate | Full sample | Restricted sample | Callback rate | |
| Woman | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.39 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.37 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.37 |
| Graduate | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.27 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.26 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.28 |
| High school | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.42 | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.46 |
| No title | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.30 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.26 |
| Front office | 0.46 | 0.44 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.44 | 0.33 | 0.46 | 0.44 | 0.42 |
| North-center | 0.77 | 0.85 | 0.84 | 0.77 | 0.85 | 0.89 | 0.77 | 0.85 | 0.84 |
Fig. 1Callback rates by nationality, generation, and sex
Callback rates for the full sample and the restricted sample
| Positive responses | Full sample | Restricted sample | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| CVs sent | Callback rate (%) |
| Callback rate (%) | |
| Italian | 237 | 2000 | 0.12 | 458 | 0.52 |
| First generation | 539 | 10,000 | 0.05 | 2290 | 0.24 |
| Second generation | 734 | 10,000 | 0.07 | 2290 | 0.32 |
The restricted sample is formed by 458 Italian men and women, 2290 first-generation immigrants and 2290 second-generation ones
Callback rates by ethnicity and gender
| Restricted sample | Woman | Man | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| % |
| % | |
| Italian | 229 | 92 | 0.40 | 145 | 0.63 |
| First generation | 1145 | 201 | 0.18 | 338 | 0.30 |
| Second generation | 1145 | 271 | 0.24 | 463 | 0.40 |
In the restricted sample—total Italian candidates = 458; first generation = 2290; second generation = 2290
Fig. 2Aggregate correspondence test—net discrimination (%) by ethnic origin
Aggregate correspondence test results (second-generation vs Italian applicants) by education level and contacts with customers
| Jobs | No one invited | At least one invited | Equal treatment | Discrimination against | Net discrimination | Relative callback rate |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | Second-generation | Italians | 3 − 4 |
|
| ||||
| Nationality | No. | No. | No. | No. | No. | No. | No. | % |
| |
| Callback: graduate | ||||||||||
| Albanian | 110 | 40 | 70 | 36 | 29 | 5 | 24 | 34.29 | 1.59 | *** |
| Chinese | 110 | 40 | 70 | 29 | 36 | 5 | 31 | 44.29 | 1.91 | *** |
| German | 110 | 38 | 72 | 48 | 17 | 7 | 10 | 13.89 | 1.18 | *** |
| Moroccan | 110 | 41 | 69 | 28 | 37 | 4 | 33 | 47.83 | 2.03 | *** |
| Romanian | 110 | 42 | 68 | 38 | 27 | 3 | 24 | 35.29 | 1.59 | *** |
| Callback: high school | ||||||||||
| Albanian | 196 | 83 | 113 | 58 | 44 | 11 | 33 | 29.2 | 1.48 | *** |
| Chinese | 196 | 80 | 116 | 49 | 53 | 14 | 39 | 33.62 | 1.62 | *** |
| German | 196 | 83 | 113 | 69 | 33 | 11 | 22 | 19.47 | 1.28 | *** |
| Moroccan | 196 | 81 | 115 | 46 | 56 | 13 | 43 | 37.39 | 1.73 | *** |
| Romanian | 196 | 83 | 113 | 55 | 47 | 11 | 36 | 31.86 | 1.55 | *** |
| Callback: front office | ||||||||||
| Albanian | 200 | 83 | 117 | 54 | 52 | 11 | 41 | 35.04 | 1.63 | *** |
| Chinese | 200 | 81 | 119 | 37 | 69 | 13 | 56 | 47.06 | 2.12 | *** |
| German | 200 | 79 | 121 | 64 | 42 | 15 | 27 | 22.31 | 1.34 | *** |
| Moroccan | 200 | 82 | 118 | 41 | 65 | 12 | 53 | 44.92 | 2.00 | *** |
| Romanian | 200 | 84 | 116 | 53 | 53 | 10 | 43 | 37.07 | 1.68 | *** |
The first column provides the ethnic origin of the applicant, the second one shows the number of applications sent, the third one shows the cases in which no individuals were invited for an interview, column four shows the cases in which at least one applicant was invited, column five shows the cases in which both were invited, column six shows the cases in which only the Italian candidates were invited, and the seventh one shows the cases in which only the second-generation candidates were invited. In the following two columns, we calculated the net discrimination against second-generation immigrants, and, finally, in the last columns, we reported the p value related to the chi-squared test. Chi-squared tests were conducted on the callback rates, and the results are indicated as *** significant at the 0.001 level. A positive sign indicates discrimination against the minority applicant (second-generation candidates). The null hypothesis is that discrimination against the second generation is equal to discrimination against Italians, therefore both individuals are treated unfavorably equally often
Net discrimination = (discrimination against second-generation—discrimination against Italians)/(at least one invited); Relative callback rate = success of majority/success of minority = [(2 + 3)/1]/[(2 + 4)/1]
Estimation results of Probit models and marginal effects
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | Italian | Immigrant | First generation | Second generation | |||||
| Coeff. | Coeff. | Coeff. | Coeff. | Coeff. | |||||
| Italian | 0.65*** | ||||||||
| Woman | − 0.45*** | − 0.59*** | − 0.43*** | − 0.39*** | − 0.47*** | ||||
| Graduate | 0.23*** | 0.34* | 0.22*** | 0.12 | 0.32*** | ||||
| High school | 0.15*** | 0.15 | 0.15** | 0.03 | 0.26*** | ||||
| Front office | − 0.16*** | 0.05 | − 0.18*** | − 0.34*** | − 0.06 | ||||
| North-center | 0.07 | − 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.25** | − 0.05 | ||||
| Constant | 0.49*** | 0.20 | − 0.50*** | − 0.66*** | − 0.37*** | ||||
| Pseudo | 0.046 | 0.047 | 0.029 | 0.035 | 0.035 | ||||
| Log likelihood | − 2933.84 | − 302.38 | − 2628.38 | − 1205.86 | − 1386.75 | ||||
| AIC | 5881.68 | 616.77 | 5268.75 | 2423.73 | 2785.50 | ||||
| BIC | 5927.35 | 641.53 | 5307.33 | 2458.14 | 2819.92 | ||||
Marginal effects in brackets
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001;