MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125679606 · doi:10.3386/w22187

The Age Twist in Employers’ Gender Requests: Evidence from Four Job Boards

2016· report· en· W3125679606 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Delgado Helleseter, Peter Kuhn, Kailing Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2016
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBusinessTwistDemographic economicsLabour economicsPsychologyBusiness administrationEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When permitted by law, employers sometimes state the preferred age and gender of their employees in job ads.We study the interaction of advertised requests for age and gender on one Mexican and three Chinese job boards, showing that firms' explicit gender requests shift dramatically away from women and towards men when firms are seeking older (as opposed to younger) workers.This 'age twist' in advertised gender preferences occurs in all four of our datasets and survives controls for occupation, firm, and job title fixed effects.Together, observed characteristics of job ads (including the job title) can account for 65 percent of the twist; within this 'explained' component, just three factors: employers' requests for older men in managerial positions, and for young women in customer contact and helping positions, account for more than half.The latter requests are frequently accompanied by explicit requests for physically attractive candidates.Based on its timing, the remaining portion of the twist, which occurs within job titles, appears to be connected to a differential effect of parenthood on firms' relative requests for men versus women.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.541
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.049 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequalityFrench-language works237,207