MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321448461 · doi:10.1086/720904

Why Did Firms Practice Segregation? Evidence from Movie Theaters during Jim Crow

2022· article· en· W4321448461 on OpenAlexaff
Ricard Gil, Justin Marion

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Law and Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFellRevenueSupreme courtMandateProfit (economics)DesegregationFor profitWhite (mutation)BusinessMarketingAdvertisingEconomicsPolitical scienceLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Racial segregation by businesses during Jim Crow was often voluntary and practiced without a legal mandate. Voluntary segregation can be driven by profit-motivated business owners catering to racist white customers or discrimination by business owners. We assess the relative importance of customers’ and firms’ discrimination by examining the 1953 desegregation of Washington, DC, movie theaters, which occurred rapidly because of a Supreme Court ruling affecting only businesses in Washington. Using weekly data for a nationwide sample of theaters, we find that revenues of Washington theaters fell relative to other theaters, consistent with reduced demand from biased white customers. We use a test for firms’ discrimination based on a model of the screening decision for films with black actors cast in prominent roles. We cannot reject that the run length of these films was profit motivated. Together, our results point toward customer discrimination as a primary cause of public accommodation segregation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Law and EconomicsSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207