← ireadpaper · 顶刊中的公共政策研究

提高选择的风险性会扩大性别差距吗?

Does Increasing the Riskiness of Choices Widen Gender Gaps?
Management Science · 2025 · Samuel D. Hirshman、Alexander Willén

中文摘要

我们分离出改变选择的风险性对现实世界结果中性别差距的因果效应。为此,我们利用挪威大学改分制度的一项全国性改革,该改革在改分申请结果概率上产生了外生变异。利用独特的个体层面行政数据,我们表明,改分申请的期望值和下行风险均因该政策而大幅上升。随后我们展示,这项表面上的性别中立政策如何大幅扩大了男女之间的差距,原因在于两性在风险偏好和信念上存在差异。具体而言,改分申请风险性的外生变化使改分申请中的性别差距扩大了90%。我们证明,该政策通过其对成绩的影响而对学生具有重要意义。我们通过辅助性的简化式分析、结构估计以及补充性的实验室实验,厘清了各机制的相对重要性。综合来看,我们的机制分析表明,风险偏好和损失厌恶方面的性别差异不足以解释政策变化后性别差距的扩大,而自信或信念方面的性别差异对于合理解释数据是必要的,并且在更广泛意义上与我们观察到的模式相一致。

Abstract

We isolate the causal effect of changing the riskiness of choices on the gender gap in real world outcomes. We do so by exploiting a national reform to the regrade system of Norwegian universities that generated exogenous variation in the probabilities of the outcome of regrade requests. Using unique individual-level administrative data, we show that both the expected value of a regrade request, as well as the downside risk, increased substantially as a result of the policy. We then show how the ostensibly gender-neutral policy substantially increased gaps between men and women because they differed in their risk preferences and beliefs. Specifically, the exogenous change in the riskiness of requesting a regrade augmented the gender gap in regrade requests by 90%. We demonstrate that this has important implications for students through its impact on their grades. We disentangle the relative importance of mechanisms through auxiliary reduced-form analyses, structural estimation, and a supplemental laboratory experiment. Taken together, our mechanism analyses suggest that gender differences in risk preferences and loss aversion are not sufficient to explain the increased gender gap after the policy change, and that gender differences in confidence or beliefs are necessary to rationalize the data and more broadly consistent with the patterns we observe.
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →