To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

Screening, Competition, and Job Design: Economic Origins of Good Jobs

American Economic Review 2012 102(2), 834-864 open access
High-performance work systems give workers more discretion, thereby increasing effort productivity but also shirking opportunities. We show experimentally that screening for work attitude and labor market competition are causal determinants of the viability of high-performance work systems, and we identify the complementarities between discretion, rent-sharing, and screening that render them profitable. Two fundamentally distinct job designs emerge endogenously in our experiments: “bad” jobs with low discretion, low wages, and little rent-sharing, and “good” jobs with high discretion, high wages, and substantial rent-sharing. Good jobs are profitable only if employees can be screened, and labor market competition fosters their dissemination.

Public Discourse and Socially Responsible Market Behavior

American Economic Review 2024 114(10), 3041-3074 open access
We investigate the causal impact of public discourse on socially responsible market behavior. Across three laboratory experiments, having market participants engage in public discourse generally increases market social responsibility. These positive impacts are robust to variation in several characteristics of the discourse. We provide evidence that discourse strengthens beliefs that others support socially responsible exchange. However, relaxing requirements to engage in discourse sharply reduces its effectiveness. Our findings suggest that campaigns encouraging discussion of appropriate market behavior can have sizable impacts on addressing inefficiencies due to market failures but that policies encouraging broad public engagement may be important.

Egalitarianism and Competitiveness

American Economic Review 2009 99(2), 93-98 open access
The article discusses and analyzes data from several economic experiments in a household survey with mothers of preschool children. The researchers measured competitiveness by giving the subjects the choice between competing in a tournament or receiving a piece rate for a real effort task. The subjects also participated in lottery choices, which enabled the researchers to assess their risk preferences. The relationship between social preferences and competitiveness in the sample of mothers of preschool children was analyzed. The hypothesis that egalitarian subjects aren't as likely to self-select into competitive environments, which can produce winners and losers, was tested. A negative relationship between egalitarian choices and self-selection into competition was found.