Forthcoming in the JEL: "Difference-in-Differences Designs: A Practitioner’s Guide" by Andrew Baker, Brantly Callaway, Scott Cunningham, Andrew Goodman-Bacon, and Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna. www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
The tragic landslide in Blatten gives me the excuse to tell you the story of how we found out Ice Ages existed. It's a cool story and the most important bit is rather similar to what's happening now.
psantanna.com/files/DDD_OV...
"War Causes Religiosity: Gravestone Evidence from the Vietnam Draft Lottery"
osf.io/preprints/so...
🚨Working Paper Alert
"Seeing Stereotypes"
✒️ @elisabaldazzi.bsky.social @pietrobiroli.bsky.social @mardelgiu.bsky.social @florentdubois.bsky.social
Do teachers recognize stereotypes in the classroom? Learn how the Stereotype Identification Test sheds light on bias: www.cesifo.org/en/publicati...
@agueda-sa.bsky.social (@economicsunito.bsky.social, Coll. Carlo Alberto) ends the panel with “Work Harder or Work Smarter? The Effects of Academic Distinctions on Early Careers”. Her research finds no advantages in earnings/job search, but sectoral sorting effects and gender disparities can persist
Does drinking this much coffee lower the risk of omitted variable bias?
Critical report for our profession.
Some of the points brought up align perfectly with our findings and suggestions!
Check it out at papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
Joint with @agueda-sa.bsky.social @lucafavero12.bsky.social
🤔 Implications: Affiliation bias reinforces inequalities & limits diverse perspectives in academia.
📄 Read more: ssrn.com/abstract=499...
Or, listen to a podcast that summarizes the paper in under 3 mins!
🎓 We find:
Affiliation impacts acceptance chances (controlling for paper quality), benefiting authors from top institutions
Driven largely by in-group favoritism among reviewers from similar institutions
Affiliation bias affects women and first-gen applicants’ representation
We compare evaluations under both grading schemes, keeping the quality of the paper constant, and allowing us to isolate the effect of institutional affiliation on the evaluation of the papers
We create 2 versions of each submission: one with visible affiliation and a non-visible affiliation (blind) version. We use applicants to the event as reviewers, and randomly pair them to read the same set of papers, one reviewer in the visible version, the other in the blind one.
We designed a matched-pairs field experiment, and ran it during the reviewing phase of an early-career workshop at a French university. We focus on conferences because they are crucial events for the development of ideas and networks, particularly important for junior researchers
🚨 New WP Alert! 🚨
"Judging the Paper by Its Cover: Affiliation Bias in Conference Admissions"
w/ Luca Favero @agueda-sa.bsky.social & Enrique Carreras
Ever wondered how the uni of affiliation affects how research is evaluated? So did we! Discover how we did it and what we find 🧵
#EconSky
