Racial Discrimination: Expanded

Continuing on an earlier post, here is the data about the first names used, their prevalence in the specific group (black/white male/female) and the percentage who received calls for interviews in the study:

White-Sounding Black-sounding
Name Frequency Mean Call-back Name Frequency Mean Call-back
Females
Emily 4.7% 8.3% Aisha 3.6% 2.2%
Anne 5.0% 9.0% Keisha 3.7% 3.8%
Jill 4.2% 9.3% Tamika 5.3% 5.4%
Allison 4.7% 9.4% Lakisha 4.1% 5.5%
Sarah 3.9% 9.8% Tanisha 4.2% 6.3%
Meredith 3.9% 10.6% Latoya 4.6% 8.8%
Laurie 4.0% 10.8% Kenya 4.0% 9.1%
Carrie 3.5% 13.1% Latonya 4.7% 9.1%
Kristen 4.4% 13.6% Ebony 4.3% 10.5%
Males
Neil 1.6% 6.6% Rasheed 1.4% 3.0%
Geoffrey 1.2% 6.8% Tremayne 1.4% 4.3%
Brett 1.2% 6.8% Kareem 1.3% 4.7%
Brendan 1.3% 7.7% Darnell 0.9% 4.8%
Greg 1.0% 7.8% Tyrone 1.6% 5.3%
Todd 1.4% 8.7% Jamal 1.2% 6.6%
Matthew 1.4% 9.0% Hakim 1.1% 7.3%
Jay 1.4% 13.2% Leroy 1.3% 9.4%
Brad 1.3% 15.9% Jermaine 1.1% 11.3%

I have a few more excerpts and thoughts on this, but right now I have to go for dinner with a friend.

To be continued.

NOTE: All the tables and quotes belong to Bertrand and Mullainathan and are from their paper “Are Emily and Brendan More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination.” All copyrights belong to the authors or to the publisher of their paper.

By Zack

Dad, gadget guy, bookworm, political animal, global nomad, cyclist, hiker, tennis player, photographer

3 comments

  1. Interesting. I tend to think of Aisha as a “classy” name – and all other things being equal, I’d probably call back an Allison before a Kristen. I wonder how much of the discrepancy can simply be explained by employers thinking that certain names sound nicer than others.

  2. Racial Discrimination: Post 3

    Looking at the data for the different names from the previous post, a few things come to mind. There is a great variation even within a category. What is the reason for that? Do people like Kristen so much better…

Comments are closed.