How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment

Abstract

Natural field experiments investigating key labour market phenomena such as unemployment have only been used since the early 2000s. This paper reviews the literature and draws three primary conclusions that deepen our understanding of unemployment. First, the inability to monitor workers perfectly in many occupations complicates the hiring decision in a way that contributes to unemployment. Second, the inability to determine a worker’s attributes precisely at the time of hiring leads to discrimination on the basis of factors such as race, gender, age and ethnicity. This can lead to systematically high and persistent levels of unemployment for groups that face discrimination. Third, the importance of social and personal dynamics in the workplace can lead to short-term unemployment. Much of the knowledge necessary for these conclusions could only be obtained using natural field experiments due to their ability to combine randomized control with an absence of experimenter demand effects.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Blakely, T. A., Collings, S. C. & Atkinson, J. Unemployment and suicide. Evidence for a causal association? J. Epidemiol. Community Health 57, 594–600 (2003).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Remmer, K. L. The political impact of economic crisis in Latin America in the 1980s. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 85, 777–800 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Leeper, E. M., Walker, T. B. & Yang, S. C. S. Government investment and fiscal stimulus. J. Monet. Econ. 57, 1000–1012 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Staiger, D., Stock, J. H. & Watson, M. W. The NAIRU, unemployment and monetary policy. J. Econ. Perspect. 11, 33–49 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Dornbusch, R. Expectations and exchange rate dynamics. J. Polit. Econ. 84, 1161–1176 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Long, J. B. Jr & Plosser, C. I. Real business cycles. J. Polit. Econ. 91, 39–69 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Nickell, S. Unemployment and labor market rigidities: Europe versus North America. J. Econ. Perspect. 11, 55–74 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Brown, C., Gilroy, C. & Kohen, A. The effect of the minimum wage on employment and unemployment. J. Econ. Lit.. 20, 487–528 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Oswald, A. J. The economic theory of trade unions: an introductory survey. Scand. J. Econ. 87, 160–193 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Rogerson, R., Shimer, R. & Wright, R. Search-theoretic models of the labor market: a survey. J. Econ. Lit. 43, 959–988 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Benassy, J. P. Imperfect competition, unemployment and policy. Eur. Econ. Rev. 31, 417–426 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Crépon, B. & Van den Berg, G. J. Active labor market policies. Annu. Rev. Econ. 8, 521–546 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Keynes, J. M. General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (Atlantic Publishers & Distributors, New Delhi, 2016).

  14. 14.

    Engle, R. F., Hendry, D. F. & Richard, J. F. Exogeneity. Econometrica 51, 277–304 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    MacKinlay, A. C. Event studies in economics and finance. J. Econ. Lit. 35, 13–39 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Al-Ubaydli, O. & List, J. A. in Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology (eds Fréchette, G. R. & Schotter, A.) 420–462 (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 2015).

  17. 17.

    Harrison, G. W. & List, J. A. Field experiments. J. Econ. Lit. 42, 1009–1055 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Akerlof, G. A. Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Q. J. Econ. 97, 543–569 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    List, J. A. & Rasul, I. Handbook of Labor Economics Vol. 4 (eds Ashenfelter, O. & Card, D.) 103–228 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2011).

  20. 20.

    Heckman, J. J. Causal parameters and policy analysis in economics: a twentieth century retrospective. Q. J. Econ. 115, 45–97 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Heckman, J. J. & Smith, J. A. Assessing the case for social experiments. J. Econ. Perspect. 9, 85–110 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Fréchette, G. R. & Schotter, A. Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 2015).

  23. 23.

    Cummings, R. G., Elliott, S., Harrison, G. W. & Murphy, J. Are hypothetical referenda incentive compatible? J. Polit. Econ. 105, 609–621 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Kramer, A. D., Guillory, J. E. & Hancock, J. T. Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 8788–8790 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Falk, A. & Heckman, J. J. Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences. Science 326, 535–538 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Maniadis, Z., Tufano, F. & List, J. A. One swallow doesn’t make a summer: new evidence on anchoring effects. Am. Econ. Rev. 104, 277–90 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Levitt, S. D. & List, J. A. What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? J. Econ. Perspect. 21, 153–174 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Pigou, A. C. Theory of Unemployment (Routledge, Abingdon, 2013).

  29. 29.

    Marshall, A. Principles of Economics (Macmillan, London, 1890).

  30. 30.

    Walras, L. Éléments d’économie Politique Pure, Ou, Théorie de la Richesse Sociale (F. Rouge, Lausanne, 1896).

  31. 31.

    Al-Ubaydli, O., List, J. A. & Price, M. K. The nature of excess: using randomized treatments to investigate price dynamics. Preprint at https://www.nber.org/papers/w16319 (2010).

  32. 32.

    Al-Ubaydli, O. & List, J. A. Handbook of Economic Field Experiments Vol. 1 (eds Banerjee, A. V. & Duflo, E.) 271–307 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2017).

  33. 33.

    Levitt, S. D. & List, J. A. Field experiments in economics: the past, the present, and the future. Eur. Econ. Rev. 53, 1–18 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Garraty, J. A. Unemployment in History: Economic Thought and Public Policy (Harper & Row, New York, 1978).

  35. 35.

    Smith, V. L. An experimental study of competitive market behavior. J. Polit. Econ. 70, 111–137 (1962).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Nash, J. Non-cooperative games. Ann. Math. 54, 286–295 (1951).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Ramey, V. A. Can government purchases stimulate the economy? J. Econ. Lit. 49, 673–685 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Smith, V. L. Experimental auction markets and the Walrasian hypothesis. J. Polit. Econ. 73, 387–393 (1965).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Manning, A. An integration of trade union models in a sequential bargaining framework. Econ. J. 97, 121–139 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Shapiro, C. & Stiglitz, J. E. Equilibrium unemployment as a worker discipline device. Am. Econ. Rev. 74, 433–444 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Akerlof, G. A. The market for “lemons”: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q. J. Econ. 84, 235–251 (1970).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Prendergast, C. The provision of incentives in firms. J. Econ. Lit. 37, 7–63 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Sparks, R. A model of involuntary unemployment and wage rigidity: worker incentives and the threat of dismissal. J. Labor Econ. 4, 560–581 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Akerlof, G. A. & Kranton, R. E. Identity, supervision, and work groups. Am. Econ. Rev. 98, 212–17 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Greenwald, B. C. Adverse selection in the labour market. Rev. Econ. Stud. 53, 325–347 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Spence, M. Job market signaling. Q. J. Econ. 87, 281–306 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Cain, G. G. Handbook of Labor Economics Vol. 1 (eds Ashenfelter, O. C. & Layard, R.) 693–785 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1986).

  48. 48.

    Becker, G. S. The Theory of Discrimination (Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, 1957).

  49. 49.

    Nagin, D. S., Rebitzer, J. B., Sanders, S. & Taylor, L. J. Monitoring, motivation, and management: the determinants of opportunistic behavior in a field experiment. Am. Econ. Rev. 92, 850–873 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Boly, A. On the incentive effects of monitoring: evidence from the lab and the field. Exp. Econ. 14, 241–253 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Holmstrom, B. & Milgrom, P. Multitask principal-agent analyses: incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design. J. Law Econ. Organ. 7, 24–52 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Shearer, B. Piece rates, fixed wages and incentives: evidence from a field experiment. Rev. Econ. Stud. 71, 513–534 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Bandiera, O., Barankay, I. & Rasul, I. Social preferences and the response to incentives: evidence from personnel data. Q. J. Econ. 120, 917–962 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Shi, L. Incentive effect of piece-rate contracts: evidence from two small field experiments. B. E. J. Econ. Anal. Policy 10, https://doi.org/10.2202/1935-1682.2539 (2010).

  55. 55.

    Hong, F., Hossain, T., List, J. A. & Tanaka, M. Testing the theory of multitasking: evidence from a natural field experiment in Chinese factories. Int. Econ. Rev. 59, 511–536 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Al-Ubaydli, O., Andersen, S., Gneezy, U. & List, J. A. Carrots that look like sticks: toward an understanding of multitasking incentive schemes. South. Econ. J. 81, 538–561 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Benabou, R. & Tirole, J. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Rev. Econ. Stud. 70, 489–520 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Bertrand, M. & Duflo, E. Handbook of Economic Field Experiments Vol. 1 (eds Banerjee, A. V. & Duflo, E.) 309–393 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2017).

  59. 59.

    Bertrand, M. & Mullainathan, S. Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? Am. Econ. Rev. 94, 991–1013 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Gneezy, U., List, J. & Price, M. K. Toward an understanding of why people discriminate: evidence from a series of natural field experiments. Preprint at https://www.nber.org/papers/w17855 (2012).

  61. 61.

    Neumark, D., Bank, R. J. & Van Nort, K. D. Sex discrimination in restaurant hiring: an audit study. Q. J. Econ. 111, 915–941 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Pager, D. The mark of a criminal record. Am. J. Sociol. 108, 937–975 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Kroft, K., Lange, F. & Notowidigdo, M. J. Duration dependence and labor market conditions: evidence from a field experiment. Q. J. Econ. 128, 1123–1167 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    List, J. A. The nature and extent of discrimination in the marketplace: evidence from the field. Q. J. Econ. 119, 49–89 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Blaug, M. The Methodology of Economics: Or, How Economists Explain (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1992).

  66. 66.

    Akerlof, G. A. & Yellen, J. L. Fairness and unemployment. Am. Econ. Rev. 78, 44–49 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Agell, J. & Lundborg, P. Theories of pay and unemployment: survey evidence from Swedish manufacturing firms. Scand. J. Econ. 97, 295–307 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    List, J. A. The behavioralist meets the market: measuring social preferences and reputation effects in actual transactions. J. Polit. Econ. 114, 1–37 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Gneezy, U. & List, J. A. Putting behavioral economics to work: testing for gift exchange in labor markets using field experiments. Econometrica 74, 1365–1384 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Pritchard, R. D., Dunnette, M. D. & Gorgenson, D. O. Effects of perceptions of equity and inequity on worker performance and satisfaction. J. Appl. Psychol. 56, 75–94 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Loewenstein, G. & Schkade, D. in Well-being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology (eds Kahneman, D., Diener, E. & Schwarz, N.) 85–105 (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1999).

  72. 72.

    Lee, D. & Rupp, N. G. Retracting a gift: How does employee effort respond to wage reductions? J. Labor Econ. 25, 725–761 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Kube, S., Maréchal, M. A. & Puppe, C. Do wage cuts damage work morale? Evidence from a natural field experiment. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 11, 853–870 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Bellemare, C. & Shearer, B. Gift giving and worker productivity: evidence from a firm-level experiment. Games Econ. Behav. 67, 233–244 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Levitt, S. D. & Neckermann, S. What field experiments have and have not taught us about managing workers. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 30, 639–657 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Fehr, E., Goette, L. & Zehnder, C. A behavioral account of the labor market: the role of fairness concerns. Annu. Rev. Econ. 1, 355–384 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G. & Riedl, A. Does fairness prevent market clearing? An experimental investigation. Q. J. Econ. 108, 437–459 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Al-Ubaydli, O. & List, J. A. Do natural field experiments afford researchers more or less control than laboratory experiments? Am. Econ. Rev. 105, 462–66 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Card, D. & Krueger, A. B. Minimum wages and employment: a case study of the fast-food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Am. Econ. Rev. 84, 772–793 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Burda, M. C. A note on firing costs and severance benefits in equilibrium unemployment. Scand. J. Econ. 94, 479–489 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Bazen, S. & Skourias, N. Is there a negative effect of minimum wages on youth employment in France? Eur. Econ. Rev. 41, 723–732 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    Endo, S. K. Neither panacea, placebo, nor poison: examining the rise of anti-unemployment discrimination laws. Pace Law Rev 33, 4 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  83. 83.

    Christiano, L. J., Eichenbaum, M. & Evans, C. L. Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy. J. Polit. Econ. 113, 1–45 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. 84.

    Duffy, J. Experimental Macroeconomics (Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2010).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omar Al-Ubaydli.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Al-Ubaydli, O., List, J.A. How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment. Nat Hum Behav 3, 33–39 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0496-z

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter for a daily update on COVID-19 science.
Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing