Can group identity explain the gender gap in the recruitment process?

• Published date: 01 January 2023
• Author: Igor Asanov,Maria Mavlikeeva
• Date: 01 January 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12392

DOI: 10.1111/irj.12392

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Can group identity explain the gender gap in

the recruitment process?

Igor Asanov |Maria Mavlikeeva

International Center for Higher

Education Research (INCHER),

University of Kassel, Kassel, Hessen,

Germany

Correspondence

Igor Asanov, International Center for

Higher Education Research (INCHER),

University of Kassel, Mönchebergstrasse

17, Hessen, 34125, Kassel, Germany.

Email: igor.asanov@uni-kassel.de

Abstract

Despite evidence that the gender gap in the labour

market favours men, aggregate findings from corre-

spondence studies show that women are more likely

than men to be invited for a job interview. We

hypothesize that the predominance of women among

recruiters may explain this somewhat puzzling finding;

recruiters may favour applicants of their own gender.

We use the data from a large‐scale correspondence

study to test this hypothesis. As expected, we find that

female applicants are more likely to receive callbacks

for interview. We also see that in our sample the

majority of contact persons responsible for the recruit-

ment process are female. More importantly, we find

that if recruiter and applicant are of the same gender,

then the likelihood that the applicant will be invited for

an interview increases. These findings reveal the

gender favouritism at the selection stage in the labour

market.

1|INTRODUCTION

The gender gap in the labour market has persisted over the years, with women having poorer labour

market outcomes than men. For instance, compared to men, women earn less on average and less

frequently reach the highest levels of managerial or professional occupations (Altonji & Blank, 1999;

Weichselbaumer & Winter‐Ebmer, 2005). These unequal labour market outcomes could be due to

Ind. Relat. 2023;54:95–113. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/irj

|

95

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use,

distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

© 2022 The Authors. Industrial Relations Journal published by Brian Towers (BRITOW) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

discrimination against women in the labour market. However, correspondence studies investigating

discrimination at the selection stage show that on average female candidates are more likely to be

invited for interviews than men (Carlsson, 2011; Riach & Rich, 2002). The extent of the observed

gender gap varies by country, industry and occupation under study

1

(Albertetal.,2011;Balkan&

Cilasun, 2018; Bertrand & Duflo, 2016;Booth&Leigh,2010; Carlsson, 2011; Gornall & Strebulaev,

2018;Neumarketal.,1996;Petit,2004; Weichselbaumer, 2004), but the aggregate evidence gravitates

towards a somewhat surprising pattern of favourable treatment of women at the selection stage of the

recruitment process (Albert et al., 2011;Birkelundetal.,2019;Booth&Leigh,2010;Gornall&

Strebulaev, 2018).

Different theories have been proposed to explain this pattern. One notion is that it is due to

occupational segregation in the labour market. Evidence shows the probability of women being

called for interviews relative to men varies depending on whether the profession is

stereotypically male‐or female‐dominated (Carlsson, 2011; Riach & Rich, 2006; Rich, 2014).

Another theory emphasizes the role of human capital and self‐censorship among women (Petit,

2007). Female candidates tend to apply for low‐skill positions and can be less ambitious than

male candidates. In turn, this might explain the high rate of women being invited to take up

low‐prestige positions, and lower rates of females hirings for high‐prestige positions (Carlsson,

2011; Neumark et al., 1996; Petit, 2007).

Gender differences in candidates' preferences may also affect the gender imbalance at the

selection stage. Women and men exhibit different levels of altruism, trust, fairness and envy

(Azmat & Petrongolo, 2014). Thus, assessing productivity of the applicants based on gender

stereotypes, recruiters may consider the applicant an unsuitable match for a certain job (Stern

& Madison, 2022; Weichselbaumer, 2004). However, Weichselbaumer's (2004) correspondence

study does not support this phenomenon, rather showing that neither personality traits nor

productivity have an influence on the gender bias in the labour market. Thus, there is either a

lack of empirical evidence to support these various theories, or they fail when tested to explain

the aggregate pattern of the positive treatment of female candidates at the job selection stage

compared to male candidates.

We investigate this further by testing an alternative explanation for the gender imbalance at the

selection stage of the recruitment process. We conjecture that the phenomenon of female candidates

being more likely to be invited for interviews can be explained in two ways. First, most recruiters are

female—in many countries over 70% of HR positionsareoccupiedbywomen(Reicheletal.,2010).

2

Second, people tend to treat members of their gender group more favourably (Ahmed, 2007;Billig&

Tajfel, 1973;Charnessetal.,2007;Chen&Li,2009) according to group identity theory (Akerlo f &

Kranton, 2000;Tajfel&Turner,1979). Thus, if recruiters more often call back candidates of the same

gender as themselves, then, given that most recruiters are women, callback rates will be higher for

female than male candidates on average.

To test this conjecture, we first provide a quantitative meta‐analysis that assesses if women receive

more callbacks on average than men in correspondence studies (Study 1). We find support for this

pattern. Next, using the data from a large correspondence study we conducted in the context of the

Russian labour market, we assess if the recruiters favour applicants of their own gender (Study 2). We

applied for large numbers of vacancies using fictitious resumés with randomly varied characteristics

1

A series of correspondence and meta‐analysis studies provide evidence of the gender gap at the selection stage varying between 0.58 and

3.15. In most studies, the average ratio is about 1.2: (1.34) Albert et al. (2011); (1.3) Gornall and Strebulaev (2018); (1.28) Booth and

Leigh (2010); (1.26) Birkelund et al. (2019).

2

See US Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) for details of the US labour market available at https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.htm

96

|

ASANOV AND MAVLIKEEVA