Cultural Change through Writing Style: Gendered Pronoun Use in the Economics Profession, with Camilo García-Jimeno (Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago) • 2024

Abstract: Through their writing, people often reflect their values. Since the 1970s, academic economists have gradually changed their third-person pronoun choices, from using the masculine form to incorporating feminine and plural forms. We document this transition empirically, and examine the role of social interactions among economists in driving the cultural change reflected in these choices. Our analysis relies on a model where writing style depends on: i) the influence of academic peers, where authors may align with or oppose their peers' stylistic choices, ii) the implicit negotiation between co-authors, and iii) individual authors' preferences for expressing gender equality values in their writing. We directly measure peer influences relying on detailed time-varying information on academic connections between economists, and propose a methodology where, relying on a homophily-based model of co-authoring decisions, we can isolate the effect of peer influence from unobserved personal preferences. The model allows us to decompose the observed changes in writing style over the last 50 years into generational shifts, the increasing prevalence of co-authorship in the profession, the increasing share of female economists, and peer influence. Generational changes and the growing share of women in the profession play a minor role.Early on, the pace of change in writing styles was accelerated by the presence of contrarian economists moving away from their peer's behavior. The large fraction of conformists and the overall homophily in co-authoring, which restricts economists' exposure to peers with different gender-attitude signaling preferences, in contrast, slowed the adoption of innovative writing styles.

The Gender Mentor Gap: Leaned Out of the Academic Pipeline , with Anders Kjelsrud (Oslo Metropolitan University) • 2024

Abstract: This paper examines how the temporary absence of female professors impacts the early careers of Economics Ph.D. students. Using rich data on advisor-advisee relationships and career trajectories, we find that the loss of a female mentor at a critical juncture can have significant and gendered consequences. Third-year female Ph.D. students experience a substantial decline in the probability of publishing papers and securing academic positions when their female advisor goes on sabbatical. Conversely, male Ph.D. students in the same cohort benefit from this absence, seeing an increase in their publishing and placement prospects. We argue that these divergent outcomes can be explained by the gendered nature of professional networks in Economics and provide evidence of gender homophily in advisor-advisee relationships. Our findings underscore the pivotal role of female mentorship in fostering gender equity and highlight how the absence of female role models can perpetuate disparities in the field.

Immigration, Science, and Invention: Evidence from the Quota Acts, with Petra Moser (NYU Stern) • Revision requested at Econometrica.

Abstract: The United States first adopted immigration quotas for “undesirable” nationalities in 1921 and 1924 to stem the inflow of low-skilled Eastern and Southern Europeans (ESE). This paper investigates whether these quotas inadvertently hurt American science and invention. Detailed biographic data on the birth place, as well as immigration, education, and employment histories of more than 80,000 American scientists reveal a dramatic decline in the arrival of ESE-born scientists after 1924. An estimated 1,170 ESE-born scientists were missing from US science by the 1950s. To examine the effects of this change on invention, we compare changes in patenting by US scientists in the pre-quota fields of ESE-born scientists with changes in other fields in which US scientists were active inventors. Methodologically, we apply k-means clustering to scientist-level data on research topics to assign each scientists to a research field, and then compare changes in patenting for the pre-quota fields of ESE-born US scientists with the pre-quota fields of other US scientists. Baseline estimates indicate that the quotas led to 68 percent decline in US invention in ESE fields. Decomposing this effect, we find that the quotas reduced not only the number of US scientists working in ESE fields, but also the number of patents per scientist. Firms that had employed ESE-born immigrants before the quotas experienced a 53 percent decline in invention. The quotas damaging effects on US invention persisted into the 1960s.

Media coverage: New York Times, Washington Post, WSJ, Behavioral Scientist, and Marginal Revolution.

From Winning an Election to Political Engagement • 2020

Abstract: How do people react when the candidate they supported wins or loses an election? I explore the consequences of having supported a winning (or losing) candidate on future political participation. I begin by presenting two empirical patterns: 1) there is a positive relationship between county vote share to the winning party and future voter turnout in that county, 2) there is no significant change in the party composition of votes, suggesting that the increase in political participation percolates to voters of all persuasions. I provide evidence for a combination of an "individual" and a "community" effect to explain this joint pattern. While winning voters are "encouraged" by the win of their preferred candidate compared to losing voters, losing voters appear to be galvanized by being surrounded by winners. In the data, the two effects happen to balance, highlighting the significance of peer effects on voter participation.