Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Publications (10 of 11) Show all publications
Sauermann, J. (2023). Worker reciprocity and the returns to training: Evidence from a field experiment. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 32(3), 543-557
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Worker reciprocity and the returns to training: Evidence from a field experiment
2023 (English)In: Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, ISSN 1058-6407, E-ISSN 1530-9134, Vol. 32, no 3, p. 543-557Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Do reciprocal workers have higher returns to employer-sponsored training? Using a field experiment with random assignment to training combined with survey information on workers' reciprocal inclinations, the results show that reciprocal workers reciprocate employers' training investments by higher posttraining performance. This result, which is robust to controlling for observed personality traits and worker fixed effects, suggests that individuals reciprocate the firm's human capital investment with higher effort, in line with theoretical models on gift exchange in the workplace. This finding provides an alternative rationale to explain firm training investments even with the risk of poaching.

National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-193226 (URN)10.1111/jems.12419 (DOI)000626919200001 ()2-s2.0-85102241957 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-05-17 Created: 2021-05-17 Last updated: 2023-08-10Bibliographically approved
Sauermann, J. (2020). Worker reciprocity and the returns to training: evidence from a field experiment. Stockholm
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Worker reciprocity and the returns to training: evidence from a field experiment
2020 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Do reciprocal workers have higher returns to employer-sponsored training? Using a field experiment with random assignment to training combined with survey information on workers’ reciprocal inclinations, the results show that reciprocal workers reciprocate employers’ training investments by higher post-training performance. This result, which is robust to controlling for observed personality traits and worker fixed effects, suggests that individuals reciprocate the firm’s human capital investment with higher effort, in line with theoretical models on gift exchange in the workplace. This finding provides an alternative rationale to explain firm training investments even with risk of poaching.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: , 2020. p. 32
Series
Swedish Institute for Social Research, ISSN 0283-8222 ; 5/2020
Keywords
on-the-job training, reciprocity, worker performance, field experiment
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-182791 (URN)
Available from: 2020-06-23 Created: 2020-06-23 Last updated: 2022-03-18
Mengel, F., Sauermann, J. & Zölitz, U. (2019). Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 17(2), 535-566
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations
2019 (English)In: Journal of the European Economic Association, ISSN 1542-4766, E-ISSN 1542-4774, Vol. 17, no 2, p. 535-566Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper provides new evidence on gender bias in teaching evaluations. We exploit a quasi-experimental dataset of 19,952 student evaluations of university faculty in a context where students are randomly allocated to female or male instructors. Despite the fact that neither students’ grades nor self-study hours are affected by the instructor’s gender, we find that women receive systematically lower teaching evaluations than their male colleagues. This bias is driven by male students’ evaluations, is larger for mathematical courses, and particularly pronounced for junior women. The gender bias in teaching evaluations we document may have direct as well as indirect effects on the career progression of women by affecting junior women’s confidence and through the reallocation of instructor resources away from research and toward teaching. (JEL: J16, J71, I23, J45)

National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-152954 (URN)10.1093/jeea/jvx057 (DOI)000489632900006 ()
Available from: 2018-02-13 Created: 2018-02-13 Last updated: 2022-02-28Bibliographically approved
Sauermann, J., Mengel, F. & Zölitz, U. (2019). Lehrevaluationen benachteiligen Wissenschaftlerinnen.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Lehrevaluationen benachteiligen Wissenschaftlerinnen
2019 (German)Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-173571 (URN)
Available from: 2019-09-25 Created: 2019-09-25 Last updated: 2022-02-26Bibliographically approved
Feld, J., Sauermann, J. & De Grip, A. (2017). Estimating the relationship between skill and overconfidence. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 68, 18-24
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Estimating the relationship between skill and overconfidence
2017 (English)In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, ISSN 2214-8043, E-ISSN 2214-8051, Vol. 68, p. 18-24Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Dunning–Kruger effect states that low performers vastly overestimate their performance while high performers more accurately assess their performance. Researchers usually interpret this empirical pattern as evidence that the low skilled are vastly overconfident while the high skilled are more accurate in assessing their skill. However, measurement error alone can lead to a negative relationship between performance and overestimation, even if skill and overconfidence are unrelated. To clarify the role of measurement error, we restate the Dunning–Kruger effect in terms of skill and overconfidence. We show that we can correct for bias caused by measurement error with an instrumental variable approach that uses a second performance as instrument. We then estimate the Dunning–Kruger effect in the context of the exam grade predictions of economics students, using their grade point average as an instrument for their exam grade. Our results show that the unskilled are more overconfident than the skilled. However, as we predict in our methodological discussion, this relationship is significantly weaker than ordinary least squares estimates suggest.

Keywords
Dunning–Kruger effect, Overconfidence, Judgment error, Measurement error, Instrumental variable
National Category
Sociology Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-140924 (URN)10.1016/j.socec.2017.03.002 (DOI)000404703300003 ()
Available from: 2017-03-23 Created: 2017-03-23 Last updated: 2022-02-28Bibliographically approved
Mengel, F., Sauermann, J. & Zölitz, U. (2017). Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations. Sweden: The Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI), Stockholm University
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations
2017 (English)Report (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sweden: The Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI), Stockholm University, 2017. p. 50
Series
Swedish Institute for Social Research, ISSN 0283-8222 ; 6/2017
Keywords
gender bias, teaching evaluations, female faculty
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-147371 (URN)
Available from: 2017-09-25 Created: 2017-09-25 Last updated: 2022-02-28Bibliographically approved
Collewet, M. & Sauermann, J. (2017). Working Hours and Productivity. IZA – Institute of Labor Economics, 47
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Working Hours and Productivity
2017 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This paper studies the link between working hours and productivity using daily informationon working hours and performance of a sample of call centre agents. We exploit variationin the number of hours worked by the same employee across days and weeks due tocentral scheduling, enabling us to estimate the effect of working hours on productivity. Wefind that as the number of hours worked increases, the average handling time for a callincreases, meaning that agents become less productive. This result suggests that fatiguecan play an important role, even in jobs with mostly part-time workers.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IZA – Institute of Labor Economics, 2017. p. 35
Series
IZA Discussion Paper Series ; 10722
Keywords
working hours, productivity, output, labour demand
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-150263 (URN)
Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2022-02-28Bibliographically approved
Collewet, M. & Sauermann, J. (2017). Working hours and productivity. Labour Economics, 47, 96-106
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Working hours and productivity
2017 (English)In: Labour Economics, ISSN 0927-5371, E-ISSN 1879-1034, Vol. 47, p. 96-106Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper studies the link between working hours and productivity using daily information on working hours and performance of a sample of call centre agents. We exploit variation in the number of hours worked by the same employee across days and weeks due to central scheduling, enabling us to estimate the effect of working hours on productivity. We find that as the number of hours worked increases, the average handling time for a call increases, meaning that agents become less productive. This result suggests that fatigue can play an important role, even in jobs with mostly part-time workers.

Keywords
Working hours, Productivity, Output, Labour demand
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-146616 (URN)10.1016/j.labeco.2017.03.006 (DOI)000411849400007 ()
Available from: 2017-09-04 Created: 2017-09-04 Last updated: 2022-02-28Bibliographically approved
Sauermann, J. (2016). Performance Measures and Workers’ Productivity. IZA World of Labor, Article ID 260.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Performance Measures and Workers’ Productivity
2016 (English)In: IZA World of Labor, ISSN 2227-2283, E-ISSN 2054-9571, article id 260Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Measures of worker productivity can give important insights into how workers perform and how workplaces should be organized. Direct measures of productivity are used to study a range of questions, such as the effects of incentives on workers’ productivity, the influence of peers on behavior, or the accumulation of human capital on the job. For these and related questions, it is important to select appropriate performance measures. This choice is critical, as relying on inappropriate measures can lead to the design of inefficient incentives, poor employment contracts, or wrong policy conclusions.

Keywords
worker productivity, performance measures, human resource management
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-130687 (URN)10.15185/izawol.260 (DOI)
Available from: 2016-05-30 Created: 2016-05-30 Last updated: 2022-02-23Bibliographically approved
Dohmen, T. & Sauermann, J. (2016). Referee Bias. Journal of Economic Surveys, 30(4), 679-695
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Referee Bias
2016 (English)In: Journal of Economic Surveys, ISSN 0950-0804, E-ISSN 1467-6419, Vol. 30, no 4, p. 679-695Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper surveys the empirical literature on the behavior of referees in professionalfootball and other sports. Referees are typically appointed by a principal to be impartial, especiallywhen unbiased referee judgment is vital for the accomplishment of the principal’s objective.Answering whether referees make biased decisions and understanding the causes that lead refereesto digress from their principal duty of impartiality is therefore fundamental from a theoretical pointof view. At the same time, assessing the prevalence and origin of referee bias is germane to variousdomains of life. Referee bias is particularly relevant in sports, where partial decision-making candetermine competition outcomes, which can have strong repercussions on athletes’ careers andsupporters’ well-being.

Keywords
Favoritism, Referee bias, Social pressure
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-132471 (URN)10.1111/joes.12106 (DOI)000382587600001 ()
Available from: 2016-08-14 Created: 2016-08-14 Last updated: 2022-02-23Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-0550-0675

Search in DiVA

Show all publications