John B. Holbein@JohnHolbein1
These authors wanted to know whether mothers face discrimination in hiring, even when they are equally qualified as other applicants.
So they ran two experiments.
First, a lab experiment: participants evaluated pairs of identical job applicants who differed only in parental status.
Then, a real-world audit study: they sent 1,200+ job applications to real employers for entry- and mid-level jobs.
They randomized whether applicants were:
– Mothers (based on serving on the PTA)
– Childless women (they were listed as volunteering in a non-parent specific role)
– Fathers (based on serving on the PTA)
– Childless men (they were listed as volunteering in a non-parent specific role)
All applicants had identical qualifications.
Then they tracked evaluations, salary recommendations, and employer callbacks.
They found that:
Mothers were rated as less competent and less committed than equally qualified childless women.
Mothers were held to stricter standards, offered lower salaries, and were far less likely to be hired or promoted.
In the field experiment, real employers called back childless women at more than twice the rate of mothers.
Fathers, by contrast, faced no penalty and sometimes received a bonus.
Bottom line:
The “motherhood penalty” is real, causal, and driven by discrimination, not differences in ability.
As the authors put it:
“Giving evidence of being a mother leads to discrimination against mothers in hiring and pay.”
