Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Labour Econ. 2020 May 21;65:101851. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2020.101851

Table 8 -.

Discrimination Estimates by Indigenous Signal Type

(1) (2)
Volunteer Only (β1) (n = 3,029) −0.006 (0.010) −0.006 (0.010)
Language Only (β2) (n = 1,723) 0.006 (0.010)
 Language Only (Native A. or Alaska N.) (n = 1,356) 0.010 (0.012)
 Language Only (Native Hawaiian) (n = 346) −0.009 (0.021)
First Name (Native Hawaiian) Only (β3) (n = 475) −0.017 (0.018) −0.017 (0.012)
Last Name (Navajo) Only (β4) (n = 222) −0.007 (0.026) −0.007 (0.026)
Two Signals (β5) (n = 823) 0.003 (0.015)
 Language + Last Name (n = 78) 0.009 (0.033)
 Volunteer + Last Name (n = 89) −0.040 (0.030)
 Language + First Name (n = 112) −0.011 (0.032)
 Volunteer + First Name (n = 117) 0.023 (0.041)
 Volunteer + Language (Native A. or Alaska N.) (n = 578) 0.002 (0.019)
 Volunteer + Language (Native Hawaiian) (n = 125) 0.043 (0.054)
Three Signals (β6) (n = 92) 0.038 (0.037) 0.007 (0.062)
Boys & Girls Club (Volunteer Control) (α1) (n = 3,298) −0.007 (0.009) −0.007 (0.009)
Food Bank (Volunteer Control) (α2) (n = 3,460) −0.006 (0.009) −0.005 (0.009)
Irish Gaelic (Language Control) (α3) (n = 831) −0.017 (0.013) −0.016 (0.013)

Notes: N=13,516 for the entire sample and the n in each row corresponds to the number of resumes with that feature. See also the notes to Table 6. Regressions include the “Regular Controls” and occupation and city fixed effects from Table 6 (Column (2)). Different from zero at 1-per cent level (***), 5-per cent level (**) or 10-per cent level (*).