This topic area focuses on the effectiveness of rules, policies, and enforcement activities aimed at preventing discrimination by employers on workers’ labor market outcomes. CLEAR assesses the quality of existing causal evidence on this topic.
Employer Compliance
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1990 - 2021.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 50
Interactive theater: An effective tool to reduce gender bias in faculty searches (Shea et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Gender Equity and Recruitment of Underrepresented People (GEAR UP) workshop on employment. The study used an interrupted time…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Salary History Bans (SHBs) on employment and earnings outcomes by sex and age. The author conducted a difference-in-differences…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of changes in standard of causation for employment discrimination claims under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) on employment outcomes. …Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of state employment nondiscrimination acts on employment and earnings of cohabitating gay men and lesbian women. The study used a…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on employment discrimination of workers in the United States. The study used a descriptive analysis to…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Executive Order 11246, affirmative action (AA) on the Black share of employment. The study uses establishment-level EEO-1 form data…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of state-wide implementation of Salary History Bans (SHBs) on gender earnings gap ratios. The study used a nonexperimental design…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of organizational accountability and transparency policies on merit-based pay increases. The study used an interrupted time series…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of age discrimination laws on the employment of older women. This profile focuses on the comparison for state age discrimination laws. The author…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of age discrimination laws on the employment of older women. This profile focuses on the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.