Cracking the Glass Ceiling

A vast literature seeks to explain the barrier to female advancement widely known as the “glass ceiling,” which is regarded as “an egregious denial of social justice” by the U.S. Department of Labor. But the two primary strands of this literature — one using experimental methods and the other using data gleaned from sports events — offer very different conclusions. Three key findings from the experimental literature are that women respond less positively than men to the incentives associated with competitive settings; are more easily discouraged than men by random adversities; and are more likely than men to avoid competitive settings. Recently, however, economists have turned their attention to whether male and female athletes respond differently to tournament incentives. And the findings of this literature generally contradict experimental results. This essay examines what these studies have added to our understanding of the glass ceiling and points out the limits of the methods that they employ.