(Note: Full list of publications available on my CV here.)
Private Sector Studies
"Progress on the Gender Pay Gap: 2019"
March 2019
by Andrew Chamberlain, Daniel Zhao and Amanda Stansell
March 2019
by Andrew Chamberlain, Daniel Zhao and Amanda Stansell
"Metro Movers: Where Are Americans Moving for Jobs, And Is It Worth It?"
May 2018
by Andrew Chamberlain
May 2018
by Andrew Chamberlain
"Give to Get: A Mechanism to Reduce Bias in Online Reviews"
October 2017
by Andrew Chamberlain and Morgan Smart
October 2017
by Andrew Chamberlain and Morgan Smart
"The Pipeline Problem: How College Majors Contribute to the Gender Pay Gap"
April 2017
by Andrew Chamberlain and Jyotsna Jayaraman
April 2017
by Andrew Chamberlain and Jyotsna Jayaraman
"Why Do Workers Quit? The Factors That Predict Employee Turnover"
February 2017
by Andrew Chamberlain and Morgan Smart
February 2017
by Andrew Chamberlain and Morgan Smart
"Demystifying the Gender Pay Gap: Evidence from Glassdoor Salary Data"
March 2016
by Andrew Chamberlain
March 2016
by Andrew Chamberlain
"Do Difficult Job Interviews Lead to More Satisfied Workers? Evidence from Glassdoor Reviews"
October 2015
by Andrew Chamberlain and Ayal Chen-Zion
October 2015
by Andrew Chamberlain and Ayal Chen-Zion
"Is Salary Transparency More Than a Trend? Economic Research on the Impact of Greater Workplace Transparency"
April 2015
by Andrew Chamberlain
April 2015
by Andrew Chamberlain
"Does Company Culture Pay Off? Analyzing Stock Returns for 'Best Places to Work' Companies"
March 2015
by Andrew Chamberlain
March 2015
by Andrew Chamberlain
Academic Studies
"Incentives Can Reduce Bias in Online Reviews"
by Ioana Elena Marinescu, Nadav Klein, Andrew Chamberlain, and Morgan Smart
NBER Working Paper No. 24372 (March 2018)
Abstract
Online reviews are a powerful means of propagating the reputations of products, services, and even employers. However, existing research suggests that online reviews often suffer from selection bias—people with extreme opinions are more motivated to share them than people with moderate opinions, resulting in biased distributions of reviews. Providing incentives for reviewing has the potential to reduce this selection bias, because incentives can mitigate the motivational deficit of people who hold moderate opinions. Using data from one of the leading employer review companies Glassdoor, we show that voluntary reviews have a different distribution from incentivized reviews. The likely bias in the distribution of voluntary reviews can affect workers’ choice of employers, because it changes the ranking of industries by average employee satisfaction. Because observational data from Glassdoor are not able to provide a measure of the true distribution of employer reviews, we complement our investigation with a randomized controlled experiment on MTurk. We find that when participants’ decision to review their employer is voluntary, the resulting distribution of reviews differs from the distribution of forced reviews. Moreover, providing relatively high monetary rewards or a pro-social cue as incentives for reviewing reduces this bias. We conclude that while voluntary employer reviews often suffer from selection bias, incentives can significantly reduce bias and help workers make more informed employer choices.
by Ioana Elena Marinescu, Nadav Klein, Andrew Chamberlain, and Morgan Smart
NBER Working Paper No. 24372 (March 2018)
Abstract
Online reviews are a powerful means of propagating the reputations of products, services, and even employers. However, existing research suggests that online reviews often suffer from selection bias—people with extreme opinions are more motivated to share them than people with moderate opinions, resulting in biased distributions of reviews. Providing incentives for reviewing has the potential to reduce this selection bias, because incentives can mitigate the motivational deficit of people who hold moderate opinions. Using data from one of the leading employer review companies Glassdoor, we show that voluntary reviews have a different distribution from incentivized reviews. The likely bias in the distribution of voluntary reviews can affect workers’ choice of employers, because it changes the ranking of industries by average employee satisfaction. Because observational data from Glassdoor are not able to provide a measure of the true distribution of employer reviews, we complement our investigation with a randomized controlled experiment on MTurk. We find that when participants’ decision to review their employer is voluntary, the resulting distribution of reviews differs from the distribution of forced reviews. Moreover, providing relatively high monetary rewards or a pro-social cue as incentives for reviewing reduces this bias. We conclude that while voluntary employer reviews often suffer from selection bias, incentives can significantly reduce bias and help workers make more informed employer choices.
"Are State Workers Overpaid? Survey Evidence from Liquor Privatization in Washington State"
by Andrew Chamberlain
Journal of Labor Research, Volume 36, Issue 4 (2015), Page 347-388.
Abstract
Industry privatizations that result in exogenous job displacement of public employees can be exploited to estimate public sector wage rents. I report the findings of an original survey I administered to examine how wages of displaced government workers were affected by a 2012 privatization of liquor retailing in Washington State. Based on a panel difference-in-differences estimator I find that privatization reduced wages by $2.51 per hour or 17 percent compared to a counterfactual group of nearly identical non-displaced workers, with larger effects for women. I decompose wage losses into three rents identified in the literature: public sector rents, union premiums, and industry-specific human capital. Public sector wage premiums separately account for 85 to 90 percent of overall wage losses, while union premiums and industry-specific human capital account for just 10 to 15 percent. The results are consistent with a roughly 16 percent public sector wage premium.
Data and Code
by Andrew Chamberlain
Journal of Labor Research, Volume 36, Issue 4 (2015), Page 347-388.
Abstract
Industry privatizations that result in exogenous job displacement of public employees can be exploited to estimate public sector wage rents. I report the findings of an original survey I administered to examine how wages of displaced government workers were affected by a 2012 privatization of liquor retailing in Washington State. Based on a panel difference-in-differences estimator I find that privatization reduced wages by $2.51 per hour or 17 percent compared to a counterfactual group of nearly identical non-displaced workers, with larger effects for women. I decompose wage losses into three rents identified in the literature: public sector rents, union premiums, and industry-specific human capital. Public sector wage premiums separately account for 85 to 90 percent of overall wage losses, while union premiums and industry-specific human capital account for just 10 to 15 percent. The results are consistent with a roughly 16 percent public sector wage premium.
Data and Code
"Urban Crime and Spatial Proximity to Liquor: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment in Seattle"
by Andrew Chamberlain
Working Paper (February 2014)
Abstract
There is a well-established correlation between retail liquor outlets and crime, but few studies identify causal effects. I exploit a unique source of identifying variation to establish causality: a 2012 privatization of liquor retailing in Washington State that rapidly expanded liquor availability into preexisting grocery and drug store chains. Based on 166,000 police reports from Seattle and a fixed-effects panel model, I find a significant positive effect of liquor availability on neighborhood crime both in OLS and IV estimates. Reducing the distance to the nearest liquor retailer by one mile leads to an average treatment effect of roughly 6 to 8 percent higher monthly crime rates. Violent crime and drug crimes are persistently affected, with more transitory effects on shoplifting and other non-violent crimes. Using an event study framework I investigate whether the results are due to new crime or spatial redistribution of existing crime, finding evidence of both effects. Overall, expanded liquor retailing appears to have had a significant causal effect on crime.
by Andrew Chamberlain
Working Paper (February 2014)
Abstract
There is a well-established correlation between retail liquor outlets and crime, but few studies identify causal effects. I exploit a unique source of identifying variation to establish causality: a 2012 privatization of liquor retailing in Washington State that rapidly expanded liquor availability into preexisting grocery and drug store chains. Based on 166,000 police reports from Seattle and a fixed-effects panel model, I find a significant positive effect of liquor availability on neighborhood crime both in OLS and IV estimates. Reducing the distance to the nearest liquor retailer by one mile leads to an average treatment effect of roughly 6 to 8 percent higher monthly crime rates. Violent crime and drug crimes are persistently affected, with more transitory effects on shoplifting and other non-violent crimes. Using an event study framework I investigate whether the results are due to new crime or spatial redistribution of existing crime, finding evidence of both effects. Overall, expanded liquor retailing appears to have had a significant causal effect on crime.
"The Effect of Federal Intergovernmental Grants on State Taxes: New Evidence of Budget Persistence"
by Andrew Chamberlain
Working Paper (May 2013)
(Summary from UCSD departmental newsletter)
Abstract
I examine whether federal intergovernmental grants have a persistent long-term effect on state fiscal policy. A simple theoretical framework is developed based on the median voter model and is structurally estimated based on a 30-year panel of U.S. federal grants and state tax revenues. In both OLS and IV estimates I find evidence that temporary federal aid has a persistent effect on state finances. Each $1 of federal grants predicts eventual state tax increases of between $0.04 and $0.17. These effects are most evident on state personal income and corporate income taxes. There is some evidence that state tax and expenditure limitations (TELs) and supermajority voting rules mitigate these effects. To address possible endogeneity of federal grants I employ an instrumental variables strategy which yields similar results. Consistent with previous literature I find state budgets respond asymmetrically with respect to increases and decreases in federal grants, with temporary grant-funded expenditures persisting over time in state budgets.
by Andrew Chamberlain
Working Paper (May 2013)
(Summary from UCSD departmental newsletter)
Abstract
I examine whether federal intergovernmental grants have a persistent long-term effect on state fiscal policy. A simple theoretical framework is developed based on the median voter model and is structurally estimated based on a 30-year panel of U.S. federal grants and state tax revenues. In both OLS and IV estimates I find evidence that temporary federal aid has a persistent effect on state finances. Each $1 of federal grants predicts eventual state tax increases of between $0.04 and $0.17. These effects are most evident on state personal income and corporate income taxes. There is some evidence that state tax and expenditure limitations (TELs) and supermajority voting rules mitigate these effects. To address possible endogeneity of federal grants I employ an instrumental variables strategy which yields similar results. Consistent with previous literature I find state budgets respond asymmetrically with respect to increases and decreases in federal grants, with temporary grant-funded expenditures persisting over time in state budgets.
Public Policy Studies
"Planning for Prosperity: What Can Seattle Learn from Economic Research on Transportation, Affordable Housing and Local Economic Development?"
July 2013
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
This paper provides a brief survey the academic literature in three public policy areas: transportation, affordable housing, and local economic development. Based on our review of the literature, we summarize key policy lessons for Seattle lawmakers who are currently facing challenges in each of these policy areas. This brief was prepared for the 2013 Albert Shen for Seattle City Council campaign.
July 2013
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
This paper provides a brief survey the academic literature in three public policy areas: transportation, affordable housing, and local economic development. Based on our review of the literature, we summarize key policy lessons for Seattle lawmakers who are currently facing challenges in each of these policy areas. This brief was prepared for the 2013 Albert Shen for Seattle City Council campaign.
"Who Pays Taxes and Who Receives Government Spending? An Analysis of Federal, State and Local Tax and Spending Distributions, 1991-2004"
March 2007
by Andrew Chamberlain and Gerald Prante
Abstract
While the U.S. tax system is progressive, the distribution of government spending makes the overall fiscal system more progressive than is apparent from tax distributions alone. Using a microdata model we estimate the distribution of federal, state and local taxes and spending between 1991 and 2004. We find households in the lowest quintile of income received roughly $8.21 in federal, state and local government spending for every dollar of taxes paid in 2004, while households in the middle quintile received $1.30, and households in the top quintile received $0.41. Overall, tax payments exceeded government spending received for the top two quintiles of income, resulting in a net fiscal transfer of between $1.031 trillion and $1.527 trillion between quintiles. Both taxes and spending appear to have large distributional effects on households, and these effects have grown since 1991. The results suggest tax distributions alone are an inadequate measure of progressivity, and policymakers should examine both tax and spending distributions when judging the overall fairness of policy toward income groups.
March 2007
by Andrew Chamberlain and Gerald Prante
Abstract
While the U.S. tax system is progressive, the distribution of government spending makes the overall fiscal system more progressive than is apparent from tax distributions alone. Using a microdata model we estimate the distribution of federal, state and local taxes and spending between 1991 and 2004. We find households in the lowest quintile of income received roughly $8.21 in federal, state and local government spending for every dollar of taxes paid in 2004, while households in the middle quintile received $1.30, and households in the top quintile received $0.41. Overall, tax payments exceeded government spending received for the top two quintiles of income, resulting in a net fiscal transfer of between $1.031 trillion and $1.527 trillion between quintiles. Both taxes and spending appear to have large distributional effects on households, and these effects have grown since 1991. The results suggest tax distributions alone are an inadequate measure of progressivity, and policymakers should examine both tax and spending distributions when judging the overall fairness of policy toward income groups.
"Who Pays for Climate Policy? New Estimates of the Household Burden and Economic Impact of a U.S. Cap-and-Trade System"
March 2009
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
Many U.S. lawmakers view cap and trade as a politically superior non-tax approach to climate policy. However, cap and trade imposes identical economic burdens on households to a similarly designed carbon tax. Using the newly-released 2002 input-output accounts we present new estimates of the distributional impact of a typical cap-and-trade system by income, age, U.S. region and family type. In total, households would face an annual burden of roughly $144.8 billion per year with costs disproportionately borne by low-income households, those under age 25 and over 75 years, those in Southern states, and single parents with dependent children. Lawmakers weighing the costs and benefits of climate policy should be aware that cap and trade would impose a significant and regressive annual burden on U.S. households.
March 2009
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
Many U.S. lawmakers view cap and trade as a politically superior non-tax approach to climate policy. However, cap and trade imposes identical economic burdens on households to a similarly designed carbon tax. Using the newly-released 2002 input-output accounts we present new estimates of the distributional impact of a typical cap-and-trade system by income, age, U.S. region and family type. In total, households would face an annual burden of roughly $144.8 billion per year with costs disproportionately borne by low-income households, those under age 25 and over 75 years, those in Southern states, and single parents with dependent children. Lawmakers weighing the costs and benefits of climate policy should be aware that cap and trade would impose a significant and regressive annual burden on U.S. households.
"Estimating Federal Tax Burdens for Major City Areas, Counties, and U.S. Congressional Districts"
March 2007
by Andrew Chamberlain and Gerald Prante
Abstract
The burden of federal taxes does not fall equally on the cities, counties and congressional districts that comprise the geographic landscape of the United States. Because tax collections figures provide little information about the true economic burden of taxes, researchers must employ various statistical methods to estimate the economic incidence of federal taxes across geographic areas. We outline a detailed methodology for modeling the burden of each federal tax – individual income, corporate income, payroll, estate and gift, and all excises – by narrow geographic areas. Using this model, we provide estimates of federal tax burdens by three geographic areas for Calendar Year 2004: major city area, county and U.S. congressional district.
March 2007
by Andrew Chamberlain and Gerald Prante
Abstract
The burden of federal taxes does not fall equally on the cities, counties and congressional districts that comprise the geographic landscape of the United States. Because tax collections figures provide little information about the true economic burden of taxes, researchers must employ various statistical methods to estimate the economic incidence of federal taxes across geographic areas. We outline a detailed methodology for modeling the burden of each federal tax – individual income, corporate income, payroll, estate and gift, and all excises – by narrow geographic areas. Using this model, we provide estimates of federal tax burdens by three geographic areas for Calendar Year 2004: major city area, county and U.S. congressional district.
"Tax Subsidies and Prices: Estimating the Impact of Federal Tax Credits for Natural Gas Vehicles on the U.S. Price of Natural Gas"
July 2011
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
The "NAT GAS" bill proposed by Rep. John Sullivan would renew and expand expired federal tax credits for the purchase of natural gas vehicles (NGVs). We estimate the impact of the bill on U.S. natural gas prices. Based on econometric estimates, we find previous federal tax credits had a significant effect on NGV sales. The renewal and expansion of these credits would increase natural gas prices by between 1.13 and 2.98 percent, raising natural gas expenditures between $1.83 billion and $4.78 billion over five years. Roughly 30 percent of the bill’s cost would be borne by households with the remaining 70 percent borne by U.S. companies. The bill would be regressive overall, with costs falling disproportionately on low-income households, families over age 75, those in U.S. Midwestern states and single parents with dependent children. The most heavily impacted U.S. industries would be agricultural fertilizers, followed by basic chemical manufacturing, pulp and paper mills and metal ores mining. The legislation raises production costs for U.S. companies by roughly $2.29 billion over the life of the bill. Lawmakers considering renewal of federal tax credits for NGVs should be wary of these hidden costs to U.S. households and firms.
July 2011
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
The "NAT GAS" bill proposed by Rep. John Sullivan would renew and expand expired federal tax credits for the purchase of natural gas vehicles (NGVs). We estimate the impact of the bill on U.S. natural gas prices. Based on econometric estimates, we find previous federal tax credits had a significant effect on NGV sales. The renewal and expansion of these credits would increase natural gas prices by between 1.13 and 2.98 percent, raising natural gas expenditures between $1.83 billion and $4.78 billion over five years. Roughly 30 percent of the bill’s cost would be borne by households with the remaining 70 percent borne by U.S. companies. The bill would be regressive overall, with costs falling disproportionately on low-income households, families over age 75, those in U.S. Midwestern states and single parents with dependent children. The most heavily impacted U.S. industries would be agricultural fertilizers, followed by basic chemical manufacturing, pulp and paper mills and metal ores mining. The legislation raises production costs for U.S. companies by roughly $2.29 billion over the life of the bill. Lawmakers considering renewal of federal tax credits for NGVs should be wary of these hidden costs to U.S. households and firms.
"Paying for the ‘American Power Act': An Economic and Distributional Analysis of the Kerry-Lieberman Cap-and-Trade Bill"
August 2010
by Andrew Chamberlain and Feliz M. Ventura
Abstract
The “American Power Act” proposed by Sen. John Kerry and Sen. Joseph Lieberman would establish a broad-based U.S. cap-and-trade system. Using an input-output model we estimate the distributional cost of the cap-and-trade portions of the bill to households by income, age group, U.S. region and family type, as well as the value of various industry subsidies granted by the bill. In a typical year (2020), households would face a gross annual burden of $125.9 billion per year or $1,042 per household, with costs disproportionately borne by low-income households. On a net basis, the large quantity of allowances distributed freely to companies leads households in the top income quintile to benefit financially, redistributing to these households roughly $12.3 billion per year from the bottom 80 percent of earners. Finally, we explore two theoretical issues: (1) we offer microeconomic evidence that shareholders rather than households are most likely to benefit from the bill’s free allowances to electricity and natural gas utilities; and (2) we show how the bill’s exclusion of petroleum refiners from quarterly auctions reduces efficiency by introducing a source of additional systematic price volatility at quarterly auctions.
August 2010
by Andrew Chamberlain and Feliz M. Ventura
Abstract
The “American Power Act” proposed by Sen. John Kerry and Sen. Joseph Lieberman would establish a broad-based U.S. cap-and-trade system. Using an input-output model we estimate the distributional cost of the cap-and-trade portions of the bill to households by income, age group, U.S. region and family type, as well as the value of various industry subsidies granted by the bill. In a typical year (2020), households would face a gross annual burden of $125.9 billion per year or $1,042 per household, with costs disproportionately borne by low-income households. On a net basis, the large quantity of allowances distributed freely to companies leads households in the top income quintile to benefit financially, redistributing to these households roughly $12.3 billion per year from the bottom 80 percent of earners. Finally, we explore two theoretical issues: (1) we offer microeconomic evidence that shareholders rather than households are most likely to benefit from the bill’s free allowances to electricity and natural gas utilities; and (2) we show how the bill’s exclusion of petroleum refiners from quarterly auctions reduces efficiency by introducing a source of additional systematic price volatility at quarterly auctions.
"What Does America Think About Taxes? The 2007 Annual Survey of U.S. Attitudes on Taxes and Wealth"
April 2007
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
This report summarizes the findings of our third annual survey of U.S. opinions on taxes. All results are based on a Harris Interactive® survey conducted on behalf of the Tax Foundation between March 5 and 12, 2007. The survey covers a nationwide cross section of 2,012 U.S. adults aged 18 or older. All data from this and previous years’ surveys are available for download free of charge at http://www.taxfoundation.org under “Public Opinion Surveys on Taxes.”
April 2007
by Andrew Chamberlain
Abstract
This report summarizes the findings of our third annual survey of U.S. opinions on taxes. All results are based on a Harris Interactive® survey conducted on behalf of the Tax Foundation between March 5 and 12, 2007. The survey covers a nationwide cross section of 2,012 U.S. adults aged 18 or older. All data from this and previous years’ surveys are available for download free of charge at http://www.taxfoundation.org under “Public Opinion Surveys on Taxes.”