Chapter 2 Gender and Corruption: A Survey of the Experimental Evidence

Ananish Chaudhuri

Research in Experimental Economics2012https://doi.org/10.1108/s0193-2306(2012)0000015004book-chapter
ABDC B
Weight
0.55

What the paper says

I provide an overview of the literature that explores whether there are gender differences in corruption using economic decision-making experiments designed to simulate corrupt transactions usually involving acts of bribery between a firm and a government official. A primary focus of the chapter is to critically examine this evidence with a view to addressing the following question: will increased female participation in public life – both in government and bureaucracy – lead to reduced corruption? I find that across a wide variety of experiments, studying different aspects of corruption, it is either the case that women behave in a more pro-social and less corrupt manner than men or that there are no significant gender differences. There are no studies that find men to be less corrupt. Consequently, I conclude by arguing that we can answer the question posed above in the affirmative.

26 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/s0193-2306(2012)0000015004

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ananish2012,
  title        = {{Chapter 2 Gender and Corruption: A Survey of the Experimental Evidence}},
  author       = {Ananish Chaudhuri},
  journal      = {Research in Experimental Economics},
  year         = {2012},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/s0193-2306(2012)0000015004},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Chapter 2 Gender and Corruption: A Survey of the Experimental Evidence

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.55

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.52 × 0.4 = 0.21
M · momentum0.80 × 0.15 = 0.12
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.