ABSTRACT We investigate whether different criteria are used in evaluating male and female leaders when outcomes are determined by unobservable choices and luck. Evaluators form beliefs about leaders’ choices (perceived intentions) and make discretionary payments. We find that while payments to male leaders are determined by both outcomes and perceived intentions, those to female leaders are determined by outcomes only. We label this new source of gender bias as the gender criteria gap . Our findings imply that high outcomes are necessary for women to get bonuses, but men can receive bonuses for low outcomes if evaluators hold them in high regard.
Erkal et al. (Mon,) studied this question.