Why the Referential Treatment? Evidence from Field Experiments on Referrals

By Amanda Pallais, E. Sands. Journal of Political Economy, 2016

154 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2df8822182d929664565ea705a561b0e93a2eb94

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. Nava Ashraf
2. K. Muralidharan
3. Mauricio Romero
4. K. Wuthrich
5. O. Bandiera

In Safety Research

1. Nava Ashraf
2. Mauricio Romero
3. O. Bandiera
4. K. Muralidharan
5. K. Wuthrich
6. M. Lowe
7. Erika Deserranno
8. A. Ganimian

Citations in the corpus

• Discretion in Hiring Mitchell (2015, unknown): “[22] Pallais, Amanda and Emily Sands (2015), “Why the Referential Treatment? Evidence from Field Experiments on Referrals,” The Journal of Political Economy, forthcoming.”
• Social Incentives in Organizations (2018, background): “The second is Pallais and Sands (2016), who set up a series of field experiments in an on-line labor market to identify the individual channels through which social incentives can benefit the firm.”
• Factorial Designs, Model Selection, and (Incorrect) Inference in Randomized Experiments (2019, methodology): “ments on Referrals Pallais & Sands (2016) analyze three field experiments in an online labor market to study why referred workers are more likely to be hired than non-referred workers.”