|
Conventional wisdom holds that men are more likely to get a
ticket when pulled over by the police. In fact, a 2007 Cornell University
poll revealed that a whopping 85% of participants thought that males are more
likely to be ticketed. Less than 5% of the participants believed that women
would be ticketed, with the remainder predicting that males and females are
equally likely to get ticketed.
In "Gender Bias in Power Relationships: Evidence from Police
Traffic Stops", four researchers from Cornell University's
Department of Applied Economics and Management reconciled popular perception
with statistical reality. In three out of five areas observed for ticketing
rates, women were more likely to get ticketed.
Overall, men were only .3% more likely to get ticketed. According to the
Cornell study, it doesn't matter whether you're a man or a woman. If you're
breaking the law, you're just as likely to be ticketed.
There is an obvious difference between perception and reality
regarding which gender is getting traffic tickets. People tend to think that
cute girls get off much easier than guys. Where was the "evidence" behind this
opinion in the first place? Is it
possible that what once may have once been true is no longer the case? The
Cornell study doesn't reach far back in time to explore the "cute driver" myth,
but its findings are clear.
Should we be somehow "satisfied" that there is equality in
the rate of each gender getting ticketed? Although the Cornell study indicates
that women are just as likely to get ticketed as men, it doesn't show other
biases between different people. What would future studies show if the
attractiveness of the driver was taken into account? How would such as study be
constructed? And if the results were less than egalitarian, what would we do
about it?
Resources:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998464
|
Good Answers: