BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

John J. Horton

John J. Horton contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
cs.CYecon.GNHuman-Computer Interactionq-fin.EC

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
4topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Algorithmic Writing Assistance on Jobseekers' Resumes Increases Hires

There is a strong association between the quality of the writing in a resume for new labor market entrants and whether those entrants are ultimately hired. We show that this relationship is, at least partially, causal: a field experiment in an online labor market was conducted with nearly half a million jobseekers in which a treated group received algorithmic writing assistance. Treated jobseekers experienced an 8% increase in the probability of getting hired. Contrary to concerns that the assistance is taking away a valuable signal, we find no evidence that employers were less satisfied. We present a model in which better writing is not a signal of ability but helps employers ascertain ability, which rationalizes our findings.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Employer Expectations, Peer Effects and Productivity: Evidence from a Series of Field Experiments

This paper reports the results of a series of field experiments designed to investigate how peer effects operate in a real work setting. Workers were hired from an online labor market to perform an image-labeling task and, in some cases, to evaluate the work product of other workers. These evaluations had financial consequences for both the evaluating worker and the evaluated worker. The experiments showed that on average, evaluating high-output work raised an evaluator's subsequent productivity, with larger effects for evaluators that are themselves highly productive. The content of the subject evaluations themselves suggest one mechanism for peer effects: workers readily punished other workers whose work product exhibited low output/effort. However, non-compliance with employer expectations did not, by itself, trigger punishment: workers would not punish non-complying workers so long as the evaluated worker still exhibited high effort. A worker's willingness to punish was strongly correlated with their own productivity, yet this relationship was not the result of innate differences---productivity-reducing manipulations also resulted in reduced punishment. Peer effects proved hard to stamp out: although most workers complied with clearly communicated maximum expectations for output, some workers still raised their production beyond the output ceiling after evaluating highly productive yet non-complying work products.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access