mastodon.world is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Generic Mastodon server for anyone to use.

Server stats:

8.4K
active users

#laboreconomics

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

Large Language Models, Small Labor Market Effects
bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/up
"#AI chatbots have had no significant impact on earnings or recorded hours in any occupation, with confidence intervals ruling out effects larger than 1%. Modest productivity gains (average time savings of 3%), combined with weak wage pass-through, help explain these limited labor market effects.
… no evidence of differential trends over time, suggesting that the limited effects are not merely a very short-run phenomenon.
… findings challenge narratives of imminent labor market transformation due to Generative AI."
#llm #laborEconomics #wages

Remote Work, Employee Mix, and Performance
cevatgirayaksoy.wordpress.com/
"…fully remote work increased the share of women, including married women, rural and smaller-town residents. By accessing groups with traditionally lower labor-force participation, the firm was able to increase its share of graduate employees by 14% without raising #wages
…workforce productivity rose by 10%, reflecting shorter call durations for remote employees. This was facilitated by a quieter home working environment, avoiding the background noise in the office
…fully remote employees with initial in-person training saw higher long-run remote #productivity and lower #attrition rates."
#wfh #laborEconomics

A recent study analyzing the Danish labor market (2023-2024) offers some insights into the early impact of generative AI. While AI chatbots have seen rapid adoption across various occupations, the study suggests their effects on overall wages and employment have been remarkably limited so far. 🌐

Key takeaways from the research:
📈 Despite widespread use, AI chatbots showed no significant impact on earnings or recorded hours.
🤔 While AI saves time for many users, the study found that new tasks created by AI (like reviewing AI output or crafting prompts) often offset these time savings for 8.4% of workers.
💸 Only a small fraction (3-7%) of productivity gains translated into higher earnings for workers, raising questions about who benefits most from efficiency.

This early look provides perspective, challenging some narratives around immediate, widespread labor market transformation. It highlights that the integration of AI is still evolving and its long-term economic impact remains a dynamic area for further research. What are your observations on AI's impact in your workplace?
arstechnica.com/ai/2025/05/tim
#GenerativeAI #LaborEconomics #AIImpact #WorkplaceInnovation #FutureOfWork

Robot with megaphone yelling at businesswoman working at computer - stock illustration
Ars Technica · Time saved by AI offset by new work created, study suggestsBy Benj Edwards

Behavioral Measures Improve AI Hiring: A Field Experiment d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rco:dpap
"… suggest that survey-based behavioral measures markedly improve the predictions of a random-forest algorithm trained to predict productivity within sample relative to demographic information alone."

It's a pity that the authors do not give the more traditional probit model as much attention as their fancy "#AI", a random forrest model. They spend a lot of effort to find a good random forrest model with cross validation. But it is pitted against a simple probit model where they didn't even try to include interaction effects according to their description. Now, what is the computational cost of the cross validated random forrest model compared to a well crafted probit model? Of course you can do automated feature and feature interteraction selection with probit models, too. There is no reason to dismiss the probit model in such an unfair comparison.
#jobtech #LaborEconomics #ML

Who Gets the Callback? Generative AI and Gender Bias d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:pape
"… most #llm models reproduce stereotypical gender associations and systematically recommend equally qualified women for lower-wage roles, indicating occupational segregation.
… These biases stem from entrenched gender patterns in the training data as well as from an agreeableness bias induced during the reinforcement learning from human feedback stage
.…AI-driven hiring may perpetuate biases in the labor market and have implications for #fairness and diversity within firms"
#AI #jobtech #ExperimentalEcon #LaborEconomics #discrimination #bias

Time saved by #AI offset by new work created arstechnica.com/ai/2025/05/tim
"Despite finding widespread and often employer-encouraged adoption of these tools, the study concluded that “AI chatbots have had no significant impact on earnings or recorded hours in any occupation” during the period studied. The confidence intervals in their statistical analysis ruled out average effects larger than 1%."
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.
#economics #LaborEconomics

Robot with megaphone yelling at businesswoman working at computer - stock illustration
Ars Technica · Time saved by AI offset by new work created, study suggestsBy Benj Edwards

Macroeconomic Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Productivity: An estimate from a survey d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:eti:dpap
"… highly educated and high-wage workers are more likely to use #AI
… the diffusion of AI may widen overall labor market inequality
… estimate that macroeconomic productivity impact is 0.5–0.6% when AI is used than when it is not.
… as approximately 28% of the respondents expect to use AI for their jobs in the future, the macroeconomic effects of AI are likely to expand. However, because the productivity gain of AI for those who have recently started using AI is smaller than that for those who have been using AI continuously, the additional productivity gain is likely to diminish over time."
#economics #LaborEconomics

Estimating Wage Disparities Using Foundation Model gsb.stanford.edu/gsb-box/route
"… classic problem from #laborEconomics: estimating how individuals with the same labor market experience get paid when they belong to different groups. We highlighted the promise of using a foundation model in this setting: wage predictions improve over econometric baselines by 15%. We also showed that an omitted variable bias arises when a foundation model discards relevant information about group differences."
#llm

Stanford Graduate School of BusinessDownloading document...

From rules to forests: rule-based versus statistical models for jobseeker profiling osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/c7ps
"…statistical models outperform the current rule-based profiling approach predicting long-term unemployment considerably both in terms of discrimination (ROC-AUC: 0.735 vs. 0.593) and in terms of calibration (ICI: 0.037 vs. 0.223).
…machine learning methods achieve higher performance scores than conventional #regression models, especially regarding calibration."
#ML #LaborEconomics

osf.ioOSF