Why Women Earn Less: The Link Between Misogyny and the Gender Wage Gap

A study by NBER and the University of California, Irvine, reveals that misogyny, measured through Google search data, is a significant driver of the gender wage gap, contradicting traditional economic models. The findings suggest that explicit bias, not just structural factors, actively suppresses women's wages and career opportunities, requiring both policy and cultural interventions.

A groundbreaking study by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) and the University of California, Irvine, led by Molly Maloney and David Neumark, delves into whether explicit misogyny is a key driver of the gender wage gap. Unlike prior research that focused on statistical discrimination or implicit biases, the study uses an innovative approach, Google Trends data to quantify misogyny and measure its economic impact. The findings reveal a strong and statistically significant connection between regional misogyny levels and wage disparities, even after adjusting for education, work experience, and industry type. This challenges long-standing economic theories that assume competitive markets eliminate taste-based discrimination, highlighting how deep-seated prejudices continue to influence labor market outcomes.

Breaking Down the Theories of Discrimination

For decades, economists have debated the true causes of the gender wage gap. A well-known explanation is Becker’s (1957) taste-based discrimination model, which suggests that employers with a distaste for women will offer them lower wages. However, this theory assumes that only the least prejudiced employer who still hires women determines the wage gap, meaning that a small fraction of extreme misogynists should have little effect.

An alternative explanation, Black’s search model (1995), challenges this assumption by showing that even a small group of highly prejudiced employers can have a cascading impact on wages. If certain employers refuse to hire women, female job seekers must search longer for jobs, reducing their bargaining power and forcing them to accept lower wages. This model suggests that discriminatory attitudes are more widespread in the labor market than previously thought, affecting wages beyond just a few prejudiced employers.

A New Measure of Misogyny Using Google Trends

Traditional surveys often fail to accurately measure gender bias because respondents hesitate to admit prejudiced views due to social pressures. To circumvent this, the study constructs a novel misogyny index using Google search data. Researchers track search interest in derogatory terms for women across different U.S. states, providing anonymized, real-time insight into explicit biases. This method has been used successfully in prior research on racism and voting patterns, and here, it offers a direct measure of misogynistic attitudes at the state level.

The findings are striking states with higher misogyny levels exhibit significantly larger gender wage gaps. Even after controlling for education, experience, and industry composition, misogyny remains a strong predictor of wage disparities. This suggests that misogyny is not just a cultural issue but an economic one, shaping women’s earnings in tangible ways. The study also distinguishes between two forms of sexism—misogyny (outright dislike of women) and normative sexism (traditional gender role beliefs). While both influence labor market disparities, misogyny has a stronger effect on wages, whereas normative sexism impacts educational attainment, marriage rates, and childbearing decisions.

Rejecting Becker, Supporting Black

By testing the predictions of both Becker’s and Black’s models, the study finds strong evidence against Becker’s model of taste-based discrimination. If Becker were correct, the wage gap would only be influenced by the "marginal discriminator"—the least prejudiced employer willing to hire women. However, the findings show that misogyny broadly influences wages rather than being confined to a select few employers.

On the other hand, the results align with Black’s search model, which predicts that even a minority of highly misogynistic employers can widen the wage gap. Furthermore, the study finds that in states where a higher percentage of women participate in the workforce, the gender wage gap is smaller—a direct contradiction of Becker’s theory but a perfect fit for Black’s model. These findings challenge the assumption that market competition erases discriminatory pay gaps and instead highlight how entrenched biases persist even in modern economies.

Beyond Wages: The Wider Impact of Misogyny

The influence of misogyny extends beyond wages, affecting broader life outcomes for women. States with higher misogyny levels also exhibit:

• Lower female college completion rates
• Higher rates of early marriage
• Earlier childbirth
• Lower full-time employment rates for women

These trends suggest that misogyny not only suppresses wages but also influences women’s career decisions, educational opportunities, and family planning. The study raises an important policy question if misogyny is a barrier to women’s full economic participation, how should policymakers respond?

Addressing the gender wage gap requires more than just equal pay laws. While legislative efforts such as pay transparency and anti-discrimination policies remain crucial, they must be complemented by broader cultural and educational interventions. Media representation, awareness campaigns, and workplace diversity initiatives can help challenge misogynistic attitudes at their root, making discrimination more socially and economically costly.

Rethinking the Gender Wage Gap

This study upends traditional assumptions about the gender wage gap by demonstrating that overt misogyny plays a key role in shaping women’s earnings. Unlike past research that emphasized subtle biases or statistical discrimination, this paper provides evidence that explicit distaste for women is an economically significant force. By leveraging Google search data, the researchers show that misogyny is not just a private opinion but a measurable economic factor affecting labor market outcomes.

Furthermore, the findings challenge the long-standing belief that market forces naturally eliminate discrimination. Instead, the research suggests that prejudice, even among a minority of employers, can sustain wage gaps by making it harder for women to find jobs and negotiate salaries. As policymakers continue to address gender inequality, this study underscores the need for a multi-faceted approach that goes beyond economic policies and targets the cultural roots of misogyny.

By exposing the connection between misogyny and wage disparities, the research provides a wake-up call that gender inequality in the workplace is not just about education, experience, or industry; it is also about the explicit biases that continue to shape economic opportunities for women. Addressing this challenge requires policy reform and a broader societal shift in attitudes toward women in the workforce.