Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Our results suggest that investors do not discriminate against female or Asian entrepreneurs when evaluating unsolicited pitch emails... Are they implying that investors do discriminate against non-Asian males? Why write it the other way around.
From omission it seems they reply less to black and white men. But these groups are large, however, sadly I don’t think it’d be easy to test on feigned education/class, so we won’t know what causes the bias.
> After long and thoughtful consideration, we discarded the idea of assigning African-American names to our fictitious entrepreneurs. First, there has been a concern about the ability to disentangle race and socioeconomic perception by using distinctly African-American names (Fryer and Levitt (2004)). Second, and most importantly, African-American entrepreneurs are woefully underrepresented in high-impact entrepreneurship (less than 1%, see Gompers and Wang (2017)). This poses a substantial challenge for our setup, because even names that are disproportionately likely to be African-American in the general population (such as “Martin Jackson”) may not be perceived as African-American by investors in this context. Studying discrimination against African-Americans and other underrepresented minorities in high-impact entrepreneurship remains an important problem.