
We examine how search frictions impact labor market sorting by constructing a model consistent with evidence that employers interview a subset of a pool of applicants. We derive necessary and sufficient conditions for sorting in applications and matches. Positive sorting is obtained when production complementarities outweigh a counterforce measured by a (novel) quality-quantity elasticity. Interestingly, the threshold for the complementarities depends on the fraction of high-type workers and can be increasing in the number of interviews. Our model shows how policies like Ban the Box can backfire because when screening workers becomes harder, firms may discourage certain workers from applying. (JEL D22, D82, D83, J23, M51)
D82, D83, ddc:330, E24, information frictions, heterogeneity, search frictions, sorting, C78, complementarity
D82, D83, ddc:330, E24, information frictions, heterogeneity, search frictions, sorting, C78, complementarity
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
