arXiv subjects

Bruno Crépon

Publications and source records attributed to Bruno Crépon.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Biases-Informed Job Search Guidance: Characterization, Implications, and Targeting Support

Job seekers' expectations about reemployment are increasingly used to study job search, but what their biases reveal about underlying beliefs and preferences is ambiguous. We combine new survey data, structural modeling, and machine learning to uncover the informational content of these expectations and show how they can be used to improve the targeting of employment support. Using a new panel of French job seekers' subjective expectations linked to administrative records, we show that reemployment expectation biases are strongly associated with, and summarize, biases in beliefs about the two fundamentals of search, job offer arrival rates and the wage distribution. These underlying biases are heterogeneous but strongly positively correlated, so their effects on search compound. We then estimate a structural job search model with multiple sources of biased beliefs and show that correcting them helps pessimistic job seekers but can demotivate and hurt optimistic ones, providing a rationale for targeting. Finally, we develop a machine-learning stratification that recovers policy-relevant groups, with distinct patterns of biased beliefs and behaviors, from easily elicited reemployment expectations alone. This gives employment services a simple tool to target informational interventions.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2026

Targeting Support Using Job Seekers' Biases: A Randomized Experiment

Most digital job-search assistance encourages unemployed workers to broaden their search toward related occupations, targeting one important source of search inefficiency: insufficient occupational diversification. Our analysis suggests that the relevant margin of adjustment depends on the underlying search problem. Building on a detailed analysis of job seekers' beliefs and search behavior, we identify a large group of pessimistic workers for whom the main constraints are low search effort and low aspirations, rather than insufficient occupational diversification. This diagnosis points to an unexpected intervention: rather than encouraging these workers to search in new occupations, we encourage them to search more intensively and apply for better-paying jobs within the occupations they already consider. We evaluate this diagnosis-based intervention, alongside a standard occupational recommendation, in a large-scale randomized experiment conducted with the French Public Employment Service. The motivational intervention increases search effort, raises reservation wages, and improves reemployment outcomes along the predicted margins. Occupational recommendations, by contrast, primarily benefit workers whose search problem lies in the allocation of attention across occupations and operate by activating existing perceptions rather than correcting beliefs. More broadly, our findings show how digital platforms can combine subjective expectations, behavioral data, targeted interventions, and randomized experimentation to diagnose job seekers' needs and iteratively improve intervention design.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2026

A Job I Like or a Job I Can Get: Designing Job Recommender Systems Using Field Experiments

Recommendation systems (RSs) are increasingly used to guide job seekers on online platforms, yet the algorithms currently deployed are typically optimized for predictive objectives such as clicks, applications, or hires, rather than job seekers' welfare. We develop a job-search model with an application stage in which the value of a vacancy depends on two dimensions: the utility it delivers to the worker and the probability that an application succeeds. The model implies that welfare-optimal RSs rank vacancies by an expected-surplus index combining both, and shows why rankings based solely on utility, hiring probabilities, or observed application behavior are generically suboptimal, an instance of the inversion problem between behavior and welfare. We test these predictions and quantify their practical importance through two randomized field experiments conducted with the French public employment service. The first experiment, comparing existing algorithms and their combinations, provides behavioral evidence that both dimensions shape application decisions. Guided by the model and these results, the second experiment extends the comparison to an RS designed to approximate the welfare-optimal ranking. The experiments generate exogenous variation in the vacancies shown to job seekers, allowing us to estimate the model, validate its behavioral predictions, and construct a welfare metric. Algorithms informed by the model-implied optimal ranking substantially outperform existing approaches and perform close to the welfare-optimal benchmark. Our results show that embedding predictive tools within a simple job-search framework and combining it with experimental evidence yields recommendation rules with substantial welfare gains in practice.

econ.EM↗