Erika L. Kirgios is a third-year PhD student in the Decision Processes group. Prior to her doctoral studies at Wharton, she graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University with a BA in Computer Science, and minors in Cognitive Science and Neuroscience.
Erika’s research primarily falls into two streams of work: the first centers on race and gender inequality, and the second on charitable giving and prosocial behavior. Her work on race and gender aims to elucidate why inequality persists and how it may be reduced. She focuses both on the decisions of organizational leaders and on those of underrepresented minorities. Overall, her work seeks to provide new insights about how we can encourage decision-making that reduces inequality through a dual focus on workplace diversity and prosocial behavior.
Abstract: Past research demonstrates that people prefer to affiliate with others who resemble them demographically. However, we posit that the strength of this tendency toward homophily may be moderated by strategic considerations when competing for scarce opportunities. Across six experiments, we find that anticipated competition weakens people’s desire to join groups that include similar others. When expecting to compete against fellow group members, women are more willing to join all-male groups and Black participants are more willing to join all-White groups than in the absence of competition. We show that this effect is mediated both by a belief that being distinct will lead your performance to stand out and by a desire to compete against demographically dissimilar others. Our findings offer a new perspective to enrich past research on homophily, shedding light on the instances when minorities are more likely to join groups in which they will be underrepresented.
Abstract: We highlight a feature of personnel selection decisions that can influence the gender diversity of groups and teams. Specifically, we show that people are less likely to choose candidates whose gender would increase group diversity when making personnel selections in isolation (i.e., when they are responsible for selecting a single group member) than when making collections of choices (i.e., when they are responsible for selecting multiple group members). We call this the isolated choice effect. Across 6 preregistered experiments (n=3,509), we demonstrate that the isolated choice effect has important consequences for group diversity. When making sets of hiring and selection decisions (as opposed to making a single hire), people construct more gender-diverse groups. Mediation and moderation studies suggest that people do not attend as much to diversity when making isolated selection choices, which drives this effect.
Best Micro Paper Award, East Coast Doctoral Conference, 2019
National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, 2017-2020
Wharton Risk Center Russell Ackoff Fellowship, 2018 and 2019
Marjorie Weiler Prize for Excellence in Writing, 2018