. | Dependent variable LOF . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | Female clients . | Male clients . | Diff. in client . | Advisor . | . | . |
Homophily dimension . | (|$\beta_{1})$| . | (|$\beta _{1} +\beta _{3})$| . | gender (|$\beta _{3})$| . | FEs . | N . | R|$^{2}$| . |
Same gender | −0.0108 | 0.0388*** | 0.0496*** | No | 2,209 | 0.1819 |
(0.0193) | (0.0105) | (0.0121) | ||||
Same age | 0.0035 | 0.0160*** | 0.0125*** | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2503 |
(0.0192) | (0.0049) | (0.0035) | ||||
Same marital status | 0.0627** | 0.0311 | −0.0316* | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2433 |
(0.0299) | (0.0391) | (0.0175) | ||||
Same parental status | 0.0182* | 0.0021 | −0.0161 | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2175 |
(0.0096) | (0.0146) | (0.0184) |
. | Dependent variable LOF . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | Female clients . | Male clients . | Diff. in client . | Advisor . | . | . |
Homophily dimension . | (|$\beta_{1})$| . | (|$\beta _{1} +\beta _{3})$| . | gender (|$\beta _{3})$| . | FEs . | N . | R|$^{2}$| . |
Same gender | −0.0108 | 0.0388*** | 0.0496*** | No | 2,209 | 0.1819 |
(0.0193) | (0.0105) | (0.0121) | ||||
Same age | 0.0035 | 0.0160*** | 0.0125*** | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2503 |
(0.0192) | (0.0049) | (0.0035) | ||||
Same marital status | 0.0627** | 0.0311 | −0.0316* | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2433 |
(0.0299) | (0.0391) | (0.0175) | ||||
Same parental status | 0.0182* | 0.0021 | −0.0161 | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2175 |
(0.0096) | (0.0146) | (0.0184) |
In the first row, for example, |$\beta _{1}$| reports the effect of the homophily dimension Same gender on client |$j$|’s likelihood of following advisor |$k$|’s recommendations in meeting |$i$| (LOF) for the group of female clients (i.e. Client male = 0), |$\beta _{1}+\beta _{3}$| reports the effect of Same gender for the subsample of male clients, and |$\beta _{3}$| shows the difference in the reported effects for male and female clients, respectively. To gauge the statistical significance of the estimated coefficients pertaining to (|$\beta _{1} $|+ |$\beta _{3})$|, each regression is rerun with rescaled values. All specifications are estimated with robust standard errors and include client characteristics and meeting controls as well as time fixed effects. ***, **, and * indicate statistical significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, respectively.
. | Dependent variable LOF . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | Female clients . | Male clients . | Diff. in client . | Advisor . | . | . |
Homophily dimension . | (|$\beta_{1})$| . | (|$\beta _{1} +\beta _{3})$| . | gender (|$\beta _{3})$| . | FEs . | N . | R|$^{2}$| . |
Same gender | −0.0108 | 0.0388*** | 0.0496*** | No | 2,209 | 0.1819 |
(0.0193) | (0.0105) | (0.0121) | ||||
Same age | 0.0035 | 0.0160*** | 0.0125*** | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2503 |
(0.0192) | (0.0049) | (0.0035) | ||||
Same marital status | 0.0627** | 0.0311 | −0.0316* | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2433 |
(0.0299) | (0.0391) | (0.0175) | ||||
Same parental status | 0.0182* | 0.0021 | −0.0161 | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2175 |
(0.0096) | (0.0146) | (0.0184) |
. | Dependent variable LOF . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | Female clients . | Male clients . | Diff. in client . | Advisor . | . | . |
Homophily dimension . | (|$\beta_{1})$| . | (|$\beta _{1} +\beta _{3})$| . | gender (|$\beta _{3})$| . | FEs . | N . | R|$^{2}$| . |
Same gender | −0.0108 | 0.0388*** | 0.0496*** | No | 2,209 | 0.1819 |
(0.0193) | (0.0105) | (0.0121) | ||||
Same age | 0.0035 | 0.0160*** | 0.0125*** | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2503 |
(0.0192) | (0.0049) | (0.0035) | ||||
Same marital status | 0.0627** | 0.0311 | −0.0316* | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2433 |
(0.0299) | (0.0391) | (0.0175) | ||||
Same parental status | 0.0182* | 0.0021 | −0.0161 | Yes | 2,209 | 0.2175 |
(0.0096) | (0.0146) | (0.0184) |
In the first row, for example, |$\beta _{1}$| reports the effect of the homophily dimension Same gender on client |$j$|’s likelihood of following advisor |$k$|’s recommendations in meeting |$i$| (LOF) for the group of female clients (i.e. Client male = 0), |$\beta _{1}+\beta _{3}$| reports the effect of Same gender for the subsample of male clients, and |$\beta _{3}$| shows the difference in the reported effects for male and female clients, respectively. To gauge the statistical significance of the estimated coefficients pertaining to (|$\beta _{1} $|+ |$\beta _{3})$|, each regression is rerun with rescaled values. All specifications are estimated with robust standard errors and include client characteristics and meeting controls as well as time fixed effects. ***, **, and * indicate statistical significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, respectively.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.