Randomized audits and correspondence studies are widely regarded as a “gold standard” for capturing discrimination and bias. However, gatekeepers (e.g., employers) are the analytic unit even though stated implications often center on group-level inequalities. Employing simple rules, we show that audits have the potential to uncover applicant-side inequalities and burdens beyond the gatekeeper biases standardly reported. Specifically, applicants from groups facing lower callback rates must submit more applications to ensure an eventual callback, have fewer opportunities to choose from, and face higher uncertainty regarding how many applications to submit. These results reflect several sequential and cumulative stratification processes “real-world” applicants face that warrant attention in conventional audit reporting. Our approach can be straightforwardly applied and, we show, is particularly pertinent for employment relative to other institutional domains (e.g., education, religion). We discuss the methodological and theoretical relevance of our suggested extensions and the implications for the study of inequality, discrimination, and social closure.

中文翻译：

---

审计的未实现潜力：申请人方在努力、机会和确定性方面的不平等

随机审计和函询研究被广泛认为是捕捉歧视和偏见的“黄金标准”。然而，守门人（例如雇主）是分析单位，尽管所陈述的含义通常集中在群体层面的不平等上。采用简单的规则，我们表明审计有可能发现申请人方的不平等和负担，而不仅仅是标准报告的看门人偏见。具体来说，来自回拨率较低群体的申请人必须提交更多的申请以确保最终回拨，可供选择的机会较少，并且在提交多少申请方面面临更高的不确定性。这些结果反映了“现实世界”申请人面临的几个连续和累积的分层过程，这些过程在传统审计报告中值得关注。我们的方法可以直接应用，并且表明，相对于其他机构领域（例如，教育、宗教）而言，我们的方法对就业特别相关。我们讨论了我们建议的扩展的方法论和理论相关性，以及对不平等、歧视和社会封闭研究的影响。