Skip to main content

Table 6 Labor-market intermediation on job matching efficiency. Labor-Market Intermediation Program, Lima 2009–2010

From: Integrating mobile phone technologies into labor-market intermediation: a multi-treatment experimental design

  Month # 1 Month # 2 Month # 3
Overall treatment 4 −10 28 11 34 16
  (28) (27) (26) (24) (26) (24)
Type of treatment
Traditional treatement (DT1) 31 −6 36 0 42 13
  (34) (35) (31) (32) (32) (33)
Restricted-SMS treatment (DT2) −45 −44 −12 −4 5 −1
  (39) (41) (37) (37) (36) (41)
Unrestricted-SMS treatment (DT3) 6 5 44 33 44 30
  (34) (34) (32) (30) (32) (28)
p-value of F-test: DT1 = DT2 = DT3 0.148 0.496 0.290 0.621 0.512 0.745
Covariates No Yes No Yes No Yes
Experimental groups FE No Yes No Yes No Yes
  1. Notes: Standard errrors in parenthesis. Estimates based on a parametric cross-sectional estimator conditional on working status. The treatment indicator takes the value 1 for those benefiting from labor-market intermediation, 0 otherwise. Control covariates are the same as those included in Table 4. Clustered standard errors by day are considered when including experimental group fixed effects in columns 2, 4, and 6.***statistically significant at 1%, **statistically significant at 5%, *statistically significant at 10%.