Employment Nondiscrimination Acts and Corporate Innovation

References

• Acharya V, Baghai R, Subramanian K (2014) Wrongful discharge laws and innovation. Rev. Financial Stud. 27(1):301–346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Van Reenen J, Zingales L (2013) Innovation and institutional ownership. Amer. Econom. Rev. 103(1):277–304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2005) Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. Quart. J. Econom. 120(2):701–728.Google Scholar
• Atanassov J (2013) Do hostile takeovers stifle innovation? Evidence from antitakeover legislation and corporate patenting. J. Finance 68(3):1097–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Autor D, Donohue III J, Schwab S (2006) The costs of wrongful-discharge laws. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88(2):211–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Badgett MVL, Lau H, Sears B, Ho D (2007) Bias in the workplace: Consistent evidence of sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination Report, The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, LosAngeles. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Badgett-Sears-Lau-Ho-Bias-in-the-Workplace-Jun-2007.pdf.Google Scholar
• Barber J (2002) Re-orienting sexual harassment: Why federal legislation is needed to cure same-sex sexual harassment law. Amer. University Law Rev. 52(2):493–533.Google Scholar
• Barth J, Overby M (2003) Are gay men and lesbians in the south the new “threat”? Regional comparisons of the contact theory. Politics and Policy 31(3):452–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bénabou R, Ticchi D, Vindigni A (2015) Religion and innovation. Amer. Econom. Rev.: Papers Proc. 105(5):346–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S (2004) How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Quart. J. Econom. 119(1):249–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Black D, Gates G, Sanders S, Taylor L (2000) Demographics of the gay and lesbian population in the United States: Evidence from available systematic data sources. Demography 37(2):139–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Schankerman M, Van Reenen J (2013) Identifying technology spillovers and product market rivalry. Econometrica 81(4):1347–1393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Button J, Rienzo B, Wald K (1995) Where local laws prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Public Management 77(4):9–14.Google Scholar
• Claessens S, Laeven L (2003) Financial development, property rights, and growth. J. Finance 58(6):2401–2436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coff R (2002) Human capital, shared expertise, and the likelihood of impasse in corporate acquisition. J. Management 28(1):107–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diefenbach C (2007) Same-sex sexual harassment after Oncale: Meeting the “because of…sex” requirement. Berkeley J. Gender Law and Justice 22(1):42–94.Google Scholar
• Ederer F, Manso G (2013) Is pay-for-performance detrimental to innovation? Management Sci. 59(7):1496–1513.Link, Google Scholar
• Fang V, Tian X, Tice S (2014) Does stock liquidity enhance or impede firm innovation? J. Finance 69(5):2085–2125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Florida R (2003) Cities and the creative class. City and Community 2(1):2–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Florida R (2011) The geography of hate. The Atlantic Magazine (May 11), http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/05/the-geography-of-hate/238708/.Google Scholar
• Gates GJ (2006) Same-sex couples and the gay, lesbian, bisexual population: New estimates from the American Community Survey. Report, The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, Los Angeles. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-Same-Sex-Couples-GLB-Pop-ACS-Oct-2006.pdf.Google Scholar
• Gates GJ (2009) The impact of sexual orientation anti-discrimination policies on the wages of lesbians and gay men. Report, The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, Los Angeles. http://papers.ccpr.ucla.edu/papers/PWP-CCPR-2009-010/PWP-CCPR-2009-010.pdf.Google Scholar
• Gates GJ (2011) How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender?. Report, The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, Los Angeles. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf.Google Scholar
• Gorman-Murray A (2007) Reconfiguring domestic values: Meanings of home for gay men and lesbians. Housing, Theory and Soc. 24(3):229–246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griliches Z (1981) Market value, R&D, and patents. Econom. Lett. 7(2):183–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagelskamp C, Suárez-Orozco C, Hughes D (2010) Migrating to opportunities: How family migration motivations shape academic trajectories among newcomer immigrant youth. J. Soc. Issues 66(4):717–739.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haider-Markel D, Meier K (2003) Legislative victory, electoral uncertainty: Explaining outcomes in the battles over lesbian and gay civil rights. Rev. Policy Res. 20(4):671–690.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B, Jaffe A, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B, Jaffe A, Trajtenberg M (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econom. 36(1):16–38.Google Scholar
• He J, Tian X (2013) The dark side of analyst coverage: The case of innovation. J. Financial Econom. 109(3):856–878.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heider F, Ljungqvist A (2015) As certain as debt and taxes: Estimating the tax sensitivity of leverage from state tax changes. J. Financial Econom. 118(3):684–712.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herek G (1994) Assessing heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. Greene B, Herek GM, eds. Lesbian and Gay Psychology: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA), 206–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holmstrom B (1989) Agency costs and innovation. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 12(3):305–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imbens G, Wooldridge J (2009) Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. J. Econom. Literature 47(1):5–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacoby J (1967) Open-mindedness and creativity. Psych. Rep. 20(3):i–xi.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanazawa S (2012) Intelligence and homosexuality. J. Biosocial Sci. 44(5):595–623.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klawitter M, Flatt V (1998) The effects of state and local antidiscrimination policies on earnings for gays and lesbians. J. Policy Anal. Management 17(4):658–686.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J, Seru A (2015) The use and misuse of patent data: Issues for corporate finance and beyond. Harvard University Working paper, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Lewis G, Gossett C (2008) Changing public opinion on same-sex marriage: The case of California. Politics and Policy 36(1):4–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Manso G (2011) Motivating innovation. J. Finance 66(5):1823–1860.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martell M (2014) How ENDAs extend the workweek: Legal protection and the labor supply of behaviorally gay men. Contemporary Econom. Policy 32(3):560–577.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCallum C, McLaren S (2011) Sense of belonging and depressive symptoms among Australian gay, lesbian, and bisexual adolescents. J. Homosexuality 58(1):83–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moshirian F, Tian X, Zhang B, Zhang W (2015) Financial liberalization and innovation. Working paper, University of New South Wales, Mid Glamorgan, UK.Google Scholar
• Oldham G, Cummings A (1996) Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Acad. Management J. 39(3):607–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center (2013) A survey of LGBT Americans: Attitudes, experiences and values in changing times. Report, Pew Research Center, Washington, DC. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2013/06/SDT_LGBT-Americans_06-2013.pdf.Google Scholar
• Raddatz C (2006) Liquidity needs and vulnerability to financial underdevelopment. J. Financial Econom. 80(3):677–722.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts MR, Whited TM (2012) Endogeneity in empirical corporate finance. Constantinides GM, Harris M, Stulz RM, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Finance, Vol. 2, Part A (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 493–572.Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld M, Kim B-S (2005) The independence of young adults and the rise of interracial and same-sex unions. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 70(4):541–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rubenstein W (2002) Do gay rights laws matter? An empirical assessment. Southern California Law Rev. 75(1):65–119.Google Scholar
• Scherer FM (1965) Firm size, market structure, opportunity, and the output of patented inventions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 55(5):1097–1125.Google Scholar
• Sears B, Mallory C, Nan H (2009) Analysis of scope and enforcement of state laws and executive orders prohibiting employment discrimination against LGBT people. Report, The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, Los Angeles. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/15_ENDAvStateLaws2.pdf.Google Scholar
• Sirin S, McCreary D, Mahalik J (2004) Differential reactions to men and women’s gender role transgressions: Perceptions of social status, sexual orientation, and value dissimilarity. J. Men’s Stud. 12(2):119–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weston K (1995) Get thee to a big city: Sexual imaginary and the great gay migration. GLQ: A J. Lesbian Gay Stud. 2(3):253–277.Google Scholar
• Wilcox C, Wolpert R (2000) Gay rights in the public sphere: Public opinion on gay and lesbian equality. Rimmerman CA, Wald KD, Wilcox C, eds. The Politics of Gay Rights (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 409–432.Google Scholar
• Wood-Nartker J, Sepanski J, Joe M, Andreea G (2007) College students’ perception of sexual orientation and gender given job descriptions and titles for interior decoration, interior design, and architecture. Perceptual and Motor Skills 104(3):1025–1026.Crossref, Google Scholar