A study published in Nature Human Behaviour provides evidence that anti-Asian sentiment during the COVID-19 pandemic, fueled in part by political rhetoric from Donald Trump and conservative media outlets, had serious economic consequences for Asian workers in the United States. The research found that Asian individuals in jobs requiring face-to-face interaction were more likely to experience unemployment and significant wage cuts compared to other racial groups. These labor market disparities are linked to the rise in unfavorable public opinion toward Asian people, especially among Trump voters and Fox News viewers.
Anti-Asian sentiment surged following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, largely fueled by political rhetoric and media portrayal. As the virus spread, public figures, including then-President Donald Trump, began referring to it as the “Chinese virus” and “kung flu,” which many perceived as inflammatory and racist. This language, echoed by some media outlets, contributed to widespread xenophobia and a sharp rise in hate incidents against people of Asian descent in the United States.
According to reports, one in five Asian Americans experienced hate incidents in 2020 and 2021, while anti-Asian hate crimes in large U.S. cities spiked by over 180% during the early months of 2021. This rhetoric not only led to social hostility but also raised concerns about its economic impact, particularly regarding potential discrimination in the labor market.
The researchers were motivated to explore whether this surge in anti-Asian sentiment had measurable economic consequences for Asian workers in the U.S. labor market. They aimed to investigate whether negative public opinion toward Asian people, exacerbated by political rhetoric like Trump’s, resulted in higher rates of unemployment and reduced earnings for Asian workers.
To investigate this question, the researchers used several data sources, including labor market data from the U.S. Current Population Survey (CPS), public opinion data from the Nationscape survey, and 2016 U.S. presidential election data. The CPS provided monthly employment and earnings information from a large, nationally representative sample of U.S. workers. The researchers analyzed this data from January 2019 to May 2021, allowing them to compare employment outcomes before and after the onset of the pandemic.
They focused on workers between the ages of 18 and 70 and categorized them by race and ethnicity, with an emphasis on Asian, Black, Hispanic, and white (non-Hispanic) workers. In addition to standard employment measures, they also created a metric to capture the degree to which different occupations required face-to-face interaction, based on telework data collected during the pandemic.
Public opinion data from the Nationscape survey allowed the researchers to track shifts in attitudes toward Asian people before and after the pandemic. Survey respondents were asked to rate how favorable their impressions were of different racial and ethnic groups, including Asian people. The researchers also analyzed this data to determine whether changes in attitudes were more pronounced among those who had voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election or were regular viewers of Fox News, as both groups were more likely to be exposed to anti-Asian rhetoric during the pandemic.
The study’s findings revealed a stark difference in labor market outcomes for Asian workers compared to other racial groups during the pandemic. Asian workers, particularly those in jobs that required face-to-face interaction, were more likely to experience unemployment. For instance, the study found that Asian workers in such jobs were about 7% more likely to lose their jobs than their white counterparts. Interestingly, this increased risk of unemployment did not apply equally to Black or Hispanic workers, who did not see similar outcomes in face-to-face roles.
In addition to higher unemployment rates, the study also found that Asian workers who remained employed in face-to-face jobs saw significant reductions in their earnings during the pandemic. On average, these workers earned $76 less per week than white workers in similar roles, a substantial financial loss. This earnings penalty was far greater than the gap typically seen between workers with and without college degrees, indicating that Asian workers faced unique challenges in the labor market during the pandemic.
The researchers concluded that these negative labor market outcomes were likely tied to the rise in anti-Asian sentiment. Public opinion data showed a marked increase in unfavorable views toward Asian individuals during the early months of the pandemic, particularly among Trump voters and Fox News viewers. This change in sentiment appeared to correspond with the timing of labor market disruptions, suggesting that racial bias played a role in the employment and earnings losses faced by Asian workers.
While the study provides important insights into the relationship between public opinion and labor market outcomes, it does have some limitations. The researchers note that they were unable to establish direct causal links between changes in public opinion and the specific employment and earnings outcomes of individual workers. Although they provide strong evidence that anti-Asian sentiment played a significant role, other factors, such as differing responses to the pandemic by industry or region, could also have contributed to the labor market outcomes observed in the data.
Despite these limitations, the study highlights the potentially harmful economic consequences of xenophobic rhetoric and negative shifts in public opinion toward underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. The findings raise concerns about the broader implications of divisive political rhetoric and media messaging for racial minorities, particularly in times of crisis. The researchers suggest that future work could further investigate the specific mechanisms through which public opinion affects labor market outcomes, as well as explore whether other underrepresented groups might be similarly vulnerable to economic harms during periods of rising social tensions.
The study, “Public opinion, racial bias and labour market outcomes in the USA,” was authored by Kaveh Majlesi, Silvia Prina, and Paul Sullivan.
