Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
We use a within-subjects experiment with math and word tasks to show that relative performance feedback moves high-ability females toward more competitive forms of compensation, moves low-ability men toward less competitive forms, and eliminates gender differences in choices. We also examine females across the menstrual cycle and find that women in the high-hormone phase are more willing to compete than women in the low-hormone phase. There are no significant differences between choices after subjects receive feedback. Thus, biological differences lead to economically significant differences, but the impact of those differences can be lowered through relative performance information.