In this project, we use an experimental approach to investigate whether all types of discrimination are created equal, disentangling the different mechanisms that generate discrimination. In our study, a large random sample of Jewish Israelis played four economic games with partners belonging to a disadvantaged social group, identified by gender (women), nationality-ethnicity (Arabs), religion (ultra-Orthodox Jews), or ethnicity (Mizrahi Jews). A dictator game assessed negative emotions and inclinations for fairness; a trust game explored mistrust; a competence game examined beliefs about competence and intelligence; and a donation game was used to investigate beliefs about entitlement. Arabs, the national-ethnic minority group, were the most discriminated against across all the domains measured in the different games. Ultra-Orthodox Jews were discriminated against in the dictator game but were favored in the trust game, suggesting a more nuanced attitude towards this group. Women were generally favored, compared to men, across all four games. Our findings suggest that anti-discrimination laws, which in most countries apply a unified approach to eliminating all forms of ethnic, gender, and religion-based discrimination, may not be effective because each of these forms of discrimination is generated by a different behavioral mechanism. Thus, our project makes two important contributions to the empirical study of anti-discrimination law. First, we offer an innovative methodology for disentangling the different mechanisms that generate discrimination, which could help policymakers design more tailored and effective anti-discrimination laws. Second, we document differences in the types of discrimination directed at different social groups in a modern heterogeneous society, a current global challenge
