A new IZA discussion paper explores an everyday but important question: When systems, like schools, reach out to families, who do they contact first—mothers or fathers? The study by Kristy Buzard, Laura Katherine Gee, and Olga B. Stoddard uses a large-scale field experiment to show that mothers are 1.4 times more likely than fathers to be contacted.
The findings shine a light on significant ways that gender roles continue to shape family and workplace dynamics today. The study involved sending emails to over 80,000 school principals across the United States. These messages came from fictional families—each one portrayed as a married, heterosexual couple with a school-aged child. The goal of the email was straightforward: the family was moving to the area and looking for a school for their child.
The message asked the principal to call to discuss school options and provided phone numbers for both parents. The key to the experiment was in the wording of the email. Sometimes the message was neutral—giving both phone numbers but not suggesting who should be contacted. In other cases, the email stated that one parent was more available or less available for a conversation.
The researchers then tracked who got a phone call—mom or dad. In the first version of the email, there was no suggestion of which parent should be called. It simply said, “Can you call one of us to discuss?” and listed the phone numbers for both the mother and the father.
The default to mothers
So, in a situation where there’s no stated preference, do school principals reach out to both parents equally? Not quite. When a call was made in this group, it went to the mother about 60% of the time. This is well above the 50% mark that would be expected if the choice were completely random.
In a second version of the email, the message included a clear statement: the father had a lot of availability to talk. This time, the researchers were checking whether principals would adjust their outreach accordingly and prioritize the more available parent. And they did—to some extent. In this scenario, over 70% of the calls went to the dad. So yes, principals were more likely to contact the father when told he was more available.
But here’s the twist: 26% of the time, they still called the mother, even though the father said he was very available. This suggests that even when dads state that they are clearly available, there’s a strong tendency to contact moms.
A version of the email said that the mother had a lot of availability. Now the outcome was even more skewed. A full 90% of the calls went to the mother. That’s a much stronger shift than in the previous case. When mom was described as the very available parent, principals overwhelmingly chose to contact her. So while they responded to availability in both cases, the bias in favor of contacting mothers was stronger when it aligned with traditional expectations.
Broader implications for gender equality
These differences in call patterns point to deeper societal norms and expectations. The researchers argue that the results are likely just the visible part of a much larger issue. They suspect that similar biases play out in many day-to-day situations—like when schools need to call home because a child is sick or when teachers need help organizing an event. In those cases, moms are probably contacted even more often than dads, even when both parents are equally capable or available.
This pattern of defaulting to mothers as the primary contact point—even when they’re not available—feeds into broader issues of gender inequality. For example, if mothers are always the ones being contacted by schools, they may be the ones more likely to miss work, adjust their schedules, or take time off. Over time, that can have real consequences for their careers and income.
This research helps explain why progress toward gender equality in the workplace has been so slow, even as cultural attitudes have shifted. If society continues to place more caregiving and coordination responsibilities on mothers, women will continue to face extra hurdles when it comes to balancing work and family life.
Addressing unconscious biases
The study doesn’t suggest that principals are intentionally biased. In fact, many probably aren’t even aware of these patterns in their behavior. But that’s exactly the point: many gender-based expectations are so deeply embedded that they operate beneath the surface. They’re part of our habits, assumptions, and unconscious decision-making.
By bringing this issue to light, the researchers hope to start a conversation—not just in schools, but in all workplaces and households—about how gender roles continue to influence our actions in subtle ways. They argue that recognizing and addressing these patterns is a key step toward greater fairness and equality in both the home and the workplace.