Search Results
Author: Weir, Dorothea
Resulting in 1 citation.
| 1. |
Kilbourne, Barbara Stanek Farkas, George Beron, Kurt Weir, Dorothea England, Paula A. |
|
Returns to Skill, Compensating Differentials, and Gender Bias: Effects of Occupational Characteristics on the Wages of White Women and Men American Journal of Sociology 100,3 (November 1994): 689-719. Also: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2782402 Cohort(s): Young Men, Young Women Publisher: University of Chicago Press Keyword(s): Educational Returns; Gender Differences; Human Capital Theory; Job Skills; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Skills; Unions; Wage Gap; Wages, Women Gender differences in the earnings of white US workers are decomposed using a regression model with fixed-effects & national individual-level panel data from the 1966-1981 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (N = approximately 10,000 respondents ages 14-24 at initial sampling). In accordance with neoclassical predictions from human capital theory, net positive returns to individuals' education & experience & to occupations' cognitive physical skills are found. While sex differences in experience have large effects on the sex gap, skill contributes little. In accordance with cultural feminist predictions, negative returns to being in an occupation with a higher % of females or requiring more nurturant social skills are found. These forms of gendered valuation contribute significantly to the sex gap in pay. In contrast to the neoclassical prediction of compensating differentials, there are no consistently positive effects for onerous physical conditions, nor do these have much effect on the gap. 2 Tables, 1 Appendix, 54 References. Adapted from the source document. (Copyright 1995, Sociological Abstracts, Inc., all rights reserved.) |
|
|
Bibliography Citation
Kilbourne, Barbara Stanek, George Farkas, Kurt Beron, Dorothea Weir and Paula A. England. "Returns to Skill, Compensating Differentials, and Gender Bias: Effects of Occupational Characteristics on the Wages of White Women and Men." American Journal of Sociology 100,3 (November 1994): 689-719.
|