MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1488953930

Union Wage Effect: New Evidence From Matched Employer-Employee Data

2003· preprint· en· W1488953930 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Changhui Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2003
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWageUnobservableEstimationLabour economicsEconomicsControl (management)Quarter (Canadian coin)Demographic economicsPanel dataAssociation (psychology)EconometricsPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This paper estimates a union wage effect, using matched employer-employee data and estimation models that control an association between a worker’s union status and an employer’s characteristics. Failure to control this association may cause previous studies ’ estimates of the union wage effect to be biased. As long as a worker is more likely to become a union worker in a firm that offers her a higher potential for better pay, the union status is (positively) associated with employer characteristics. The empirical finding of this paper verifies this possibility. Estimates of the union wage effect are shown to be upward-biased in the estimation models without control of the employer characteristics. The estimated union wage effect of this study (in an approximate range of 0.2~3.2 percent) is less than a quarter of cross-sectional estimates, and half of individual panel estimates with unobservable person effects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality→French-language works237,207→