Essays on intergenerational mobility and its variation over time, place and family structure.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis focuses on how the economic status of children is related to their parental income. I begin by measuring the intergenerational earnings mobility of sons in a comparative framework. I compare the extent of earnings mobility for sons in the UK, US, West Germany and Canada, and consider how mobility has changed across time in the UK and US. I find that while it is difficult to statistically distinguish between estimates, it appears that the UK and US are less mobile than the other countries. When looking over time, there is definitive evidence that mobility for sons in the UK has declined, while there is no such evidence for the US. There is a clear connection between the persistence of income inequality across generations and the unequal distribution of educational attainments. I show that part of the decline in mobility in the UK is due to increasingly unequal access to higher education. The majority of the literature on intergenerational mobility stresses the relationship between individual earnings and parental income. But economic well- being also depends on the earnings and income of partners. If partner's income is strongly connected with parental income this will reinforce individual earnings persistence. Assortative mating is the extent to which people with similar characteristics form couples, and this has a crucial role here in explaining the link between partners and parents. The final section of this thesis explores the role of assortative mating in intergenerational mobility. For the UK, I demonstrate that the increasing association between parental incomes and the earnings of daughters-in-law substantially adds to the relationship between sons' and their parents' family incomes. For Canada, I am able to link the incomes of both sets of parents for the couple. I demonstrate that the association between parental incomes within the couple is a new measure of assortative mating and show that couples who are less similar in terms of their parental income are more likely to separate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".