Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian labour market experienced a considerable decline in the male-female pay gap during years 1988 to 1992. After 1992, however, the gender wage gap decreased only slightly. This paper will study the issue of difference in the explained gender wage gap in both the public and the private sectors and will examine the components of change in the wage gap between 1991 and 1996. We measure and decompose the gender wage differentials into explained and unexplained parts separately for the public and private sectors in Canada for the census years 1991 and 1996, and compare changes in the earnings gap between 1991 and 1996 in both sectors. The analysis is based on Oaxaca decomposition and Juhn-Murphy-Pierce decomposition techniques. Results show that gender wage differentials are present in both sectors, although at a lower level in the public sector than in the private sector. In 1996, 67 percent of the wage gap is attributable to the unexplained part in the public sector, while in the private sector, this figure is 76 percent. Generally, males tend to have higher return to experience and more favorable occupation and industry distributions, which can account for the gender wage gap. Our findings also show that the overall gender wage gap decreases in both the public sector and the private sector between 1991 and 1996. This decrease is mainly attributed to the diminishing of the unexplained portion. In both the public and the private sectors, improvements in women’s wage-determining factors and ranking relative to those of men contributed to a narrowing of the gender wage gap.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".