MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2761989210

The effects of interaction between location of birth and location of study on immigrant workers' wages in Canada

2017· preprint· en· W2761989210 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shaowei Pu

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationWageHuman capitalDemographic economicsEconomicsLabour economicsWork experienceOrdinary least squaresNative-BornWork (physics)GeographyEconomic growthEconometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have suggested that the wage gap between immigrants and the native-born can be accounted for by human capital factors, including education and work experience and, more importantly, where they are acquired. However, current Canadian economic immigration policies do not consider either a potential immigrant's location of birth or location of study. In this paper, we attempt to study the effects of the interaction between a worker's location of birth and location of study on his or her wage with data from the 2011 National Household Survey. Using both OLS and median regression LAD, performed in STATA, we show that (1) the location of birth is not generally indicative of a workers earning potential; (2) without the interactions, all foreign degrees lead to a lower wage compared with Canadian peers, with a U.S. degree being the least punitive; (3) a U.S. degree would lead to a wage premium for workers from some countries; and (4) when a worker from a nontraditional foreign student source country receives a degree in a culturally and geographically distant location, there is a significant wage premium.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicMigration and Labor Dynamics→French-language works237,207→