MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792602406 · doi:10.7202/1043174ar

Sexual Orientation Wage Gaps across Local Labour Market Contexts: Evidence from Canada

2018· article· en· W2792602406 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nicole Denier, Sean Waite

Bibliographic record

VenueRelations industrielles · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual orientationEarningsMetropolitan areaWageDemographic economicsLabour economicsHuman capitalPrivate sectorEconomicsGeographySociologyEconomic growthGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mounting evidence suggests that sexual orientation matters in the labour market. Research in Canada points to a wage hierarchy not only by gender, but also by sexual orientation, with heterosexual men out-earning gay men, lesbians, and heterosexual women. While previous work has considered how human capital characteristics, occupation and industry of employment, and family status factor into the creation of these earnings disparities, little research has examined how residential concentration in large metropolitan areas factors into the creation of sexual orientation pay gaps. Drawing on the 2006 Census of Canada, this study investigates how sexual orientation wage gaps vary across geographic areas in Canada, documenting earnings disparities across the metropolitan/non-metropolitan divide as well as for Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. We also evaluate whether the mechanisms contributing to wage gaps diverge across these contexts, focusing on how pay gaps differ across occupations, points in the earnings distribution, and sectors of employment. Our results show that pay gaps are highest in non-metropolitan Canada. The underlying components of wage gaps fluctuate across Canada, especially for gay men. Sexual orientation earnings penalties are reduced in public sector employment, even where private sector wage gaps are highest. These results suggest that local social and labour market contexts are associated with the earnings outcomes of sexual minorities.

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)0.008
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.011
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRelations industriellesSame topicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesFrench-language works237,207