MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969445039

Intergenerational income mobility in the UK : new evidence using the BHPS and understanding society

2019· preprint· en· W2969445039 on OpenAlex
Bertha Rohenkohl

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBritish Household Panel SurveyIncome elasticity of demandEconomicsIncome distributionEconometricsQuarter (Canadian coin)Demographic economicsSample (material)Net national incomeSocial mobilityPermanent income hypothesisHousehold incomeLabour economicsPublic economicsGeographyGross incomeMacroeconomicsMathematicsInequalitySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a new dataset combining the British Household Panel Survey and Understanding Society, I estimate the intergenerational income elasticity in the UK for individuals born between 1973 and 1991. Employing the traditional OLS approach as well as an alternative two-stage residual method that better controls for life-cycle effects, my results indicate that the intergenerational income elasticity is approximately 0.25. This means that around one quarter of every additional 1% of income advantage enjoyed by parents is passed on to their children. I also estimate income rank coefficients, which are a measure of positional mobility in the income distribution and these results corroborate the analysis of elasticities. These main results are largely robust to changes in the specifications of the model, sample restrictions and to the use of different measures of income. I also obtain regional estimates of mobility, and find large differences between the North and South of England

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.353
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.038 · 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