MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009447106

Revisiting the relationship between ability and sheepskin effects of schooling on individual earnings: The case of Pakistan

2018· article· en· W3009447106 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tayyeb Shabbir

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsDemographic economicsEconomicsLabour economicsFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant amount of recent research continues to produce evidence in support of the presence of sheepskin effects in returns to schooling both for developed and developing countries. However, researchers have not made many attempts to identify or empirically test the possible mechanisms that may generate such effects. A few noteworthy exceptions are Flores-Lagunes and Light (2010) for the U. S., Riddle (2008) for Canada and Shabbir & Ashraf (2011) and Shabbir (2013) for Pakistan. Shabbir and Ashraf (2011) summarily reports that the sheepskin effects for rural Pakistan persist in the face of controls for measures of innate and cognitive ability. The present paper revisits this issue and adds value by presenting and discussing all of the relevant empirical estimates in full detail. Further, the present analysis fully updates the review of the literature as well as the various aspects of the pertinent debate surrounding the nature of the sheepskin effects. This study reconfirms that significant sheepskin effects exist for rural Pakistan for diplomas obtained by completing primary, high school and perhaps also FA and BA levels. Further, according to the detailed empirical regression results presented and discussed in this paper, the sheepskin effects prove to be robust both to an inclusion of measure of innate ability (Raven Progressive Matrices) and „cognitive‟ ability (specially administrated tests of literacy and numeracy). This implies that sheepskin effects „signal‟ individual characteristics unrelated to these measures of ability. The findings have significant policy implications about the nature of the private vs. social returns to schooling

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207