MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3123150551

How skills and parental valuation of education influence human capital acquisition and early labor market return to human capital in Canada

2019· preprint· en· W3123150551 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael J. Kottelenberg, Steven Lehrer

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman capitalEarningsValuation (finance)Cognitive skillCognitionGraduation (instrument)PsychologyEconomicsDemographic economicsEducational attainmentLabour economicsDevelopmental psychologyEconomic growthFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the Youth in Transition Survey we estimate a Roy model with a three dimensional latent factor structure to consider how parental valuation of education, cognitive skills and non-cognitive skills in uence endogenous schooling decisions and subsequent labour market outcomes in Canada. We find the effect of cognitive skills on adult incomes arises by increasing the likelihood of obtaining further education. Further, we find that both non-cognitive skills and parental valuation for education play a larger role in determining income at age 25 than cognitive skills. Last, our analysis uncovers striking differences between men and women in several of the estimated relationships. Specifically, simulations of the estimated model illustrate that i) among the low skilled, women have much higher college graduation rates, ii) the age 25 earnings gradient by either skill measure is much atter for women, and iii) parental valuation of education plays a larger role in in uencing young women than men.

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)0.005
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality→French-language works237,207→