Economic Benefits of Studying Economics in Canada: A Comparison of Wages of Economics Majors with those in Other Disciplines Circa 2005
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In universities across many western countries, student enrolments in economics discipline rose sharply towards the end of last decade but not in Canada. One reason for this outcome may be the continued perception of Canadian students of a lower economic reward to an economics degree. Using micro data from the 2006 census, we perform a comparative analysis of the wages earned by university degree holders in 50 disciplines in relation to economics. At undergraduate level, economics majors earned the 9th highest average wage in 2005, after controlling for demographic variables. On average, after controlling for demographic differences, workers whose wages were below those of economics majors earned about 16 percent lower while those who earned above economics majors earned about 10 percent higher. Similarity of their wages with physical science majors and their wage advantage over political science majors are also striking findings of this study. At graduate level, economics majors have greater wage advantage over other disciplines except for the business majors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it