MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292409716 · doi:10.3390/socsci11080367

How Has the Gender Earnings Gap in Ireland Changed in Thirty Years?

2022· article· en· W4292409716 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle Barrett, Karina Doorley, Paul Redmond, Barra Roantree

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsMicrodata (statistics)WageEconomicsDemographic economicsDistribution (mathematics)Labour economicsQuantileGlass ceilingInequalityQuantile regressionGender gapQuarter (Canadian coin)DemographyEconometricsGeographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1987, the wages of women in Ireland have been growing faster than those of men. This, coupled with a decrease in the average hours worked by men, has resulted in a reduction in the gender earnings gap in Ireland, most notably at the bottom of the earnings distribution. This paper provides a descriptive analysis of the growth of male and female wages, weekly earnings, and differences in working patterns across the wage and earnings distribution in Ireland over the last three decades, using detailed microdata covering the period 1987–2019. Using a Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition approach, based on unconditional quantile regressions for each time period, we also show how the explained and unexplained components of the gender wage gap have changed across the wage distribution. We find that the mean and median gender gap in earnings fell by one-sixth and one-quarter, respectively, between 1987 and 2019. This change is attributable to the faster growth of women’s wages compared to men’s and some convergence in the average hours worked by men and women. However, there has been relatively stable structural inequality at the top of the wage and earnings distribution over the past three decades, which points towards a persistent glass ceiling in Ireland.

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)0.005
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.147 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial SciencesSame topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequalityFrench-language works237,207