MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389272882 · doi:10.31235/osf.io/2p4vw

Immigrant–native pay gap driven by lack of access to high-paying jobs

2023· preprint· en· W4389272882 on OpenAlexaff
Are Skeie Hermansen, Andrew M. Penner, Marta M. Elvira, Olivier Godechot, Martin Hällsten, Lasse Folke Henriksen, Feng Hou, Zoltán Lippényi, Trond Petersen, Malte Reichelt, Halil Sabanci, Mirna Safi, Donald Tomaskovic‐Devey, Erik Vickstrom

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
FundersNorges ForskningsrådAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Science Foundation
KeywordsImmigrationBusinessLabour economicsGender pay gapDemographic economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceWage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immigrants to high-income countries often face considerable and persisting labor market difficulties upon arrival, yet their native-born children often experience economic progress. Little is known about the degree to which these immigrant–native earnings differences reflect unequal pay when doing the same work for the same employer versus labor market segregation processes that sort immigrants into lower-paid jobs. Using linked employer–employee data from nine European and North American countries, we document that the segregation of immigrant-background workers in lower-paying jobs accounts for about four-fifths of immigrant–native earnings differences. However, within-job pay inequality remains consequential in several countries. These findings highlight the centrality of policies aimed at reducing between-job immigrant–native segregation, but also the relevance of policies ensuring equal pay for equal work.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration and Labor Dynamics→French-language works237,207→