The Journal of Economic Inequality

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 3–10 | Cite as

Wage Decompositions with Selectivity-Corrected Wage Equations: A Methodological Note

  • Shoshana Neuman
  • Ronald L. Oaxaca
Article

Abstract

This paper examines the implications of the standard Heckman (Heckit) correction for selectivity bias in wage and earnings functions that are subsequently used in wage decompositions. Even when justified, Heckit selectivity correction introduces some fundamental ambiguities in the context of wage decompositions. The ambiguities arise from group differences in the selection term which consists of a parameter multiplied by the Inverse Mills Ratio (IMR). The parameter is identified as the product of the standard deviation of the errors in the wage equation and the correlation between the wage equation error and the selection equation error. How should group differences in these parameters be interpreted in terms of structural differences and endowment effects? The same issue arises with respect to group differences in the IMR which reflect nonlinear group differences in the determinants of selection and in the probit coefficients.

identification selectivity bias wage decompositions 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Blau, F.D. and Kahn, L.M.: Swimming upstream: Trends in the gender wage differential in the 1980's, J. Labor Economics 15 (1997), 1–42.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blinder, A.S.: Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural estimates, J. Human Resources 8 (1973), 436–455.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boymond, M., Flückiger, Y. and Silber, J.: Wage discrimination and occupational segregation by gender: Some evidence from Swiss data, mimeo, Geneva, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cragg, J.: Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with applications to the demand for durable goods, Econometrica 39 (1971), 829–844.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Datta Gupta, N., Oaxaca, R.L. and Smith, N.: The Danish gender wage gap and wage determination in the private and public sectors, In: S. Gusstafson and D. Meulders (eds.), Gender and the Labour Market: Econometric Evidence on Obstacles in Achieving Gender Equality, AEA Macmillan Series, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Duncan, G.M. and Leigh, D.E.: Wage determination in the union and nonunion sectors: A sample selectivity approach, Industrial and Labor Relations Review 34 (1980), 24–34.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gronau, R.: Wage comparisons: A selectivity bias, J. Political Economy 82 (1974), 1119–1143.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heckman, J.: The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models, Annals of Economic and Social Measurement 5 (1976), 475–492.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heckman, J.: Sample selection bias as a specification error, Econometrica 47 (1979), 153–163.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Juhn, C., Murphy, K.M. and Pierce, B.: Accounting for the slowdown in black-white wage convergence, In: M.H. Kosters (ed.), Workers and Their Wages: Changing Patterns in the United States, American Enterprise Institute Press, Washington, 1991.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Manski, C.: Anatomy of the selection problem, J. Human Resources 24 (1989), 343–360.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Manski, C.: Identification Problems in the Social Sciences, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Neumark, D.: Employers' discriminatory behavior and the estimation of wage discrimination, J. Human Resources 23 (1988), 279–295.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oaxaca, R.L.: Male—female wage differentials in urban labor markets, International Economic Review 14 (1973), 693–709.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oaxaca, R.L. and Ransom, M.: Searching for the effect of unionism on the wages of union and nonunion workers, J. Labor Research 9 (1988), 139–148.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oaxaca, R.L. and Ransom, M.: On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials, J. Econometrics 61 (1994), 5–21.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reimers, C.: Labor market discrimination against hispanic and black men, The Review of Economics and Statistics 65 (1983), 570–579.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suen, W.: Decomposing wage residuals: Unmeasures skill or statistical artifact, J. Labor Economics 15 (1997), 555–566.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vella, F.: Estimating models with sample selection bias: A survey, J. Human Resources 33 (1998), 127–169.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shoshana Neuman
    • 1
  • Ronald L. Oaxaca
    • 2
  1. 1.CEPR London, IZA Bonn, and Department of EconomicsBar-Ilan UniversityRamat-GanIsrael
  2. 2.IZA Bonn and Department of EconomicsUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations