Abstract
Faculty salary equity is a hot political issue that may have severe legal, monetary, and human consequences. It is also an issue that often requires the use of sophisticated statistical techniques for the determination of inequity. The purpose of this paper is to identify the areas in which human judgment must be made in order to conduct a statistical analysis of salary equity and to provide some informed guidelines for making those judgments. The direction and magnitude of the final results are contingent on the way these statistical decisions are made. Therefore, careful consideration of these issues is essential for conducting a fair and defensible salary equity study. This paper will provide a framework based on four decision elements and four fields of study as the basis for establishing criteria for selecting an appropriate salary equity model. Through this discussion, the author hopes to bring a broader perspective and, if not objectivity, then ethical fairness to the process of designing salary equity models.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abramson, J. (1975).The Invisible Woman. Washington, DC: Jossey-Bass.
AFSCME v. State of Washington, 770 F.2d 1401 (9th Cir. 1985).
American Nurses Assoc. v. State of Illinois, 783 F.2d 716 (7th Cir. 1986).
Baldus, D. C., and Cole, J. W. L. (1980).Statistical Proof of Discrimination. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Barbezat, D. A. (1987). Salary differentials by sex in the academic labor market.The Journal of Human Resources 22(3):422–428.
Barnett v. Grant, 518 F.2d 543 (4th Cir. 1975).
Bayer, A. E., and Astin, H. S. (1975). Sex differentials in the academic reward system.Science 188: 796–802.
Bazemore v. Friday, 106 S.Ct. 3000 (1986).
Berger, M. C., and Black, D. A. (1991). Faculty salary differences at the University of Kentucky: A reconsideration of results. Presented inLet Facts Be Submitted to a Candid World. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky.
Beyond the prima facie case in employment discrimination law: Statistical reproof and rebuttal (1975).Harvard Law Review 89: 387–422.
Blalock, H. M. (1960).Social Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Blum, D. E. (1990, June 13). Ten years later, questions abound over Minnesota sexbias settlement.Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A13–A15.
Board of Regents of Nebraska v. Dawes, 522 F.2d 380 (8th Cir. 1975).
Bock, R. D. (ed.) (1989).Multilevel Analysis of Educational Data. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Campbell, T. J. (1984). Regression analysis in Title VII Cases: Minimum standards, comparable worth, and other issues where law and statistics meet.Stanford Law Review 36: 1299–1324.
Carver, R. P. (1978). The case against statistical significance testing.Harvard Educational Review 48(3): 389–399.
Centra, John A. (1974).Women, Men and the Doctorate. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in 1972, Title VII, 42 U.S. C.
County of Washington v. Gunther, 452 U.S. 161 (1981).
Darland, M. D., Dawkins, S. M., Lavasich, J. L., Sherman, M. E., and Whipple, J. L. (1973). Application of multivariate regression to studies of salary differences between men and women faculty. InProceedings of the Social Statistics Section (pp. 120–132). Washington, DC: American Statistical Association.
Darlington, R. B. (1968). Multiple regression in psychological research and practice.Psychological Bulletin 69(3): 161–182.
Daymont, T. N., and Andrisani, P. J. (1984). Job preferences, college major, and the gender gap.The Journal of Human Resources 19(3): 408–428.
Denny v. Westfield State College, 669 F. Supp. 1146 (1987).
EEOC v. McCarthy, 578 F.Supp. 46 (1984).
Equal Pay Act of 1963, 29 U.S. C.
Fisher (1980). Multiple regression in legal proceedings.Columbia Law Review 80: 702.
Fogel, Walter (1986). Class pay discrimination and multiple regression proofs.Nebraska Law Review 65(242): 289–329.
Gold, D. (1969, February). Statistical tests and substantive significance.American Sociologist 4: 42–46.
Goldin, C. (1990).Understanding the Gender Gap: An Economic History of American Women. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Goldin, C., and Polachek, S. (1987). Residual differences by sex: Perspectives on the gender gap in earnings.American Economic Review 77(2): 143–151.
Goodman, R., Hoenack, S., and Rasmussen, M. (1989).Statistical Analysis of Salaries for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at the Twin Cities and Duluth Campuses of the University of Minnesota. Working paper. University of Minnesota, Office of Management Planning and Information Services.
Gordon, N. M., Morton, T. E., and Braden, I. C. (1974). Faculty salaries: Is there discrimination by sex, race, and discipline?American Economic Review 64(3): 419–427.
Gray, M. W., and Scott, E. L. (1980). A “statistical” remedy for statistically identified discrimination.Academe 66(4): 174–181.
Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
Gunderson, M. (1989). Male-female wage differentials and policy responses.Journal of Economic Literature 27: 46–72.
Hagood, M., and Price, D. (1952).Statistics for Sociologists. New York: Holt.
Hirsch, B. T., and Leppel, K. (1982). Sex discrimination in faculty salaries: Evidence from a historically women's university.American Economic Review 72(4): 829–835.
Hoffman, E. R. (1976). Faculty salaries: Is there discrimination by sex, race, and discipline? Additional evidence.American Economic Review 66(1): 196–198.
Johnson, G. E., and Stafford, F. P. (1975). The earnings and promotion of women faculty.American Economic Review 64(6): 888–903.
Kazal-Thresher, D. M. (1990).Employment and Earnings Patterns of Stanford MBAs: Gender Comparisons Among Thirteen Graduating Classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.
Key v. Gillette, 29 Empl. Prac. De. (CCH) 32, 909 (1982).
Keyes v. Lenoir Rhyne College, 552 F.2d 579 (4th Cir. 1977).
LaNoue, G. R., and Lee, B. A. (1987).Academics in Court: The Consequences of Faculty Discrimination Litigation. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Lee, Y. S. (1989). Shaping judicial response to gender discrimination in employment compensation.Public Administration Review 49: 420–430.
Lewis, D. R., and Becker, W. E. (1979).Academic Rewards in Higher Education. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company.
Marshall v. Georgia Southwest College, 489 F. Supp. 1322 (1980).
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).
Mecklenburg v. Montana State Board of Regents, 13 FEP Cases 462 (1976).
Megdal, S. B., and Ransom, M. R. (1985). Longitudinal changes in salary at a large public university: What response to equal pay legislation?AEA Papers and Proceedings 75(2): 271–274.
Miller, S. I., and Fredericks, M. (1991). Postpositivistic assumptions and educational research: Another view.Educational Researcher 20(4): 2–8.
Moore, K. (1990).Gender Differences in Faculty Salaries at the Pennsylvania State University. Report to the Strategic Study Group on the Status of Women. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.
Morrison, D. E., and Henkel, R. E. (1969). Significance tests reconsidered.The American Sociologist 4(2): 131–140.
Namboodiri, N. K., Carter, L. F., and Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1975).Applied Multivariate Analysis and Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Netter, J., Wasserman, W., and Kutner, M. H. (1985).Applied Linear Regression Models. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
Oaxaca, R. (1973). Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets.International Economic Review 14(3): 693–709.
Ottaviani v. State University of New York at New Paltz, 679 F.Supp. 288 (1988).
Parcel, T. L., and Mueller, C. W. (1983).Ascription and Labor Markets: Race and Sex Differences in Earnings. New York: Academic Press.
Penk v. Oregon State Board of Higher Education, 816 F.2d 458 (1987).
Pezzullo, T. R., and Brittingham, B. E. (eds.) (1979).Salary Equity: Detecting Sex Bias in Salaries Among College and University Professors. Massachusetts: Lexington Books.
Presseisen v. Swarthmore College, 15 FEP Cases 1466 (1977).
Ransom, M. R., and Megdal, S. B. (1989)On the Status of Women in the Academic Labor Market in the Affirmative Action Area. Unpublished paper.
Rosenthal, W., and Yancey, B. (eds.) (1985). The use of data in discrimination issues cases.New Directions for Institutional Research, No.48, XII(4). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rothchild. Overview of pay initiatives.Issues for the 80s, pp. 119–128.
Scott, E. L. (1977).Higher Education Salary Evaluation Kit. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors.
Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs (1990).Faculty Salaries: Analysis of Gender, Location, and Minority Status Differences in Salaries. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.
Siegfried, J. J., and White, K. J. (1973). Financial rewards to research and teaching: A case study of academic economics.American Economic Review 63(2): 309–315.
Sobel v. Yeshiva University, 839 F.2d 18 (2d Cir. 1988).
Spaulding v. University of Washington, 740 F.2d 686 (9th Cir. 1984).
Striebel, C. (1989).Differences in Salary Between Men and Women on the Faculty and Academic Staff at the University of Minnesota (Petitioner's Statistical Report). Duluth, MN: University of Minnesota.
Strober, M. H., and Quester, A. O. (1977). The earnings and promotion of women faculty: Comment.The American Economic Review 67(2): 207–213.
Tabahnick, B. G., and Fidell, L. S. (1989).Using Multivariate Statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
Tuckman, B. H., and Tuckman, H. P. (1976). The structure of salaries at American universities.The Journal of Higher Education 47(1): 51–64.
Weeks, K. (1985). Equal pay: The emerging terrain.Journal of College and University Law 12: 41–60.
Weeks, K., and Organ, J. (1986). Educational institutions and comparable worth: A doctrine in search of applications.Journal of Law and Education 15: 207–228.
Williams, E. J. (1959).Regression Analysis. New York: Wiley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moore, N. Faculty salary equity: Issues in regression model selection. Res High Educ 34, 107–126 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991866
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991866