Same degrees, different outcomes? Fields of study choices and gender wage inequality in Finland and Germany

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Social Science Research Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2024.103029
Anna Erika Hägglund
{"title":"Same degrees, different outcomes? Fields of study choices and gender wage inequality in Finland and Germany","authors":"Anna Erika Hägglund","doi":"10.1016/j.ssresearch.2024.103029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Men and women's diverging fields of study choices contribute to the gender wage gap among highly educated workers in several countries, yet systematic cross-national comparisons are rare. Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study, the German Microcensus, and Statistics Finland this study explores whether fields of study shape the gender wage gap differently in Germany than in Finland; two countries that display strong linkages between education and employment, but differ in the generosity of family policies. The results show that fields of study are an important source of gender wage disparities in both countries. In Germany, associations between characteristics of fields and wages do not seem to differ between the genders. In Finland, the findings suggest that women profit more than men from fields with strong linkages to occupations. Our findings highlight that research analyzing the association between fields of study and gender inequality needs to consider institutional features and gender-specific patterns.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48338,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Research","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 103029"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X24000516/pdfft?md5=8d62e1c9cf1cbc5992d5f080451a6d2a&pid=1-s2.0-S0049089X24000516-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X24000516","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Men and women's diverging fields of study choices contribute to the gender wage gap among highly educated workers in several countries, yet systematic cross-national comparisons are rare. Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study, the German Microcensus, and Statistics Finland this study explores whether fields of study shape the gender wage gap differently in Germany than in Finland; two countries that display strong linkages between education and employment, but differ in the generosity of family policies. The results show that fields of study are an important source of gender wage disparities in both countries. In Germany, associations between characteristics of fields and wages do not seem to differ between the genders. In Finland, the findings suggest that women profit more than men from fields with strong linkages to occupations. Our findings highlight that research analyzing the association between fields of study and gender inequality needs to consider institutional features and gender-specific patterns.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
同样的学位,不同的结果?芬兰和德国的专业选择与性别工资不平等
在一些国家,男性和女性在学习领域选择上的差异造成了高学历工人的性别工资差距,但系统的跨国比较却很少见。本研究利用德国社会经济面板研究、德国微观人口普查和芬兰统计局的数据,探讨了德国与芬兰这两个在教育与就业之间表现出紧密联系,但在家庭政策的慷慨程度上却有所不同的国家,在两性工资差距的形成过程中,学习领域是否有所不同。研究结果表明,在这两个国家,学习领域是造成男女工资差距的一个重要原因。在德国,专业特点与工资之间的联系在性别上似乎没有差异。在芬兰,研究结果表明,女性比男性从与职业联系紧密的领域中获利更多。我们的研究结果突出表明,在分析研究领域与性别不平等之间的关系时,需要考虑制度特征和性别特有的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
65 days
期刊介绍: Social Science Research publishes papers devoted to quantitative social science research and methodology. The journal features articles that illustrate the use of quantitative methods in the empirical solution of substantive problems, and emphasizes those concerned with issues or methods that cut across traditional disciplinary lines. Special attention is given to methods that have been used by only one particular social science discipline, but that may have application to a broader range of areas.
期刊最新文献
Impact of layoffs on mortality and physical health in transitional China 1989–2015 Political and educational dynamics behind the Evangelicals’ stance against mask mandates during COVID-19 in the U.S. Social welfare expansion and political support during economic slowdown: A panel data analysis of China, 2010–2018 Punishing “gender deviants”? Women born in the year of the white horse and college selectivity The effects of world society on international poverty, 1990–2018
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1