Explore the vast range of titles available.

A recurring question in public and scientific debates is whether occupation-specific skills enhance labor market outcomes. Is it beneficial to have an educational degree that is linked to only one or a small set of occupations? To answer this question, we generalize existing models of the effects of (mis)match between education and occupation on labor market outcomes. Specifically, we incorporate the structural effects of linkage strength between school and work, which vary considerably across industrialized countries. In an analysis of France, Germany, and the United States, we find that workers have higher earnings when they are in occupations that match their educational level and field of study, but the size of this earnings boost depends on the clarity and strength of the pathway between their educational credential and the labor market. The earnings premium associated with a good occupational match is larger in countries where the credential has a stronger link to the labor market, but the penalty for a mismatch is also greater in such countries. Moreover, strong linkage reduces unemployment risk. These findings add nuance to often-made arguments that countries with loosely structured educational systems have more flexible labor markets and produce better labor market outcomes for workers. An institutional environment that promotes strong school-to-work pathways appears to be an effective strategy for providing workers with secure, wellpaying jobs.

The terrain of gender inequalities in education has seen much change in recent decades. This article reviews the empirical research and theoretical perspectives on gender inequalities in educational performance and attainment from early childhood to young adulthood. Much of the literature on children and adolescents attends to performance differences between girls and boys. Of course, achievement in elementary and secondary school is linked to the level of education one ultimately attains including high school completion, enrollment in post-secondary education, college completion, and graduate and professional school experiences. We recommend three directions for future research: (a) interdisciplinary efforts to understand gender differences in cognitive development and noncognitive abilities in early childhood, (b) research on the structure and practices of schooling, and (c) analyses of how gender differences might amplify other kinds of inequalities, such as racial, ethnic, class, or nativity inequalities.

Although originally developed by R.K. Merton to explain advancement in scientific careers, cumulative advantage is a general mechanism for inequality across any temporal process (e.g., life course, family generations) in which a favourable relative position becomes a resource that produces further relative gains. This review shows that the term cumulative advantage has developed multiple meanings in the sociological literature. We distinguish between these alternative forms, discuss mechanisms that have been proposed in the literature that may produce cumulative advantage, and review the empirical literature in the areas of education, careers, and related life course processes.

In a few short decades, the gender gap in college completion has reversed from favoring men to favoring women. This study, which is the first to assess broadly the causes of the growing female advantage in college completion, considers the impact of family resources as well as gender differences in academic performance and in the pathways to college completion on the rising gender gap. Analyses of General Social Survey data indicate that the female-favorable trend in college completion emerged unevenly by family status of origin to the disadvantage of sons in families with a low-educated or absent father. Additional analyses of National Educational Longitudinal Survey (NELS) data indicate that women's superior academic performance plays a large role in producing the gender gap in college completion, but that this effect remains latent until after the transition to college. For NELS cohorts, who were born in the mid-1970s, the female advantage in college completion remains largest in families with a low-educated or absent father, but currently extends to all family types. In conjunction with women's growing incentives to attain higher education, gender differences in resources related to family background and academic performance largely explain the growing female advantage in college completion.

Identifying causal effects in nonexperimental data is an enduring challenge. One proposed solution that recently gained popularity is the idea to use genes as instrumental variables [i.e., Mendelian randomization (MR)]. However, this approach is problematic because many variables of interest are genetically correlated, which implies the possibility that many genes could affect both the exposure and the outcome directly or via unobserved confounding factors. Thus, pleiotropic effects of genes are themselves a source of bias in nonexperimental data that would also undermine the ability of MR to correct for endogeneity bias from nongenetic sources. Here, we propose an alternative approach, genetic instrumental variable (GIV) regression, that provides estimates for the effect of an exposure on an outcome in the presence of pleiotropy. As a valuable byproduct, GIV regression also provides accurate estimates of the chip heritability of the outcome variable. GIV regression uses polygenic scores (PGSs) for the outcome of interest which can be constructed from genome-wide association study (GWAS) results. By splitting the GWAS sample for the outcome into nonoverlapping subsamples, we obtain multiple indicators of the outcome PGSs that can be used as instruments for each other and, in combination with other methods such as sibling fixed effects, can address endogeneity bias from both pleiotropy and the environment. In two empirical applications, we demonstrate that our approach produces reasonable estimates of the chip heritability of educational attainment (EA) and show that standard regression and MR provide upwardly biased estimates of the effect of body height on EA.

Scholars frequently argue whether the sharp rise in chief executive officer (CEO) pay in recent years is \"efficient\" or is a consequence of \"rent extraction\" because of the failure of corporate governance in individual firms. This article argues that governance failure must be conceptualized at the market rather than the firm level because excessive pay increases for even relatively few CEOs a year spread to other firms through the cognitively and rhetorically constructed compensation networks of \"peer groups,\" which are used in the benchmarking process to negotiate the compensation of CEOs. Counterfactual simulation based on Standard and Poor's Execu-Comp data demonstrates that the effects of CEO \"leapfrogging\" potentially explain a considerable fraction of the overall upward movement of executive compensation since the early 1990s. Adapted from the source document.

Analysis of March Current Population Survey data from 1964 through 2002 shows that white women overtook white men in their rates of college completion and that this phenomenon occurred during a period in which women's standard-of-living gains from college completion grew at a faster rate than those for men. We assess whether these trends are related to changes in the value of education for men and women in terms of earnings returns to higher education, the probability of getting and staying married, education-related differences in family standard of living, and insurance against living in poverty. Although returns to a college education in the form of earnings remained higher for women than for men over the entire period, trends in these returns do not provide aplausible explanation for gender-specific trends in college completion. But when broader measures of material well-being are taken into account, women's returns to higher education appear to have risen faster than those of men.

The analysis of intergenerational mobility has primarily used measures of social position that are functions of an individual's occupation. Occupation-based models of social mobility, however, have limitations that arguably have grown in recent decades. Meta-analysis of available evidence for Sweden, western Germany, and the United States concerning occupational mobility, household income mobility, job displacement, union dissolution, and poverty dynamics shows the limitations of the individual-level occupation-based career-trajectory approach to life course mobility. This article develops an alternative formulation at the household level, which focuses on cross-national variation in the extent to which societal institutions influence the rate of events with the potential to change a household's life conditions via the manipulation of incentives for mobility-generating events, and the extent to which they mitigate the consequences of these events through social insurance. The combination of these institutional processes produces the distinctive characteristics of the mobility regimes of these countries.

Social inequality is a central topic of research in the social sciences. Decades of research have deepened our understanding of the characteristics and causes of social inequality. At the same time, social inequality has markedly increased during the past 40 years, and progress on reducing poverty and improving the life chances of Americans in the bottom half of the distribution has been frustratingly slow. How useful has sociological research been to the task of reducing inequality? The authors analyze the stance taken by sociological research on the subject of reducing inequality. They identify an imbalance in the literature between the discipline’s continual efforts to motivate the plausibility of large-scale change and its lesser efforts to identify feasible strategies of change either through social policy or by enhancing individual and local agency with the potential to cumulate into meaningful progress on inequality reduction.

Today, boys generally underperform relative to girls in schools throughout the industrialized world. Building on theories about gender identity and reports from prior ethnographic classroom observations, we argue that school environment channels conceptions of masculinity in peer culture, fostering or inhibiting boys' development of anti-school attitudes and behavior. Girls' peer groups, by contrast, vary less strongly with the social environment in the extent to which school engagement is stigmatized as un-feminine. As a consequence, boys are more sensitive than girls to school resources that create a learning-oriented environment. To evaluate this argument, we use a quasi-experimental research design and estimate the gender difference in the causal effect of peer socioeconomic status (SES) as an important school resource on test scores. Our design is based on the assumption that assignment to 5th-grade classrooms within Berlin's schools is as good as random, and we evaluate this selection process with an examination of Berlin's school regulations, a simulation analysis, and qualitative interviews with school principals. Estimates of the effect of SES composition on male and female performance strongly support our central hypothesis, and other analyses support our proposed mechanism as the likely explanation for gender differences in the causal effect.