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.

Research suggests that the reported increase in student mental health issues such as study burnout might be related to students’ identity problems and their motivations for undertaking higher education. The present study added to this line of research by investigating the associations between identity profiles, motives for attending university and study burnout in a sample of Finnish first-year university students ( N  = 430). Field of study (professional vs non-professional) as a factor was also evaluated because differing occupational prospects might influence one’s sense of identity. The results showed that (1) three identity profiles emerged (i.e. achievement, moderate moratorium and diffusion), (2) students in the achievement profile scored lowest on burnout, (3) the achievement profile was the most common among students studying for entry to a profession and (4) students in the achievement profile scored highest on internal motives for attending university. It is concluded that most students lack a clear sense of identity and that identity measures may be more appropriate in predicting study progression and well-being than motives for attending university or engaging in a field of study.

While girls have better grades than boys in high school, this does not translate into better performance of young women, as compared to young men, in university. Due to the high signalling value of university grades for subsequent income and employment outcomes, this has important consequences for gender inequalities at labour market entry. However, previous studies have not yet examined the potential barriers that might limit women’s ability to maintain their previous academic achievement at the university level. Drawing on the nation-wide Student Survey, this study addresses this shortcoming by investigating perceived discrimination against women and perceived competition among students as two potential correlates. Our findings first confirm that while girls have better grades in high school than boys, this has reversed at the university level. Further, high school grades are less strongly correlated with university grades for girls compared to boys. Our results highlight that young women perceive there to be more discrimination against women as well as higher levels of competition within their field of study, than do their male peers. The study further demonstrates that an increased level of perceived discrimination is strongly associated with lower university performance for young women, thereby plausibly hindering their ability to reach their full academic potential.

With the announcement of the retirement of Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG), the non-profit organization OurResearch announced that they would provide a similar resource under the name OpenAlex. Thus, we compare the metadata with relevance to bibliometric analyses of the latest MAG snapshot with an early OpenAlex snapshot. Practically all works from MAG were transferred to OpenAlex preserving their bibliographic data publication year, volume, first and last page, DOI as well as the number of references that are important ingredients of citation analysis. More than 90% of the MAG documents have equivalent document types in OpenAlex. Of the remaining ones, especially reclassifications to the OpenAlex document types journal-article and book-chapter seem to be correct and amount to more than 7%, so that the document type specifications have improved significantly from MAG to OpenAlex. As another item of bibliometric relevant metadata, we looked at the paper-based subject classification in MAG and in OpenAlex. We found significantly more documents with a subject classification assignment in OpenAlex than in MAG. On the first and second level, the classification structure is nearly identical. We present data on the subject reclassifications on both levels in tabular and graphical form. The assessment of the consequences of the abundant subject reclassifications on field-normalized bibliometric evaluations is not in the scope of the present paper. Apart from this open question, OpenAlex seems to be overall at least as suited for bibliometric analyses as MAG for publication years before 2021 or maybe even better because of the broader coverage of document type assignments.

This article examines the overall strength, the qualitative pattern, and the evolution over time of gender segregation in higher education across eight European countries. Although previous studies have focused primarily on the divide between humanistic and scientific fields, this work indicates that this divide accounts for no more than half of the association between gender and college major. The degree of gender imbalance is highly variable within scientific fields as well as within humanistic fields. We can make sense of these findings once we posit the existence of a second, equally important gender divide that can be described as the care—technical divide. Accordingly, this work develops a topological model to show that these two dimensions together account for more than 90 percent of gender segregation in the countries under study. Moreover, this model can be used to show the noticeable degree of cross-national stability in both the qualitative pattern and the overall strength of gender segregation. The empirical analyses also point to a generalized stagnation of integration of college majors in recent decades. Taken together, these results indicate that gender segregation has stabilized to an almost identical level and displays a similar qualitative pattern in several countries. This suggests that cultural forces underlying gender segregation are highly resilient, not least because they are sustained by a number of structural developments in educational and occupational institutions.

Gendered field-of-study choice is a lively topic of discussion. The explanation usually given for the fact that women are still an exception in typically ‘male’ fields—particularly STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics)—employs domain-specific stereotypes regarding men’s and women’s ‘natural’ abilities in different fields. The central argument of our study is that domain-specific gender stereotypes help explain why few women enter such fields; however, they are not necessarily the driving forces behind the finding that female students who chose typically male subjects have weaker academic self-concepts than their male peers. If it were only domain-specific gender stereotypes that influence students’ perceptions of their abilities, we should find the opposite result in typically female fields of study and no differences in gender-mixed fields. Because existing studies often focus on the male-dominated STEM domain alone, research may have drawn the wrong conclusions. By comparing students in male-dominated, female-dominated, and gender-mixed fields of study, we ask: Does gender composition in the field of study matter for gender disparities in college (university) students’ academic self-concepts? Using data from 10,425 students in the German National Educational Panel Study, our results suggest that it is not only in male-dominated fields of study that women rate their own abilities to be poorer than men rate theirs; the same is true in female-dominated and gender-mixed fields. Therefore, domain-specific gender stereotypes regarding students’ abilities do not (alone) seem to drive gender disparities in STEM students’ perception of their own abilities. No matter what academic field we consider, female students generally exhibit weaker academic self-concepts; however, the gap is most pronounced in male-dominated fields.

Gender segregation in fields of study represents an important explanation for gender inequalities in the labor market, such as the gender wage gap. Research shows that horizontal gender segregation in higher education persists for a variety of reasons, including women’s greater communal goals and men’s greater motivation to earn high incomes. Yet with the male breadwinner model in decline, a key question is whether women’s motivation to earn high incomes might contribute to increasing women’s participation in female-atypical fields of study. Using data from the German Student Survey over a period of 30 years, our findings show that the proportion of women enrolled in female-atypical fields of study increased from 1984 to 2015. Moreover, women’s motivation to earn high incomes mediates the effect of time on enrollment in female-atypical fields of study. Their motivation to earn high incomes might thus be a factor contributing to the disruption of gender segregation in fields of study over time. Furthermore, contrary to expectations, the motivation to earn high incomes as a driving force for women to opt for gender-atypical fields of study is not stratified by social background.

The current research investigated the endorsement of hegemonic masculinity, sexism, and homophobia, and the perceptions of discrimination, among samples of heterosexual male and female, and LGB students who had entered into traditionally male-dominated and female-dominated fields of study. Specifically, students from vocational and educational training in Swiss upper-secondary schools were recruited. Results revealed that adherence to hegemonic masculinity, sexism, and homophobia is higher in male-dominated fields of study (vs. female-dominated). Furthermore, heterosexual female and LGB students enrolled in male-dominated fields of study have been found to experience and anticipate more discrimination than heterosexual male students. Implications of these results are discussed.

The paper focuses on the contradictory results on the effect of social background on choice of field of study (field stratification) in expanded higher education systems. We predicted that the contradictory results stem from variations in institutional selectivity and curricular policy. Based on two surveys conducted in 1999 (4146 students) and 2014 (7384 students) in the Israeli expanded higher education system, this paper analyzes changes in the ratio of continuing-generation college students in fields of study offered by institutions with varying degrees of selectivity. The results show a decrease in the selectivity of the second-tier institutions in the second analyzed period, accompanied by an increase in field stratification. We suggest that this increase stems from the differential curricular policies of second-tier higher education institutions. In the second period, the second-tier institutions initiated labor market-oriented programs for the less popular fields, thus opening them to first-generation students. In popular and lucrative fields, some of them regulated by professional associations, the second-tier institutions kept to the traditional orientation of the programs, and attracted less qualified continuing-generation students. We discuss the implications of the findings on social stratification.