{"title":"劳动力活动的马尔可夫过程模型:集中趋势、形状、百分位数和自举标准误差的扩展表","authors":"Gary R. Skoog, James E Ciecka, K. Krueger","doi":"10.5085/JFE.22.2.165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper updates the Skoog-Ciecka (2001) worklife tables, which used 1997–1998 data, and the Krueger (2005) worklife tables, which used 1998–2004 data. The present paper uses data generated by the methodology Krueger devised in his 2003 PhD dissertation. We have pooled the data beginning January 2005 and continuing through December 2009, a period of five years, using observations matched a year apart. Thus, we have roughly four times the data in the first of the previous studies, and about that of the second. We chose this period for a variety of reasons, including recency, business cycle and trend considerations. The result is the most current and disaggregated set of worklife tables, along with extended probability calculations and statistical measures available to forensic economists.","PeriodicalId":265321,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Economics","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Markov Process Model of Labor Force Activity: Extended Tables of Central Tendency, Shape, Percentile Points, and Bootstrap Standard Errors\",\"authors\":\"Gary R. Skoog, James E Ciecka, K. Krueger\",\"doi\":\"10.5085/JFE.22.2.165\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper updates the Skoog-Ciecka (2001) worklife tables, which used 1997–1998 data, and the Krueger (2005) worklife tables, which used 1998–2004 data. The present paper uses data generated by the methodology Krueger devised in his 2003 PhD dissertation. We have pooled the data beginning January 2005 and continuing through December 2009, a period of five years, using observations matched a year apart. Thus, we have roughly four times the data in the first of the previous studies, and about that of the second. We chose this period for a variety of reasons, including recency, business cycle and trend considerations. The result is the most current and disaggregated set of worklife tables, along with extended probability calculations and statistical measures available to forensic economists.\",\"PeriodicalId\":265321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Forensic Economics\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Forensic Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5085/JFE.22.2.165\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5085/JFE.22.2.165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Markov Process Model of Labor Force Activity: Extended Tables of Central Tendency, Shape, Percentile Points, and Bootstrap Standard Errors
This paper updates the Skoog-Ciecka (2001) worklife tables, which used 1997–1998 data, and the Krueger (2005) worklife tables, which used 1998–2004 data. The present paper uses data generated by the methodology Krueger devised in his 2003 PhD dissertation. We have pooled the data beginning January 2005 and continuing through December 2009, a period of five years, using observations matched a year apart. Thus, we have roughly four times the data in the first of the previous studies, and about that of the second. We chose this period for a variety of reasons, including recency, business cycle and trend considerations. The result is the most current and disaggregated set of worklife tables, along with extended probability calculations and statistical measures available to forensic economists.