教育经济价值研究中的性别盲目性:理论与方法的因果

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Hadas Mandel, Assaf Rotman
{"title":"教育经济价值研究中的性别盲目性:理论与方法的因果","authors":"Hadas Mandel,&nbsp;Assaf Rotman","doi":"10.1016/j.rssm.2025.101049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A thorough ‘sociological reading’ in one of the most important, high-profile, and extensive literatures, the research on the economic value of education, reveals its failed to acknowledge women’s lower education premiums, as well as the rise in gender inequality in education premiums over-time. This neglect is surprising because the economic value of education is a hot topic that has attracted major scholarly attention in recent decades due to its relation to the expansion of income inequality in postindustrial economies. It also has significant implications for understanding the mechanisms underpinning gender inequality in modern labor markets that rely on workers’ education and skills. Our analysis 1) sheds light on this omission, 2) identifies its theoretical and methodological sources, 3) reveals its consequences by presenting comparative evidence on trends in gender inequality in education premium (based on US-CPS data from the years 1980–2023), and 4) offers a gender-sensitive approach for future studies. The data and literature analyses have significant empirical and theoretical implications. Empirically, they highlight the widening gender gap in educational premiums. Theoretically, the findings contribute to the sociology of knowledge by demonstrating how the theoretical framework, and consequently the research questions and methodology, shape our empirical knowledge.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47384,"journal":{"name":"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 101049"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender blindness in the research on the economic value of education: Theoretical and methodological causes and consequences\",\"authors\":\"Hadas Mandel,&nbsp;Assaf Rotman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rssm.2025.101049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>A thorough ‘sociological reading’ in one of the most important, high-profile, and extensive literatures, the research on the economic value of education, reveals its failed to acknowledge women’s lower education premiums, as well as the rise in gender inequality in education premiums over-time. This neglect is surprising because the economic value of education is a hot topic that has attracted major scholarly attention in recent decades due to its relation to the expansion of income inequality in postindustrial economies. It also has significant implications for understanding the mechanisms underpinning gender inequality in modern labor markets that rely on workers’ education and skills. Our analysis 1) sheds light on this omission, 2) identifies its theoretical and methodological sources, 3) reveals its consequences by presenting comparative evidence on trends in gender inequality in education premium (based on US-CPS data from the years 1980–2023), and 4) offers a gender-sensitive approach for future studies. The data and literature analyses have significant empirical and theoretical implications. Empirically, they highlight the widening gender gap in educational premiums. Theoretically, the findings contribute to the sociology of knowledge by demonstrating how the theoretical framework, and consequently the research questions and methodology, shape our empirical knowledge.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility\",\"volume\":\"97 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101049\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027656242500040X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027656242500040X","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

对最重要、最引人注目、最广泛的文献之一——关于教育经济价值的研究——进行彻底的“社会学阅读”,就会发现它没有承认女性较低的教育溢价,以及随着时间的推移,教育溢价中的性别不平等加剧。这种忽视是令人惊讶的,因为教育的经济价值是一个热门话题,近几十年来,由于它与后工业经济中收入不平等扩大的关系,引起了学术界的广泛关注。它还对理解现代劳动力市场中依赖于工人的教育和技能的性别不平等的机制具有重要意义。我们的分析1)揭示了这一遗漏,2)确定了其理论和方法来源,3)通过提供教育溢价中性别不平等趋势的比较证据(基于1980-2023年的美国cps数据)揭示了其后果,4)为未来的研究提供了性别敏感的方法。数据和文献分析具有重要的实证和理论意义。从经验上看,他们强调了在教育费用方面不断扩大的性别差距。从理论上讲,这些发现通过展示理论框架以及研究问题和方法如何塑造我们的经验知识,为知识社会学做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gender blindness in the research on the economic value of education: Theoretical and methodological causes and consequences
A thorough ‘sociological reading’ in one of the most important, high-profile, and extensive literatures, the research on the economic value of education, reveals its failed to acknowledge women’s lower education premiums, as well as the rise in gender inequality in education premiums over-time. This neglect is surprising because the economic value of education is a hot topic that has attracted major scholarly attention in recent decades due to its relation to the expansion of income inequality in postindustrial economies. It also has significant implications for understanding the mechanisms underpinning gender inequality in modern labor markets that rely on workers’ education and skills. Our analysis 1) sheds light on this omission, 2) identifies its theoretical and methodological sources, 3) reveals its consequences by presenting comparative evidence on trends in gender inequality in education premium (based on US-CPS data from the years 1980–2023), and 4) offers a gender-sensitive approach for future studies. The data and literature analyses have significant empirical and theoretical implications. Empirically, they highlight the widening gender gap in educational premiums. Theoretically, the findings contribute to the sociology of knowledge by demonstrating how the theoretical framework, and consequently the research questions and methodology, shape our empirical knowledge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
6.00%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The study of social inequality is and has been one of the central preoccupations of social scientists. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility is dedicated to publishing the highest, most innovative research on issues of social inequality from a broad diversity of theoretical and methodological perspectives. The journal is also dedicated to cutting edge summaries of prior research and fruitful exchanges that will stimulate future research on issues of social inequality. The study of social inequality is and has been one of the central preoccupations of social scientists.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信