<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>EconStor Collection: Publikationen von Forscherinnen und Forschern des DIW</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/48632</link>
    <description>DIW</description>
    <textInput>
      <title>The Collection's search engine</title>
      <description>Search the Channel</description>
      <name>search</name>
      <link>http://www.econstor.eu/simple-search</link>
    </textInput>
    <item>
      <title>Income comparisons, income adaptation, and life satisfaction: How robust are estimates from survey data?</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/74717</link>
      <description>Title: Income comparisons, income adaptation, and life satisfaction: How robust are estimates from survey data?
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Pfaff, Tobias
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Theory suggests that subjective well-being is affected by income comparisons and adaptation to income. Empirical tests of the effects often rely on self-constructed measures from survey data. This paper shows that results can be highly sensitive to simple parameter changes. Using large-scale panel data from Germany and the UK, I report cases where plausible variations in the underlying income type substantially affect tests of the relationship between life satisfaction, income rank, reference income, and income adaptation. Models simultaneously controlling for income and income rank as well as models with a number of income lags are prone to imperfect multicollinearity with consequences for the precision and robustness of estimates. When testing relative-income effects, researchers should be aware that reference income constructed as average of a rather arbitrarily defined reference group and reference income predicted from Mincer-type earnings equations are two approaches that can produce inconsistent results, and that are probably not as reliable and valid as previously assumed. The analysis underlines the importance of robustness checks and regression diagnostics, two routines that are often not carried out diligently in empirical research.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Internalized gender stereotypes vary across socioeconomic indicators</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/74716</link>
      <description>Title: Internalized gender stereotypes vary across socioeconomic indicators
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Dietrich, Julia; Schnabel, Konrad; Ortner, Tuulia; Eagly, Alice; Garcia-Retamero, Rocio; Kröger, Lea; Holst, Elke
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: In the following we aim to approach the question of why, in most domains of professional and economic life, women are more vulnerable than men to becoming targets of prejudice and discrimination by proposing that one important cause of this inequality is the presence of gender stereotypes in many domains of society. We describe two approaches employed to measure gender stereotypes: An explicit questionnaire based on rating scales and a newly developed Implicit Association Test assessing gender stereotypes representing instrumentality (i.e., agency) and expressivity (i.e., communion). We first present information on psychometric properties of each stereotype measure designed for this purpose. We then present preliminary data based on the SOEP Innovation Sample 2011 indicating differences in explicit stereotypes with reference to occupational position and income. Implicit stereotypic associations concerning expressivity increased with respondents' age, stereotypic associations concerning instrumentality increased with household income, particularly among male participants. Finally, stereotypic associations were related simultaneously to occupational position and participants' gender, such that differences between male and female participants were found in lower occupational positions for the Expressivity IAT and in higher occupational positions for the Instrumentality IAT. This finding indicates that individually held gender stereotypes are related to socioeconomic and social variables.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Testing the easterlin hypothesis with panel data: The dynamic relationship between life satisfaction and economic growth in Germany and the UK</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/74715</link>
      <description>Title: Testing the easterlin hypothesis with panel data: The dynamic relationship between life satisfaction and economic growth in Germany and the UK
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Pfaff, Tobias; Hirata, Johannes
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Recent studies focused on testing the Easterlin hypothesis (happiness and national income correlate in the cross-section but not over time) on a global level. We make a case for testing the Easterlin hypothesis at the country level where individual panel data allow exploiting important methodological advantages. Novelties of our test of the Easterlin hypothesis are a) long-term panel data and estimation with individual fixed effects, b) regional GDP per capita with a higher variation than national figures, c) accounting for potentially biased clustered standard errors when the number of clusters is small. Using long-term panel data for Germany and the United Kingdom, we do not find robust evidence for a relationship between GDP per capita and life satisfaction in either country (controlling for a variety of variables). Together with the evidence from previous research, we now count three countries for which Easterlin's happiness-income hypothesis cannot be rejected: the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"Familien in Deutschland" - FiD: Enhancing research on families in Germany</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/74714</link>
      <description>Title: "Familien in Deutschland" - FiD: Enhancing research on families in Germany
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Schröder, Mathis; Siegers, Rainer; Spieß, C. Katharina
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: The full range of public benefits for married people and families is being evaluated on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ) and the German Federal Ministry of Finance (BMF) for the first time. To strengthen existing datasets such as the Socio-economic Panel (SOEP) in their statistical power, Familien in Deutschland (FiD) was initiated. FiD is one of the related studies of the SOEP, i.e. a data collection effort closely related to the SOEP in concepts and contents. The main difference lies in the sample, as FiD provides information on families only, specifically on single parents, large families, low-income families, and families with very young children. These groups are main targets of family policies but their numbers in regular surveys such as the SOEP are too small to conduct meaningful statistical analyses. This paper provides an overview of the sampling concepts and questionnaire contents in FiD, along with case numbers and quality indicators for the first three waves of data collection from 2010 to 2012.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

