<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>EconStor Collection:</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/146794</link>
    <description />
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:22:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:date>2026-04-28T10:22:11Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Die 3M-Perspektive auf die Mobilität: Mobilitätsvermögen, Mobitus und Mobitat (3M) als Kategorien der sozialwissenschaftlichen Mobilitätsforschung</title>
      <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/335105</link>
      <description>Title: Die 3M-Perspektive auf die Mobilität: Mobilitätsvermögen, Mobitus und Mobitat (3M) als Kategorien der sozialwissenschaftlichen Mobilitätsforschung
Authors: Gegner, Martin
Abstract: Mobility, as a social science category, is usually understood as the mobility of social advancement or decline of individuals or groups in an unequal, hierarchical society. Recently, there have been increased efforts to examine the relationship between social and spatial mobility in the context of a discourse of justice. In the background, some promising efforts to conceptualize mobility in Pierre Bourdieu's categories and thus to analyze the connection between social and spatial mobility from a post-structural materialist perspective have faded. These efforts have not been crowned with resounding success: spatial mobility has neither become a prominent topic in sociology, nor has the "Bourdieu School" received a significant innovative boost from its study of mobility. This may be due to the categorical inadequacy of previous approaches. The following article aims to counter this by theoretically defining three categories that can be used to place spatial mobility within Bourdieu's praxeology and enable sociology to play a greater role in the study of spatial mobility. The introduction of the three categories of mobicity (or mobile capacity), mobitus and mobitat is intended to develop a sociological theory of mobility.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/10419/335105</guid>
      <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Child penalties in labour market skills</title>
      <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/334541</link>
      <description>Title: Child penalties in labour market skills
Authors: Jessen, Jonas; Kinne, Lavinia; Battisti, Michele
Abstract: This paper estimates child penalties in labour-market-relevant cognitive skills, such as numeracy but also literacy and problem-solving competencies. We use international PIAAC data and adapt a pseudo-panel approach to a single cross-section covering 29 countries. Numeracy scores, which are associated with the largest returns to skills and pronounced gender differences, decline by 0.11 standard deviations for fathers and an additional 0.07 for mothers. We find no evidence of a deterioration in the occupational skill match for either mothers or fathers. Our findings suggest that changes in general labour market skills such as numeracy competencies explain at most 10% of child penalties in earnings. We additionally show that cross-sectional estimates of child penalties can be sensitive to controlling for predetermined characteristics that vary across cohorts, in our case education.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/10419/334541</guid>
      <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The relevance of meritocratic beliefs for redistributive preferences increases with income</title>
      <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/333719</link>
      <description>Title: The relevance of meritocratic beliefs for redistributive preferences increases with income
Authors: Pañeda-Fernández, Irene; Kamphorst, Jonne; van de Rijt, Arnout; Battu, Balaraju
Abstract: A leading explanation for why in democratic societies the rich are not taxed more is that meritocratic beliefs breed tolerance for inequality. We problematize this account by claiming that, unlike the rich, the poor support greater redistribution regardless of how meritocratic they perceive society to be. The claim is tested using a cross-national survey and a preregistered experimental game that exogenized both income and perceptions of meritocratic fairness. Analysis of both survey and experimental data supports the proposed interaction effect between income and perceived meritocratic fairness on demand for redistribution. We conclude that while meritocratic beliefs can explain why the rich do not support more redistribution, it fails to explain the poor’s inequality acceptance.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/10419/333719</guid>
      <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Nonstandard work schedules and work-life balance in dual-earner households: The role of parenthood</title>
      <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/334722</link>
      <description>Title: Nonstandard work schedules and work-life balance in dual-earner households: The role of parenthood
Authors: Resendez, Sarahi; Li, Jianghong; Pollmann-Schult, Matthias
Abstract: Objective: This study examines whether nonstandard work schedules (NSWS) improve or hinder work-life balance (WLB) for parents and non-parents in dual-earner households. Background: Previous research shows that NSWS can negatively affect workers' well-being. However, less is known about whether and to what extent these effects differ between parents and childless individuals. Method: Using data from the first wave of the German Family Demography Panel Study (FReDA), linear regression models are applied to assess whether the effect of NSWS on WLB is influenced by family circumstances. Results: Parenthood is generally associated with lower WLB. However, the negative association between NSWS and WLB is more pronounced among childless workers. Notably, mothers of young children (ages 0-5), as well as fathers of school-aged children (ages 6-12) working NSWS report higher WLB than their childless counterparts. Conclusion: Parents with NSWS in dual-earner households do not necessarily experience lower WLB than childless workers. In some cases, NSWS may even help parents better reconcile work and family responsibilities.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/10419/334722</guid>
      <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

