Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/71234 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2003
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
Reihe Ökonomie / Economics Series No. 144
Verlag: 
Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS), Vienna
Zusammenfassung: 
Scientific rhetoric can have a profound impact on the perception of research; it can also drive and direct further research efforts. What determines whether results are discussed in a neutral or a judgmental way? How convincing must results be so that authors call for significant policy changes? These questions are difficult to answer, because rhetoric on the one hand, and content and methodology of research on the other hand, cannot be separated easily. We use a unique example to examine this question empirically: the analysis of gender wage differentials. The Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition represents a standard research method that compares male and female earnings, holding productivity constant. We analyze the wording in these studies and their prevalence to ask for policy intervention. Furthermore, we examine whether the rhetoric used reveals an author's prejudice on the topic which may also be reflected in data selection and thereby his or her findings.
Schlagwörter: 
rhetoric
gender wage differential
discrimination
JEL: 
J7
J16
B4
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
838.34 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.