Name File Type Size Last Modified
20160995_Blau_Kahn_online_appendix_Feb_2017.pdf application/pdf 287.8 KB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM
20160995_CPS_reg.dta application/octet-stream 321.3 MB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM
20160995_blau_kahn_cps_data_analysis_file_variable_list.pdf application/pdf 122.6 KB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM
20160995_blau_kahn_jel_cps_table_1.do.txt text/plain 10.6 KB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM
20160995_blau_kahn_jel_psid_data_analysis.do.txt text/plain 16.5 KB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM
20160995_blau_kahn_psid_regression_file_variable_list.pdf application/pdf 136.2 KB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM
20160995_readme.doc.docx application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document 13.6 KB 11/07/2024 10:58:AM
CHANGES.txt text/plain 100 bytes 11/14/2024 05:47:AM
LICENSE.txt text/plain 14.6 KB 10/12/2019 01:44:PM

Project Citation: 

Blau, Francine D., and Kahn, Lawrence M. Replication data for: The Gender Wage Gap: Extent, Trends, and Explanations. Nashville, TN: American Economic Association [publisher], 2024. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2024-11-14. https://doi.org/10.3886/E113913V2

Project Description

Summary:  View help for Summary Using Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) microdata over the 1980-2010 period, we provide new empirical evidence on the extent of and trends in the gender wage gap, which declined considerably during this time. By 2010, conventional human capital variables taken together explained little of the gender wage gap, while gender differences in occupation and industry continued to be important. Moreover, the gender pay gap declined much more slowly at the top of the wage distribution than at the middle or bottom and by 2010 was noticeably higher at the top. We then survey the literature to identify what has been learned about the explanations for the gap. We conclude that many of the traditional explanations continue to have salience. Although human-capital factors are now relatively unimportant in the aggregate, women's work force interruptions and shorter hours remain significant in high-skilled occupations, possibly due to compensating differentials. Gender differences in occupations and industries, as well as differences in gender roles and the gender division of labor remain important, and research based on experimental evidence strongly suggests that discrimination cannot be discounted. Psychological attributes or noncognitive skills comprise one of the newer explanations for gender differences in outcomes. Our effort to assess the quantitative evidence on the importance of these factors suggests that they account for a small to moderate portion of the gender pay gap, considerably smaller than, say, occupation and industry effects, though they appear to modestly contribute to these differences.

Scope of Project

JEL Classification:  View help for JEL Classification
      I26 Returns to Education
      J16 Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
      J24 Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
      J31 Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
      J71 Labor Discrimination


Related Publications

Published Versions

Export Metadata

Report a Problem

Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.

This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.