The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Seth D Zimmerman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
old boysa clubs and Upward Mobility among the educational elite
2021Co-Authors: Valerie Michelman, Joseph Price, Seth D ZimmermanAbstract:This paper studies how exclusive social groups shape Upward Mobility, and whether interactions between low- and high-status peers can integrate the top rungs of the economic and social ladder. Our setting is Harvard in the 1920s and 1930s, where new groups of students arriving on campus encountered a social system centered on exclusive old boys' clubs. We combine archival and Census records of students' college lives and long-run careers with a room-randomization design based on a scaled residential integration policy. We first show that high-status students from prestigious private high schools perform worse academically than other students, but are much more likely to join exclusive campus clubs. The club membership premium is large: members earn 32% more than other students, and are more likely to work in finance and join country clubs, both characteristic of the era's elite. The membership premium persists after conditioning on high school, legacy status, and even family. Random assignment to high-status peers raises the rates at which students join exclusive social groups on campus, but overall effects are driven entirely by large gains for private school students. In the long run, a shift from the 25th percentile of residential peer group status to the 75th percentile raises the rate at which private school students work in finance by 41% and their membership in adult social clubs by 26%. We conclude that social interactions among the educational elite mediate access to top positions in the economy and society, but may not provide a path to these positions for underrepresented groups. Differences in academic and career outcomes by high school type persist through at least the class of 1990, suggesting that this causal channel remains relevant at contemporary elite universities. Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.
-
elite colleges and Upward Mobility to top jobs and top incomes
2016Co-Authors: Seth D ZimmermanAbstract:This paper estimates the effect of elite college admission on students' chances of attaining top positions in the economy, and explores the importance of peer ties as an underlying mechanism. I combine administrative data on income and the census of directors and top managers at publicly traded firms with a regression discontinuity design based on admissions rules at elite business-focused degree programs in Chile. Admission to elite programs raises the number of firm leadership positions students hold by 50% and the share with incomes in the top 0.1% of the distribution by 45%. Effects are larger for students from high-tuition private high school backgrounds and near zero for students from other backgrounds. Consistent with the hypothesis that peer ties play an important role in driving the observed effects, private high school students admitted to top universities become more likely to work in leadership roles with peers from similar backgrounds, but no more likely to work with non-peers from the same program in different cohorts or different programs in the same field.Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.
-
elite colleges and Upward Mobility to top jobs and top incomes
2016Co-Authors: Seth D ZimmermanAbstract:This paper asks whether elite colleges help students outside of historically advantaged groups reach top positions in the economy. I combine administrative data on income and leadership teams at publicly traded firms with a regression discontinuity design based on admissions rules at elite business-focused degree programs in Chile. The 1.8% of college students admitted to these programs account for 41% of leadership positions and 39% of top 0.1% incomes. Admission raises the number of leadership positions students hold by 44% and their probability of attaining a top 0.1% income by 51%. However, these gains are driven by male applicants from high-tuition private high schools, with zero effects for female students or students from other school types with similar admissions test scores. Admissions effects are equal to 38% of the gap in rates of top attainment by gender and 54% of the gap by high school background for male students. A difference-in-differences analysis of the rates at which pairs of students lead the same firms suggests that peer ties formed between college classmates from similar backgrounds may play an important role in driving the observed effects.
Corinne Bendersky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
not all inequality is created equal effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for Upward Mobility
2015Co-Authors: Nicholas A Hays, Corinne BenderskyAbstract:Although hierarchies are thought to be beneficial for groups, empirical evidence is mixed. We argue and find in 7 studies spanning methodologies and samples that different bases of hierarchical differentiation have distinct effects on lower ranking group members� disruptive competitive behavior because status hierarchies are seen as more mutable than are power hierarchies. Greater mutability means that more opportunity exists for Upward Mobility, which motivates individuals to compete in hopes of advancing their placement in the hierarchy. This research provides further evidence that different bases of hierarchy can have different effects on individuals and the groups of which they are a part and explicates a mechanism for those effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved)
-
not all inequality is created equal effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for Upward Mobility
2015Co-Authors: Nicholas A Hays, Corinne BenderskyAbstract:Although hierarchies are thought to be beneficial for groups, empirical evidence is mixed. We argue and find in 7 studies spanning methodologies and samples that different bases of hierarchical differentiation have distinct effects on lower ranking group members' disruptive competitive behavior because status hierarchies are seen as more mutable than are power hierarchies. Greater mutability means that more opportunity exists for Upward Mobility, which motivates individuals to compete in hopes of advancing their placement in the hierarchy. This research provides further evidence that different bases of hierarchy can have different effects on individuals and the groups of which they are a part and explicates a mechanism for those effects.
Nicholas A Hays - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
not all inequality is created equal effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for Upward Mobility
2015Co-Authors: Nicholas A Hays, Corinne BenderskyAbstract:Although hierarchies are thought to be beneficial for groups, empirical evidence is mixed. We argue and find in 7 studies spanning methodologies and samples that different bases of hierarchical differentiation have distinct effects on lower ranking group members� disruptive competitive behavior because status hierarchies are seen as more mutable than are power hierarchies. Greater mutability means that more opportunity exists for Upward Mobility, which motivates individuals to compete in hopes of advancing their placement in the hierarchy. This research provides further evidence that different bases of hierarchy can have different effects on individuals and the groups of which they are a part and explicates a mechanism for those effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved)
-
not all inequality is created equal effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for Upward Mobility
2015Co-Authors: Nicholas A Hays, Corinne BenderskyAbstract:Although hierarchies are thought to be beneficial for groups, empirical evidence is mixed. We argue and find in 7 studies spanning methodologies and samples that different bases of hierarchical differentiation have distinct effects on lower ranking group members' disruptive competitive behavior because status hierarchies are seen as more mutable than are power hierarchies. Greater mutability means that more opportunity exists for Upward Mobility, which motivates individuals to compete in hopes of advancing their placement in the hierarchy. This research provides further evidence that different bases of hierarchy can have different effects on individuals and the groups of which they are a part and explicates a mechanism for those effects.
Nathaniel Hilger - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Upward Mobility and discrimination the case of asian americans
2016Co-Authors: Nathaniel HilgerAbstract:Asian Americans are the only non-white US racial group to experience long-term, institutional discrimination yet today exhibit high income. I reexamine this puzzle in California, where most Asians settled historically. Asians achieved extraordinary Upward Mobility relative to blacks and whites for every cohort born in California since 1920. This Mobility stemmed primarily from gains in earnings conditional on education, rather than unusual educational attainment. Historical test score and prejudice data suggest low initial earnings for Asians, unlike blacks, reflected prejudice rather than skills. Post-war declines in discrimination interacting with high initial skills can account for Asians’ extraordinary Upward Mobility.Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.
-
Upward Mobility and discrimination the case of asian americans
2016Co-Authors: Nathaniel HilgerAbstract:Asian Americans are the only non-white US racial group to experience long-term, institutional discrimination and subsequently exhibit high income. I re-examine this puzzle in California, where most Asians settled historically. Asians achieved extraordinary Upward Mobility relative to blacks and whites for every cohort born in California since 1920. This Mobility stemmed primarily from gains in earnings conditional on education, rather than unusual educational Mobility. Historical test score and prejudice data suggest low initial earnings for Asians, unlike blacks, reflected prejudice rather than skills. Post-war declines in discrimination interacting with previously uncompensated skills can account for Asians’ extraordinary Upward Mobility.
Danielle Wallace - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
opportunities for making ends meet and Upward Mobility differences in organizational deprivation across urban and suburban poor neighborhoods
2010Co-Authors: Alexandra K Murphy, Danielle WallaceAbstract:Objectives. Given the recent rise of poverty in U.S. suburbs, this study asks: What poor neighborhoods are most disadvantageous, those in the city or those in the suburbs? Building on recent urban sociological work demonstrating the importance of neighborhood organizations for the poor, we are concerned with one aspect of disadvantage—the lack of availability of organizational resources oriented toward the poor. By breaking down organizations into those that promote Mobility versus those that help individuals meet their daily subsistence needs, we seek to explore potential variations in the type of disadvantage that may exist. Methods. We test whether poor urban or suburban neighborhoods are more likely to be organizationally deprived by breaking down organizations into three types: hardship organizations, educational organizations, and employment organizations. We use data from the 2000 U.S. County Business Patterns and the 2000 U.S. Census and test neighborhood deprivation using logistic regression models. Results. We find that suburban poor neighborhoods are more likely to be organizationally deprived than are urban poor neighborhoods, especially with respect to organizations that promote Upward Mobility. Interesting racial and ethnic composition factors shape this more general finding. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that if a poor individual is to live in a poor neighborhood, with respect to access to organizational resources, he or she would be better off living in the central city. Suburban residence engenders isolation from organizations that will help meet one's daily needs and even more so from those offering opportunities for Mobility.
-
opportunities for making ends meet Upward Mobility differences in organizational deprivation across urban suburban poor neighborhoods
2009Co-Authors: Alexandra K Murphy, Danielle WallaceAbstract:Given the recent rise of poverty in American suburbs, this study asks: What poor neighborhoods are most disadvantageous, those in the city or those in the suburbs? Building upon recent urban sociological work demonstrating the importance of neighborhood organizations for the poor, we are concerned with one aspect of disadvantage – the lack of availability of organizational resources oriented towards the poor. By breaking down organizations into those that promote Mobility versus those that help individuals meet their daily subsistence needs we seek to explore potential variations in the type of disadvantage that may exist. Methods. We test whether poor urban or suburban neighborhoods are more likely to be organizationally deprived by breaking down organizations into three types: hardship resources, educational resources, and employment resources. We use data from the 2000 County Business Patterns and the 2000 Census and test neighborhood deprivation using logistic regression models. Results. We find that suburban poor neighborhoods are more likely to be organizational deprived than urban poor neighborhoods, especially with respect to organizations that promote Upward Mobility. Interesting racial and ethnic composition factors shape this more general finding. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that if a poor individual is to live in a poor neighborhood, with respect to access to organizational resources, he or she would be better off living in the central city. Suburban residence endears isolation from organizations that will help meet one’s daily needs and more so, from those offering opportunities for Mobility.
