Question: This problem is inspired by a study of the gender gap in earnings in top corporate jobs [Bertrand and Hallock (2001)]. The study compares total
(a) Let Female be an indicator variable that is equal to 1 for females and 0 for males. A regression of the logarithm of earnings onto Female yields
i. The estimated coefficient on Female is -0.44. Explain what this value means.
ii. The SER is 2.65. Explain what this value means.
iii. Does this regression suggest that female top executives earn less than top male executives? Explain.
iv. Does this regression suggest that there is gender discrimination? Explain.
(b) Two new variables, the market value of the firm (a measure of firm size, in millions of dollars) and stock return (a measure of firm performance, in percentage points), are added to the regression:
-2.png)
i. The coefficient on In(Market Value) is 0.37. Explain what this value means.
ii. The coefficient on Female is now -0.28. Explain why it has changed from the regression in (a).
(c) Are large firms more likely to have female top executives than small firms? Explain.
In(Earnings) 6.48 0.44Female, SER 2.65. (0.01) (0.05) In(Earnings) 386-0.28Female +0.37ln(MarketValue) + 0.004Return. (0.03) (0.04) 0.004) (0.003) n 46,670, R 0.345
Step by Step Solution
3.34 Rating (157 Votes )
There are 3 Steps involved in it
a i ln Earnings for females are on average 044 lower for men than for women ii The error term has a ... View full answer
Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts
Document Format (1 attachment)
909-M-S-L-R (8235).docx
120 KBs Word File
