Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
st: RE: Oaxaca - Negative value for unexplained portion Oaxaca - Negative value for unexplained portion
From
"STANEVA A. (497186)" <[email protected]>
To
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: Oaxaca - Negative value for unexplained portion Oaxaca - Negative value for unexplained portion
Date
Tue, 6 Mar 2012 09:58:23 +0000
The negative value for the discrimination component (or unexplained part) in your case suggests that black women are paid more than white, which is a bit puzzled. Try to run the decomposition by including more characteristics and see whether it will change. What about the endowment component?
Best
________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Sol Kizzy Ruiz Rodriguez [[email protected]]
Sent: 06 March 2012 04:38
To: [email protected]
Subject: st: Oaxaca - Negative value for unexplained portion Oaxaca - Negative value for unexplained portion
Dear Statalist,
I am decomposing the white female (high mod) - black female (low mod)
wage gap using oaxaca command in Stata.
I got negative value for the unexplained portion (differential due to
coefficients a.k.a. discrimination). And when I looked closer, most of
this -negativity- is due to the effect of the intercept coefficient.
Now, I am wondering how to interpret this negative value.
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/