IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v34y2006i4p573-586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Measures of Gender Occupational Segregation: Statistical and Conceptual Considerations (a Response to Grusky and Levanon)

Author

Listed:
  • Iris Jerby

    (Tel Aviv University, Israel)

  • Moshe Semyonov

    (Tel Aviv University, Israel)

  • Noah Lewin-Epstein

    (Tel Aviv University, Israel)

Abstract

In a recent article (2005), the authors proposed the first-order approximation (FOA) index for the measurement of gender occupational segregation across detailed occupational categories. The FOA index can remedy the two inherent limitations—sensitivity and singularity—associated with the ratio index and the association index, especially when applied to the measurement of micro-segregation. Grusky and Levanon (this issue), while acknowledging these limitations, view the FOA index as a misguided effort to remedy the shortcomings of the other indexes. When responding to Grusky and Levanon, the authors address two kinds of controversies. The first aims directly at the methodological reasoning put forward by Grusky and Levanon and centers on the statistical properties and statistical assumptions embodied in the various measures. The second revolves around different paradigmatic approaches to the study of occupational segregation and centers on different conceptual views of the gender segregation phenomenon.

Suggested Citation

  • Iris Jerby & Moshe Semyonov & Noah Lewin-Epstein, 2006. "On Measures of Gender Occupational Segregation: Statistical and Conceptual Considerations (a Response to Grusky and Levanon)," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 34(4), pages 573-586, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:34:y:2006:i:4:p:573-586
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124106286333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124106286333
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124106286333?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moshe Semyonov & Noah Lewin-Epstein & Iris Brahm, 1999. "Changing Labour Force Participation and Occupational Status: Arab Women in the Israeli Labour Force," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 13(1), pages 117-131, March.
    2. T. Karmel & M. Maclachlan, 1988. "Occupational Sex Segregation —Increasing or Decreasing?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 64(3), pages 187-195, September.
    3. William Bridges, 2003. "Rethinking gender segregation and gender inequality: Measures and meanings," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 40(3), pages 543-568, August.
    4. Karmel, T & Maclachlan, M, 1988. "Occupational Sex Segregation--Increasing or Decreasing?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 64(186), pages 187-195, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin Watts, 2014. "Spatial indexes: a focus on segregation," Chapters, in: Robert Stimson (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Spatially Integrated Social Science, chapter 15, pages 287-314, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jacques Silber & Sasiwimon Warunsiri Paweenawat & Lusi Liao, 2022. "On the measurement of non-random mating and of its change over time," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 161-198, March.
    2. Coral Río & Olga Alonso-Villar, 2022. "On Measuring Segregation in a Multigroup Context: Standardized Versus Unstandardized Indices," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 633-659, September.
    3. Angelo Mazza & Antonio Punzo, 2015. "On the Upward Bias of the Dissimilarity Index and Its Corrections," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 44(1), pages 80-107, February.
    4. Hamed Pirpour, 2022. "Measuring Taste-Based Employment Discrimination Between Females and Males," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 65(3), pages 729-745, September.
    5. Martin Watts, 1997. "Multidimensional Indexes of Occupational Segregation," Evaluation Review, , vol. 21(4), pages 461-482, August.
    6. Martin J. Watts, 1994. "A Critique of Marginal Matching," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 8(3), pages 421-431, September.
    7. Renata Semenza & Giorgio Boccardo & Simone Sarti, 2021. "So Far, so Similar? Labour Market Feminization in Italy and Chile," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 917-942, April.
    8. Martin Watts, 1992. "How Should Occupational Sex Segregation be Measured?," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 6(3), pages 475-487, September.
    9. Muhammad Zaheer Khan & Rusmawati Said & Nur Syazwani Mazlan & Norashidah Mohamed Nor, 2023. "Measuring the occupational segregation of males and females in Pakistan in a multigroup context," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    10. Amaia PALENCIA‐ESTEBAN, 2022. "Occupational segregation of female and male immigrants in Europe: Accounting for cross‐country differences," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 161(3), pages 341-373, September.
    11. Martin Watts, 2003. "The Evolution of Occupational Gender Segregation in Australia: Measurement and Interpretation," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 6(4), pages 631-655, December.
    12. Iñaki Permanyer, 2010. "The Measurement of Multidimensional Gender Inequality: Continuing the Debate," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 181-198, January.
    13. Martin J. Watts, 1995. "Trends in Occupational Segregation by Race and Gender in the U.S.A., 1983-92: A Multidimensional Approach," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 27(4), pages 1-36, December.
    14. Jacques Silber, 1992. "Occupational Segregation Indices in the Multidimensional Case: A Note," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 68(3), pages 276-277, September.
    15. Donald E. Lewis, 1996. "Occupational Crowding," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 72(217), pages 107-117, June.
    16. Thomas Couppié & Arnaud Dupray & Stéphanie Moullet, 2006. "Les salaires des hommes et femmes en début de vie active : des sources de disparité variables selon les professions," Post-Print hal-03498087, HAL.
    17. Martin Watts, 2013. "Commentary," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(7), pages 1528-1535, July.
    18. Sheila M. Rimmer, 1991. "Occupational Segregation, Earnings Differentials and Status among Australian Workers," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 67(3), pages 205-216, September.
    19. Paul W. Miller & Yew Liang Lee, 2004. "Occupational Segregation on the Basis of Gender: the Role of Entry-level Jobs," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 7(3), pages 355-374, September.
    20. Robert M. Blackburn & Jennifer Jarman & Janet Siltanen, 1994. "A Reply to Watts," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 8(3), pages 433-438, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:34:y:2006:i:4:p:573-586. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.