IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v17y1992i1p169-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Fragile Are Male Labor Supply Function Estimates?

Author

Listed:
  • Conway, Karen Smith
  • Kniesner, Thomas J

Abstract

The authors estimate male wage and nonwage income effects using linear specifications spanning three techniques (ordinary least squares, fixed effects, and random effects), two wage measures (reported hourly wages and average hourly earnings), and sample stratification by pay scheme (salaried versus hourly paid). Their regressions encompass the one-period static and perfect-foresight life-cycle models. The static model implies exogenous random person-specific effects, a negative nonwage income coefficient, and a positive labor supply substitution effect. The life-cycle model implies endogenous individual-specific effects, a positive wage coefficient, and a zero nonwage income coefficient. Neither the one-period static nor the perfect-foresight life-cycle models are implied by the data for salaried workers while the static model is consistent with the data for hourly paid workers if income taxes are ignored.

Suggested Citation

  • Conway, Karen Smith & Kniesner, Thomas J, 1992. "How Fragile Are Male Labor Supply Function Estimates?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 169-182.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:17:y:1992:i:1:p:169-82
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. James P. Ziliak & Thomas J. Kniesner, 1999. "Estimating Life Cycle Labor Supply Tax Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(2), pages 326-359, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:empeco:v:17:y:1992:i:1:p:169-82. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.