IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ess/wpaper/id11198.html

Does Rosie Like Riveting? Male and Female Occupational Choices

Author

Listed:
  • Grace Lordan

  • Jörn Pischke

Abstract

This paper explores the possibility that women and men have different tastes for the content of the work they do. It runs regressions of job satisfaction on the share of males in an occupation. Overall, there is a strong negative relationship between female satisfaction and the share of males. This relationship is stable across different specifications and contexts, and the magnitude of the association is not attenuated by personal characteristics or other occupation averages. These results suggest that women may care more about job content, and this is a possible factor preventing them from entering some male dominated professions. This study continues to find a strong negative relationship between female satisfaction and the occupation level share of males in a separate analysis that includes share of males in the firm. This suggests that it is not just picking up differences in the work environment, although these seem to play an independent and important role as well. [Working Paper 22495]

Suggested Citation

  • Grace Lordan & Jörn Pischke, 2016. "Does Rosie Like Riveting? Male and Female Occupational Choices," Working Papers id:11198, eSocialSciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:ess:wpaper:id:11198
    Note: Institutional Papers
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.esocialsciences.org/Articles/show_Article.aspx?acat=InstitutionalPapers&aid=11198
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J4 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets

    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:ess:wpaper:id:11198. 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: Padma Prakash (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.esocialsciences.org .

    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.