IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/28688.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

College as a Marriage Market

Author

Listed:
  • Lars Kirkebøen
  • Edwin Leuven
  • Magne Mogstad

Abstract

What explains the strong educational homogamy and assortativity that we observe among the college educated? We use Norwegian data to address identification and measurement challenges and find that colleges are local marriage markets that matter greatly for whom one marries, not because of the pre-determined traits of the admitted students but as a direct result of attending a particular institution at a given time. The effects of enrollment on homogamy that we uncover are sufficiently large to explain the majority of the strong educational sorting among the college educated in our data. We also examine the mechanisms behind these effects and explore implications for individual and family earnings.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars Kirkebøen & Edwin Leuven & Magne Mogstad, 2021. "College as a Marriage Market," NBER Working Papers 28688, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:28688
    Note: ED LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w28688.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html. Free access is also available to older working papers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Regis Barnichon & Andrew Figura, 2015. "Labor Market Heterogeneity and the Aggregate Matching Function," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 222-249, October.
    2. Katja Maria Kaufmann & Matthias Messner & Alex Solis, 2013. "Returns to Elite Higher Education in the Marriage Market: Evidence from Chile," Working Papers 489, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    3. Kleibergen, Frank & Paap, Richard, 2006. "Generalized reduced rank tests using the singular value decomposition," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 97-126, July.
    4. Christopher A. Pissarides & Barbara Petrongolo, 2001. "Looking into the Black Box: A Survey of the Matching Function," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 390-431, June.
    5. Sebastian Calonico & Matias D. Cattaneo & Rocio Titiunik, 2014. "Robust data-driven inference in the regression-discontinuity design," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 14(4), pages 909-946, December.
    6. Pierre-André Chiappori & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir, 2018. "The Marriage Market, Labor Supply, and Education Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(S1), pages 26-72.
    7. Artmann, Elisabeth & Ketel, Nadine & Oosterbeck, Hessel & van der Klaauw, Bas, 2018. "Field of study and family outcomes," Working Papers in Economics 736, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    8. Pierre-André Chiappori & Bernard Salanié & Yoram Weiss, 2017. "Partner Choice, Investment in Children, and the Marital College Premium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(8), pages 2109-2167, August.
    9. Lasse Eika & Magne Mogstad & Basit Zafar, 2019. "Educational Assortative Mating and Household Income Inequality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 2795-2835.
    10. Gunter J. Hitsch & Ali Hortaçsu & Dan Ariely, 2010. "Matching and Sorting in Online Dating," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 130-163, March.
    11. Abadie, Alberto, 2003. "Semiparametric instrumental variable estimation of treatment response models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 231-263, April.
    12. Michèle Belot & Marco Francesconi, 2013. "Dating Preferences and Meeting Opportunities in Mate Choice Decisions," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 48(2), pages 474-508.
    13. Eugene Choo & Aloysius Siow, 2006. "Who Marries Whom and Why," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(1), pages 175-201, February.
    14. Liu, Haoming & Lu, Jingfeng, 2006. "Measuring the degree of assortative mating," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 317-322, September.
    15. Helena Skyt Nielsen & Michael Svarer, 2009. "Educational Homogamy: How Much is Opportunities?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(4).
    16. Pierre-André Chiappori, 2020. "The Theory and Empirics of the Marriage Market," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 547-578, August.
    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. Artmann, Elisabeth & Ketel, Nadine & Oosterbeek, Hessel & van der Klaauw, Bas, 2021. "Field of study and partner choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Lavy, V & Goldstein, Y, 2022. "Gifted Children Programs’ Short and Long-Term Impact: Higher Education, Earnings, and the Knowledge-Economy," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 609, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    3. Lavy, Victor & Goldstein, Yoav, 2022. "Gifted Children Programs’ Short and Long-Term Impact : Higher Education, Earnings, and the Knowledge-Economy," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1396, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.

    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. Pierre-André Chiappori & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir, 2020. "Changes in Assortative Matching: Theory and Evidence for the US," Working Papers 2020-033, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    2. Sonia Jaffe & Simon Weber, 2019. "The effect of meeting rates on matching outcomes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(2), pages 363-378, March.
    3. Pierre‐André Chiappori & Monica Costa‐Dias & Sam Crossman & Costas Meghir, 2020. "Changes in Assortative Matching and Inequality in Income: Evidence for the UK," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 39-63, March.
    4. Bicakova, Alena & Jurajda, Štepán, 2016. "Field-of-Study Homogamy," IZA Discussion Papers 9844, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Arpita Patnaik & Matthew J. Wiswall & Basit Zafar, 2020. "College Majors," NBER Working Papers 27645, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Mansour, Hani & McKinnish, Terra, 2014. "Same-Occupation Spouses: Preferences and Search Costs," IZA Discussion Papers 8370, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Egebark, Johan & Ekström, Mathias & Plug, Erik & van Praag, Mirjam, 2021. "Brains or beauty? Causal evidence on the returns to education and attractiveness in the online dating market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    8. Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir, 2021. "The Measuring of Assortativeness in Marriage: A Comment," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2316, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    9. Arnaud Dupuy & Alfred Galichon, 2014. "Personality Traits and the Marriage Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(6), pages 1271-1319.
    10. Nie, Haifeng & Xing, Chunbing, 2019. "Education expansion, assortative marriage, and income inequality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 37-51.
    11. 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.
    12. Arnaud Dupuy & Simon Weber, 2022. "Marriage Market Counterfactuals Using Matching Models," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 29-43, January.
    13. Bisin, Alberto & Tura, Giulia, 2019. "Marriage, Fertility, and Cultural Integration in Italy," CEPR Discussion Papers 14179, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Peter Arcidiacono & Andrew Beauchamp & Marjorie McElroy, 2016. "Terms of endearment: An equilibrium model of sex and matching," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(1), pages 117-156, March.
    15. Bovet, Jeanne & Raiber, Eva & Ren, Weiwei & Seabright, Paul & Wang, Charlotte, 2021. "What Do Parents Want? Parental Spousal Preferences in China," CEPR Discussion Papers 16035, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Augsburg, Britta & Baquero, Juan Pablo & Gautam, Sanghmitra & Rodriguez-Lesmes, Paul, 2021. "Sanitation and Marriage Markets in India: Evidence from the Total Sanitation Campaign," SocArXiv 58sdf, Center for Open Science.
    17. Wang-Sheng Lee & Terra McKinnish, 2018. "The marital satisfaction of differently aged couples," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 337-362, April.
    18. Berliant, Marcus & Thakur, Sounak, 2019. "Commitment and matching in the marriage market," MPRA Paper 96001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alberto Bisin & Giulia Tura, 2019. "Marriage, Fertility, and Cultural Integration of Immigrants in Italy," Working Papers 2019-063, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    20. Hani Mansour & Terra McKinnish, 2018. "Same-occupation spouses: preferences or search costs?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1005-1033, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure

    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:nbr:nberwo:28688. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.