Wage Differentials in the Presence of Unobserved Worker, Firm, and Match Heterogeneity

By Simon D. Woodcock. 2008

134 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Estimating Measurement Error in Annual Job Earnings: A Comparison of Survey and Administrative Data (2013, unknown): “The only major difference is the fall in the variance of the person effects, which is also what Abowd, Kramarz, and Margolis (1999) find in French administrative data and Woodcock (2008) finds for American administrative data.”
A Distributional Framework for Matched Employer Employee Data (2019, methodology): “…introduce an empirical framework with two-sided unobserved heterogeneity 1Applications of the method to earnings data include Gruetter and Lalive (2009), Mendes et al. (2010), Woodcock (2008), Card et al. (2013), Goldschmidt and Schmieder (2015), Song et al. (2015), and Sorkin (2018), among others.”
Opening the Black Box of the Matching Function: The Power of Words (2020, background): “the empirical side, the literature that decomposes the wage variance (e.g. Abowd et al., 1999; Woodcock, 2007; Abowd et al., 2002; Andrews et al., 2008; Iranzo et al., 2008; Woodcock, 2008) focuses on realized wages.”
Job Referral Networks and the Determination of Earnings in Local Labor Markets (2014, result): “Their finding parallels those of related tests by Gruetter and Lalive (2009) for Germany, Rothstein (2010) in matched student-teacher data, and Woodcock (2008) on the importance of match-specific heterogeneity.”