Table 5 analyzes women's labor market outcomes. In the first column, a 10% increase in the relative wage causes women to work 1 additional hour per week. This is a small change in hours relative to the mean but explains the entirety of the rise in weekly hours of work over this period. This increase in hours worked could be caused by the change in the composition of women, since single women tend to work more hours, or by changes in working behavior conditional on marital status. A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that the change in the marital composition of women can explain at most 20% of the increase in hours of work, and the remaining 80% is changes in working behavior among married and single women.20

Table 5.

Impact of Relative Wage on Women's Labor Market Outcomes

Conditional on WorkingUnconditional
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
Weekly HoursWeeks Workedln(Wkly Inc)ln(Inc)Any EarningsIn Labor Force
Effect of 10% increase in relative wage 1.021*** −0.274 0.059** 0.054* −0.011 0.001
(0.224) (0.441) (0.023) (0.030) (0.015) (0.013)
Mean $Y$ 36.823 43.487 5.747 9.420 0.723 0.718
Observations 23,222 23,222 23,186 23,188 23,573 23,573
Average wage Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Conditional on WorkingUnconditional
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
Weekly HoursWeeks Workedln(Wkly Inc)ln(Inc)Any EarningsIn Labor Force
Effect of 10% increase in relative wage 1.021*** −0.274 0.059** 0.054* −0.011 0.001
(0.224) (0.441) (0.023) (0.030) (0.015) (0.013)
Mean $Y$ 36.823 43.487 5.747 9.420 0.723 0.718
Observations 23,222 23,222 23,186 23,188 23,573 23,573
Average wage Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

This table shows the coefficients from estimating equation (1) rescaled to represent the effect of a 10% increase in the relative (potential) wage. The dependent variable is a labor market outcome, shown in the column heading. Standard errors are clustered at the state level, and cells are weighted by the female population in the cell. $*$$p$$<$ 0.10, **$p$$<$ 0.05, and ***$p$$<$ 0.01.

Source: Census 1980, 1990, 2000, and ACS 2010.

Close Modal