IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v45y2016i1p69-108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Method of Measuring Inequality Within a Selection Process

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie Bulle

Abstract

To explain the inequalities in access to a discrete good G across two populations, or across time in a single national context, it is necessary to distinguish, for each population or period of time, the effect of the diffusion of G from that of unequal outcomes of underlying micro-social processes. The inequality of outcomes of these micro-social processes is termed inequality within the selection process. We present an innovative index of measurement that captures variations in this aspect of inequality of opportunity and is insensitive to margins. We applied this index to the analysis of inequality of educational opportunity by exploring the effects of the British 1944 Education Act, of which various accounts have been offered. The relationships between the measure of inequality within a selection process presented and classical measures of inequality of opportunity are analyzed, as well as the benefits of using this index with regard to the insight it provides for interpreting data.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathalie Bulle, 2016. "A Method of Measuring Inequality Within a Selection Process," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(1), pages 69-108, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:1:p:69-108
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124114562611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124114562611
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124114562611?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert M. Blackburn & Janet Siltanen & Jennifer Jarman, 1995. "The Measurement of Occupational Gender Segregation: Current Problems and a New Approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 158(2), pages 319-331, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. repec:cte:werepe:we077544 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:cte:werepe:we074645 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Yaşar Dinçer, Fatma Cande & Yirmibeşoğlu, Gözde, 2024. "Constraints on women pilots in airline industry: A rising sector of international trade," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    4. Martin Watts, 1998. "Occupational gender segregation: Index measureiient and econometric modeling," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 35(4), pages 489-496, November.
    5. repec:cte:werepe:we056231 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Carsten Hundertmark, 2013. "Ökonometrische Verfahren zur Messung von Segregation: eine theoretische und empirische Studie," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 559, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    7. Martin Watts, 2003. "The Evolution of Occupational Gender Segregation in Australia: Measurement and Interpretation," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 6(4), pages 631-655, December.
    8. Jane Elliott, 2005. "Comparing occupational segregation in Great Britain and the United States," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 19(1), pages 153-174, March.
    9. Borghans L. & Groot L., 1999. "Educational presorting as a cause of occupational segregation," ROA Research Memorandum 003, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    10. Alison Preston & Gillian Whitehouse, 2004. "Gender Differences in Occupation of Employment within Australia," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 7(3), pages 309-327, September.
    11. Richard Breen & Cecilia Garcia-Penalosa, 2002. "Bayesian Learning and Gender Segregation," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(4), pages 899-922, October.
    12. Robert M. Blackburn & Bradley Brooks & Jennifer Jarman, 2001. "The Vertical Dimension of Occupational Segregation," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 15(3), pages 511-538, September.
    13. Ricardo Mora & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2004. "Gender segregation by occupations in the public and the private sector.The case of Spain," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 28(3), pages 399-428, September.
    14. Borghans, Lex & Groot, Loek, 1999. "Educational presorting and occupational segregation," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 375-395, September.
    15. Muhammad Zaheer Khan & Rusmawati Said & Nur Syazwani Mazlan & Norashidah Mohamed Nor, 2023. "Measuring the occupational segregation of males and females in Pakistan in a multigroup context," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    16. repec:cte:werepe:we034014 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Anastasia Klimova & Russell Ross, 2012. "Gender‐based occupational segregation in Russia: an empirical study," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 39(7), pages 474-489, June.
    18. William Bridges, 2003. "Rethinking gender segregation and gender inequality: Measures and meanings," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 40(3), pages 543-568, August.

    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:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:1:p:69-108. 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.

    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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.