TY - JOUR
T1 - Further estimates of the economic return to schooling from a new sample of twins
AU - Rouse, Cecilia Elena
N1 - Funding Information:
I thank Michael Boozer, Alan Krueger, and Douglas Staiger for useful conversations, Lisa Barrow, Casundra Anne Cliatt, Lasagne Anne Cliatt, Eugena Estes, Kevin Hallock, Dean Hyslop, Jon Orszag, Michael Quinn, Lara Shore-Sheppard, and Cedric Tille for excellent assistance with the survey, John Abowd for access to LISREL, and three anonymous referees for helpful comments. This paper has been supported by the Mellon Foundation and The National Academy of Education and the NAE Spencer Postdoctoral Fellowship Program.
PY - 1999/4
Y1 - 1999/4
N2 - In a recent, and widely cited, paper, use a new sample of identical twins to investigate the contribution of genetic ability to the observed cross-sectional return to schooling. This paper re-examines Ashenfelter & Krueger's estimates using three additional years of the same twins survey. I find that the return to schooling among identical twins is about 10% per year of schooling completed. Most importantly, unlike the results reported in Ashenfelter and Krueger, I find that the within-twin regression estimate of the effect of schooling on the log wage is smaller than the cross-sectional estimate, implying a small upward bias in the cross-sectional estimate. Ashenfelter & Krueger's measurement error corrected estimates are insignificantly different from those presented here, however. Finally, there is evidence of an important individual-specific component to the measurement error in schooling reports. [JEL: J24, I21].
AB - In a recent, and widely cited, paper, use a new sample of identical twins to investigate the contribution of genetic ability to the observed cross-sectional return to schooling. This paper re-examines Ashenfelter & Krueger's estimates using three additional years of the same twins survey. I find that the return to schooling among identical twins is about 10% per year of schooling completed. Most importantly, unlike the results reported in Ashenfelter and Krueger, I find that the within-twin regression estimate of the effect of schooling on the log wage is smaller than the cross-sectional estimate, implying a small upward bias in the cross-sectional estimate. Ashenfelter & Krueger's measurement error corrected estimates are insignificantly different from those presented here, however. Finally, there is evidence of an important individual-specific component to the measurement error in schooling reports. [JEL: J24, I21].
KW - Measurement error
KW - Returns to schooling
KW - Selection bias
KW - Twins
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0000673435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0000673435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/s0272-7757(98)00038-7
DO - 10.1016/s0272-7757(98)00038-7
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0000673435
VL - 18
SP - 149
EP - 157
JO - Economics of Education Review
JF - Economics of Education Review
SN - 0272-7757
IS - 2
ER -