Literature DB >> 9850473

The past, present, and future of sex segregation methodology.

D B Grusky1, M Charles.   

Abstract

We review the logic underlying margin-free analyses of sex segregation arrays. In the course of our review, we show that the Karmel-MacLachlan decomposition does not live up to its margin-free billing, as the index upon which it rests, Ip, is itself margin-sensitive. Moreover, because the implicit individualism of D is necessarily inconsistent with margin-free analysis, the field would do well to abandon not merely the Karmel-MacLachlan decomposition but all related efforts to purge marginal dependencies from D-inspired measures. The criticisms that Watts (1998) levels against our log-multiplicative approach are likewise unconvincing. We demonstrate that our preferred models pass the test of organizational equivalence, that the "problem" of zero cells can be solved by applying well-developed methods for ransacking incomplete or sparse tables, and that simple log-multiplicative models can be readily devised to analyze disaggregate arrays. We illustrate these conclusions by analyzing a new cross-national archive of detailed segregation data.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9850473

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Demography        ISSN: 0070-3370


  3 in total

1.  Segregation and diversity measures in population distribution.

Authors:  M J White
Journal:  Popul Index       Date:  1986

2.  Occupational gender segregation: index measurement and econometric modeling.

Authors:  M Watts
Journal:  Demography       Date:  1998-11

3.  Revisiting occupational sex segregation in the United States, 1910-1990: results from a log-linear approach.

Authors:  K A Weeden
Journal:  Demography       Date:  1998-11
  3 in total
  5 in total

1.  Commentary: Do we have a consistent terminology for species diversity? The fallacy of true diversity.

Authors:  Root Gorelick
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  The analysis of sex segregation: when is index measurement not index measurement?

Authors:  M Watts
Journal:  Demography       Date:  1998-11

3.  Multi-way multi-group segregation and diversity indices.

Authors:  Root Gorelick; Susan M Bertram
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Rethinking gender segregation and gender inequality: measures and meanings.

Authors:  William P Bridges
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2003-08

5.  Progress toward gender equality in the United States has slowed or stalled.

Authors:  Paula England; Andrew Levine; Emma Mishel
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 11.205

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.