Socioeconomic indices and sexual inequality: a tale of scales

Socioeconomic indices and sexual inequality : a tale of scales

M O N I C A BOYD Carleton University“

Cet article prksente un indice socio-Cconomique des catigories du recensement de 1971; l’indice est base sur les caractkristiques (revenu et Cducation) de tous les membres de la force de travail - plutBt que sur celles des seuls hommes (1’Cchelle Blishen-McRoberts) ou des seules femmes (l’kchelle Blishen-Carroll). Les propriCtCs de chaque indice sont Cva- lukes au moyen des donnCes du recensement de 1971 et du Sondage Canadien sur la mobilitC de 1973. Les rCsultats indiquent qu‘un indice construit a partir de toute la force de travail est l’instrument B favoriser pour de futures comparaisons entre les statuts occupa- tionnels des hommes et des femmes.

This paper develops a socioeconomic index of 1971 Census occupational titles which is based on the income and educational characteristics of all members of the labour force rather than on the characteristics only of men (the Blishen-McRoberts scale) or only of women (the Blishen-Carroll scale). The properties of the three indices are assessed with data from the 1971 Census and from the 1973 Canadian Mobility Survey. The results suggest that a socioeconomic index based on the entire labour force is the preferred index for future comparisons of male-female occupational attainments.

Since their inception socioeconomic indices (Blishen, 1958; 1967; Duncan, 1961a; 1961b) have been extensively used by researchers who wish to hierarchically scale census occupational classifications. Although they are found in other areas of sociology, socioeconomic indices predominate in occupational status attainment research, which seeks to illuminate the process by which family of origin influences subsequent occupational outcomes (Blau and Duncan, 1967; Boyd, Goyder, Jones, McRoberts, Pineo, and Porter 1985; Featherman and Hauser, 1978).

The increasing participation of North American women in the labour force

* This research was funded by an SSHRCC Research Grant 410-81-0817 awarded to Mon- ica Boyd and Hugh A. McRoberts. The author thanks Bernard R. Blishen who gener- ously supplied the original unpublished education-income-occupation tabulations. Bon- nie Shiell, Gail Eno, and Allan Gordon at various times were graduate student assistants on the project and their meticulous work is greatly appreciated. The author also thanks two C R S A reviewers and John Goyder, Alfred Hunter, Hugh A. McRoberts, John Myles, and Peter C. Pineo for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. This manuscript was received June, 1985 and accepted January, 1986.

Rev. canad. SOC. k Anth. / Canad. Rev. SOC. 8c Anth. z3(4) 1986

458 M O N I C A BOYD

prompted the inclusion of women in these status attainment models, in turn raising questions about the scaling properties of the socioeconomic indices. In virtually all early studies of male-female occupational attainments, the average occupational status of women was the same or higher than that of men in the labour force. Further, sex differences in the occupational attainment process were not as pronounced as might be expected given sex segregation of occupations and sexual inequalitities in income, promotional opportunities and other job-related characteristics. (See Boyd, 1982; Featherman and Hauser, 1976; McClendon, 1976; Treiman and Terrell, 1975; Treas and Tyree, 1979. Also see Cooney, Clague and Salvo, 1982; Marini, 1980; Sewell, Hauser and Wolf, 1980.) This muted evidence of sexual inequality generated concern over possible biases of these socioeconomic indices (Huber, 1980). In their original formulation, socioeconomic indices were constructed from the occupational specific characteristics of the male labour force (for additional discussion, see Boyd and McRoberts, 1982). This meant that female dominated occupations, like those of nurses or clerk-typists, were assigned socioeconomic scores on the basis of the males in those occupations. As a result, a given occupation could be assigned a different position in a socioeconomic hierarchy from that determined by the socioeconomic characteristics of its largely female incumbents. One consequence, that of inflated socioeconomic scores for female-dominated occupations (Jacobs, 1981; Powers and Holmberg, 1978), casts doubt on previous comparisons of men and women which use male-derived socioeconomic scores.

An increasing response to such index criticisms is to remove the male-only reference population from the construction of the socioeconomic indices of occupations. Two variations of this strategy exist. One uses the characteristics of all members of the labour force, undifferentiated by sex, to compute socioeconomic scores of occupations. This approach is found in research conducted in the United States (Featherman and Stevens, 1982; Powers and Holmberg, 1978; 1982). In Canada, Blishen and Carroll (1978) offer a second alternative to the male-derived Blishen-McRoberts (1976) scale by constructing a socioeconomic index of occupations calculated from the income and educational characteristics of female incubents of occupations. Both approaches are based on the argument that socioeconomic indices for occupations may be 'error prone' in representing the underlying socioeconomic hierarchy if they are calculated solely from the characteristics of males in the labour force (see Boyd and McRoberts, 1982).

Each method of calculating scoioeconomic indices has different implications for research. Blishen and Carroll (1978) regress Pineo-Porter (1967) prestige scores on the income and educational characteristics of female incumbents of occupations. As such, their index more accurately scales occupations which are female dominated; it has, however, two methodological shortcomings. First, socioeconomic scores cannot be calculated for those occupations without female incumbents (33 out of 498 in i97i) , and second those that are dominated by men are assigned socioeconomic scores according to the educational and income characteristics of female incumbents. Thus, a researcher who uses the Blishen-Carroll socioeconomic index to compare men and women reverses, but does not resolve, the methodological problems involved in using the Blishen-McRoberts socioeconomic index.'

Using the 'total' socioeconomic index, calculated by regressing prestige on the

459 S O C I O E C O N O M I C I N D I C E S A N D S E X U A L 1 N E Q U A L I T Y

income and educational characteristics of all labour force participants, also has implications for research. This procedure minimizes the error in assigning socioeconomic scores to occupations where women prodominate but where the characteristics of male incumbents were used in the past. By using the characteristics of all incumbents of occupations, undifferentiated by sex, the resultant socioeconomic index is judged less error-prone in representing the underlying socioeconomic hierarchy of occupations (Boyd and McRoberts, 1982).

Blishen did not produce a socioeconomic index for 1971 Census titles based on the income and educational characteristics of all incumbents of a given occupation. Thus, Canadian researchers must choose between the male-derived Blishen- McRoberts (1976) index and the female-derived Blishen-Carroll(1978) index. This paper increases these alternatives by developing a ‘total’ socioeconomic index, derived from the characteristics of all incumbents of 1971 Census occupations.’ However, the task is not only to produce a third socioeconomic index of occupations, but also to assess its potential contribution to research. This objective is accomplished in two ways. First, the distributional properties of the three measures are compared. Then, the consequences of using the total socioeconomic index as compared to the Blishen-McRoberts index or the Blishen-Carroll are assessed by analyzing male-female differences in occupational status attainment.

H O W M E N , W O M E N A N D P E R S O N S S C A L E

Socioeconomic indices were developed to overcome the absence of quantitative information on the relative social standing of all occupations in the given society. In the initial ‘prestige’ studies, respondents were requested to rank order a selected group of occupations, to generate a hierarchy based on a social consensus (see Reiss, 1961; Pineo and Porter, 1967). In this ranking exercise, the number of occupations to be sorted was limited both because of respondent fatigue, and because of the impossibility of obtaining knowledgeable rankings over all existing occupations. In order to overcome this numerical limitation, the rankings generated by such ‘prestige’ studies’ are used as the basis for predicting the rankings of a much larger group of occupations. This generation of status scores for the larger group of occupations requires three steps. First, the occupational titles ranked in the prestige studies are matched with those in the census classification of occupations, resulting in a loss of some occupational titles from the subsequent analysis. Second, the prestige scores of these matched occupations then are regressed on the income and education characteristics observed for each occupation, using data from the census. Usually, the income and educational measures are calculated from the proportion of the population in a given occupation whose income and education exceeds a certain criterion level (see Blishen, 1967; Blishen and Carroll, 1978; Blishen and McRoberts, 1976; Duncan, 1961a; 1961b). Third, the regression coefficients are used to weight the educational and income characteristics of the incumbents of all of the census occupational titles. When added to the intercept term of the equation, a socioeconomic index can be calculated for each occupational title in the census classification (see Boyd and McRoberts, 1982, Figure I).

This procedure was followed in the construction of the Blishen-McRoberts (1976) and the Blishen-Carroll (1978) indices. The initial prediction equation for


TABLE I PREDICTION EQUAnONS FOR TOTAL, MALE AND FEMALE POPULATIONS, CANADA 1971

Total Males Females N = 85 N = 85 N = 79

~~ ~

Metric Coefficients and Standard Errors Income ,2560 ,3051 ,5133

(.0367) (.0446) (.0735) Education .4009 ,3676 ,3212

(.0326) (.0370) (.0422) Intercept 14.3417 12.2544 20.5770

Standardized Coefficients Income ,3710 .4085 ,4708 Education ,6551 ,5917 ,5136 R square ,8425 .a363 ,8213

Means and Standard Deviations Income 42.87 48.06 17.82

(26.92) (24.87) (17.36) Education 48.83 48.90 49.34

(30.36) (29.91) (30.27) Pineo-Porter Prestige 44.89 44.89 45.57

(18.58) (18.58) (18.93)

Zero Order Correlations Pineo-Porter Prestige with Income .7425 ,7994 ,8275 Education ,8655 .a615 .a406

Education with Income .5670 .6607 ,6946

the male-based Blishen-McRoberts scale used eighty-five occupational titles whereas the Blishen-Carroll index used seventy-nine occupational titles, because six of the eighty-five occupational titles did not have female incumbents according to the 1971 Census. In both studies, the educational characteristics of each occupation were defined by the percentage with a Grade 11/12 or higher education, depending on province of residence. The income characteristic was defined as the percentage of workers having a 1970 income of $6500 or more (Blishen and Carroll, 1978; Blishen and McRoberts, 1976).4

To facilitate comparisons with the Blishen-Carroll and Blishen-McRoberts indices, the total socioeconomic index is constructed in the same fashion, but it is based on the education and income characteristics of all incumbents of each occupational category undifferentiated by sex. Table I, column I presents the prediction equation obtained by regressing the eighty-five prestige scores used in the Blishen and McRoberts study on the educational and income characteristics of workers in the 1970 labour force.* Parallel information on the Blishen-McRoberts

461 S O C I O E C O N O M I C I N D I C E S A N D S E X U A L I N E Q U A L I T Y

and the Blishen-Carroll prediction equations also appears in Table I for compara- tive purposes. For both the total prediction equation and the Blishen-McRoberts male-derived prediction equation, education has a stronger effect on the prestige ranking of an occupation than does income. This similarity reflects the greater numbers of male incumbents in most of the eighty-five occupational categories. As noted by Blishen and Carroll (1978: 354) differences between the Blishen-Carroll female-based equation and the Blishen-McRoberts male-based equation generally reflect the lower wages paid to women; similar observations can be extended to comparisons of the total prediction equation (Table I, column I) and the Blishen- Carroll prediction equation (Table I, column 3).

The equation presented in column I, Table I is used to generate socioeconomic indices for all 498 occupational categories of the 1971 Census, using the education and income characteristics of all incumbents in each occupation (these indices are available from the author). To discover how this total index compares to the Blishen-McRoberts and Blishen-Carroll indices, Table 11 presents summary measures for the three ways of scaling census occupations. The greater similarity of the total socioeconomic index to the Blishen-McRoberts index as compared to the Blishen-Carroll index is shown by the distributional characteristics of each index as well as by their inter-correlations. The maximum and minimum values, ranges, and measures of skew and kurtosis indicate the total index and the Blishen- McRoberts index to be more comparable in distributional tendencies and less comparable to the Blishen-Carroll index. Relative to the first two scales, the Blishen-Carroll index has a more positively skewed distribution, a larger range, and higher minimum and maximum values.’ The Spearman rank order correlations also suggest greater similarity between the total and Blishen-McRoberts scales compared to the Blishen-Carroll with respect to the rank ordering of the various indices.

These similarities and differences are not surprising given the construction of the indices. To reiterate, the Blishen-Carroll index is calculated from the educational and income characteristics of female incumbents, and it reflects the lower incomes of women by assigning a greater weight to the income of a given occupation (Blishen and Carroll, 1978: 354). As a result, the rankings of occupations produced by the Blishen-Carroll index differ from those produced by the Blishen-McRoberts and total indices. An earlier study (McRoberts and Boyd, 1982) showed that compared to the Blishen-McRoberts index, that of Blishen- Carroll results in a higher ranking of occupations dominated by women such as dietitians, social workers, elementary and kindergarten teachers, librarians and archivists, and supervisors in nursing. Likewise, the similarity between the Blishen-McRoberts and the total indices reflects their construction and related scaling properties. As discussed earlier, the Blishen-McRoberts index is calculated from the income and educational characteristics of male incumbents of occupations. However, the number of males in the labour force greatly exceeds that of females as does the number of male-dominated occupations. As a consequence, the overall distributional tendencies of the Blishen-McRoberts index and the total index will be similar even though the rankings of specific occupational titles (notably those in which women are concentrated) may differ.

Despite the high Spearman correlations between the Blishen-McRoberts index

462 M O N I C A B O Y D

~~~~ ~

TABLE 11 PROPERTIES OF THE BLISHEN-MCROBERTS, BLISHEN-CARROLL AND TOTAL SOCIOECONOMIC INDICES

Socioeconomic-Indices

Scale Properties

Blishen- Blishen- Total McRoberts Carroll

N, unweighted Mean Standard Deviation Skew Kurtosis

Range: Minimum Maximum

Percentage Distribution 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99

498 43.03 14.28

,415 - ,793

59.71 16.31 76.02

100.0 .4

19.7 25.9 21.9 15.3 11.6 5.2

- -

498 43.87 14.46

,305 -.910 60.88 14.40 75.28

100.0 1.0

18.1 24.5 21.5 17.3 13.3 4.4

- -

465 42.20 15.77

,874 -.075 76.11 20.58 96.69

100.0

25.2 28.4 16.3 14.8

7.1 5.6 2.4

.2

-

Spearman-Rand-Order-Correlations 465-Occupations Blishen-McRoberts ,9787 1.000 - Blishen-Carroll ,8686 .8250 1.000 498 Occupations Blishen-McRoberts ,9791 - -

and the total socioeconomic indices, the total index appears to capture better the observation that many female-dominated occupations are lower in socioeconomic status than those in which men predominate. As presented in Table IIX (last row), the rank order correlation between the percentage of female workers in an occupation and its socioeconomic index is weakly negative for the Blishen-McRoberts and the Blishen-Carroll indices, but the strength of the negative relationship increases for the total index, indicating that the higher the percentage of female workers, the lower the socioeconomic status of an occupation. This increase in the negative relationship between the percentage of female workers in an occupation and the ranking of a socioeconomic index for the total index as compared to the Blishen- McRoberts or Blishen-Carroll indices is particularly true for managerial, administrative, and related occupations, service occupations, processing, machining, and product fabrication, and to a lesser extent in clerical and transport equipment occupations (Table rn) .' The data for occupations in the managerial-administrative group are particularly intriguing. When the Blishen-McRoberts index is used, the percentage of females is positively associated with the rank of the socioeconomic

TA

BL

E 11

1 SP

EA

RM

AN

RA

NK

OR

DE

R C

OR

RE

LA

TT

ON

S AM

ON

G B

LIS

HE

N M

CR

OB

ER

TS,

BL

ISH

EN

-CA

RR

OL

L,

TO

TA

L S

OC

IOE

CO

NO

MIC

IN

DIC

ES

AN

D P

ER

CE

NT

FE

MA

LE

BY

CE

NSU

S O

CC

UPA

TIO

NA

L

GR

OU

PIN

GS

465

Occ

upat

ions

' 49

8 O

ccup

atio

ns

Spea

rman

Cor

rela

tions

Pe

rcen

tage

Fem

ale

with

Sp

earm

an C

orre

latio

ns

Perc

enta

ge F

emal

e w

ith

Num

ber

of

Num

ber

of

Occ

upat

iona

l Bl

ishen

- Bl

ishe

n-

Occ

upat

iona

l Bl

ishe

n-

Cens

us O

ccup

atio

nal G

roup

s G

roup

C

CD

OS

McR

ober

ts

Carr

oll

Tota

l C

CD

OS

McR

ober

ts

Tota

l

Man

ager

ial,

Adm

inis

trat

ive,

and

Rel

ated

Occ

upat

ions

in N

atur

al S

cien

ces,

Eng

inge

erin

g an

d M

athe

mat

ics,

Soc

ial S

cien

ces a

nd R

elat

ed

Fiel

ds, O

ccup

atio

ns in

Rel

igio

n, T

each

ing

and

Rel

ated

Occ

upat

ions

, Med

icin

e an

d H

ealth

A

rtist

ic, L

itera

ry, R

ecre

atio

nal,

and

Rel

ated

Occ

upat

ions

C

leric

al a

nd R

elat

ed O

ccup

atio

ns

Sale

s Occ

upat

ions

Serv

ice O

ccup

atio

ns

Farm

ing,

Hor

ticul

tura

l, an

d A

nim

al H

usba

ndry

O

ccup

atio

ns: F

ishi

ng, F

ores

try,

Min

ing,

an

d Q

uarr

ying

Pr

oces

sing

, Mac

hini

ng, P

rodu

ct F

abric

atin

g,

Con

stru

ctio

n

Tran

spor

t Equ

ipm

ent O

pera

ting,

mat

eria

ls

Han

dlin

g, O

ther

Cra

fts a

nd E

quip

men

t O

pera

tions

, Occ

upat

ions

N. E

. C.

Tota

l, A

ll O

ccup

atio

ns

Occ

upat

ions

11

21,2

3,

25,2

7

31,3

3

41

51

61

71,7

3,

75,7

7

81,8

2,83

, 85,87

91,9

3,

95,9

9

11 to

99

31

98

(59)

(39)

36

20

31

21

179 49

465

.la1

-.481

2

-.497

2

- ,2

508

.lo60

-.2

135

- .4

714

- .2

532

-.385

1

- .I

020

-.045

1

1923

-.219

5

-.186

0

- ,1

366

,286

1 - ,1

368

-.533

9

-. 12

87

- .6

342

- ,3

294

-.044

0

-.267

2 31

-.508

2 99

-.569

4 (6

0)

-.244

5 (3

9)

-.009

0 36

-.

2451

20

-.641

9 32

-.242

9 25

-.578

1 19

5

-.226

3 60

-.128

5 49

8

.140

1

- ,4

968

-.521

9

- ,2

508

,106

0

- ,2

135

-.516

5 - ,4

293

- ,3

972

- ,0

725

-.026

1

- ,2

672

- ,5

229

- .5

905

- ,2

445

- .0

090

-.245

1

-.671

6

-.401

9

- ,5

745

-.179

0

- ,1

093

'Exc

lude

s th

irty

-thr

ee o

ccup

atio

ns w

hich

had

no

wom

en in

cum

bent

s acc

ordi

ng to

the

1971

Cen

sus.


index. The rank order correlations for managerial workers using the Blishen- McRoberts index thus implies that higher ranked occupations have higher percen- tages of female workers. Because characteristics of male incumbents are used to predict the Blishen-McRoberts index, the positive correlation reflects the higher income received by men in those managerial and administrative positions in which women concentrate.9 When the Blishen-Carroll and total indices are used, negative associations are observed between the percentage female and the socioeconomic rank of occupations in the managerial and administrative category.

D I F F E R E N T S C A L E S A N D D I F F E R E N T T A L E S

Given the similarities and differences among the three alternative indices, what is the substantive implication of selecting one or another measure of socioeconomic status? Since the generation of the Blishen-Carroll and the total indices are motivated by the increased labour force participation of women and by subsequent studies of occupational inequality, this question is answered by examining the relative position of men and women in the labour force according to the usage of the total, Blishen-McRoberts or Blishen-Carroll indices. In addition, variations in male-female occupational attainment models are assessed. The remainder of this paper draws on two data sets: the 1970 experienced civilian labour force (from unpublished tabulations of the 1971 Census of Population) and the 1973 Canadian Mobility Survey (Boyd et al. 1985).

Table IV presents the average occupational statuses of men and women in the 1970 labour force for each index. As shown in column I, Table IV, when the Blishen-McRoberts and the Blishen-Carroll indices are used to scale occupations, women have on the average slightly higher socioeconomic status than do men. But, when the total index is used, this advantage disappears, and the average occupational status for women is three-tenths of a point lower than that observed for the 1970 male labour force.

Although the total index produces results which are more consistent with the argument that women are disadvantaged in the labour force, the male-female differences specific to each index are small. Previous research (Boyd, 1982,1985) suggests that small differences occur because the higher educational attainment and social origins of women in the labour force mask the disadvantages which women experience in occupational attainments. The absence of detailed cross- tabulations in the 1971 Census data prevents adjusting the findings for such male-female compositional differences. However, such adjustment is possible with the 1973 Canadian Mobility data,lo and the analysis is presented in Table IV, columns 2 and 3. In keeping with previous research (Boyd, 1982, 1985), the reference population is the full-time, paid, native-born labour force."

The data in Table IV (Column 2) reveal patterns of sex differences in occupational status which are consistent with those observed for the 1970 labour force (Table IV, column I). When the Blishen-McRoberts or the Blishen-Carroll indices are used to scale occupations, women have higher average occupational status than men. When the total scale is used, women continue to have a higher occupational status, but as the Z scores (or standard deviation units)" show, less advantage is shown than when the other two occupational scales are employed. Further, after the higher educational attainments of women (see Boyd, 1982; 1985) are taken into


TABLE N SEX DIFFERENCES IN OCCUPATIONS STATUS BY TYPE OF SCALE

In the 1970 Full Time Paid Labour Force* Gross N e t t

1973 Canadian Mobility Study

Total Scale Male Female Difference (F-M) 2 score Blishen-MrRoberts Male Female Difference (F-M) Z score

Blishen-Carroll# Male Female Difference 2 score

40.62 40.32 -.30 -.02

40.95 42.44

+1.49 +.11

41.10 42.26 +1.16

+.07

43.99 44.62 +.63 +.05

44.53 47.10 +2.57 +.18

43.90 46.71 +2.81 +.19

44.51 43.03 -1.48 -.I0

45.07 45.46 +.39 +.03

44.45 45.26 +.81 +.05

‘Based on responses to the 1971 Census tNet of respondent’s education *Excludes those persons in occupations which, as of the 1971 Census no female respondents. SOURCE: Statistics Canada unpublished tabulations; Canadian Mobility Survey

account, the occupational status of women is below that of men, using the total index (Table IV, column 3). Overall, the patterns of differences observed in Table IV indicate that compared to a male-derived index (Blishen-McRoberts) or a female- derived index (Blishen-Carroll), the total index generates results which are more consistent with what is known about the male-female occupational segregation, the lower incomes of women compared to men, and the generally observed disadvantaged position of women in the labour force. This conclusion also is reached with various United States socioeconomic indices (Boyd and McRoberts, 1982: Table I).

D I F F E R E N T S C A L E S A N D O C C U P A T I O N A L A T T A I N M E N T M O D E L S

That different scales provide somewhat different interpretations also is evident from an analysis of sex differences in status attainment using the Canadian Mobility Study data. In keeping with previous analyses (Boyd, 1982; 1985), first job and current occupational statuses were regressed on respondent’s education and various indicators of family origins (number of siblings, occupation of father or head of household when respondent was age sixteen, mother’s education, father’s education) for men and women in the full-time paid 1973 labour force (Appendix A). A final regression analysis (Table IV) was performed in which regression coefficients not found to be statistically different for men or women were constrained to be the same (Gujarati, 1970; Specht and Warren, i975).’3


The regression analyses provide three types of information which reveal similarities and differences in male-female attainments according to the scale used: information on the process of occupational attainment; information on intergenerational mobility; and information on the conditioning impact of social origins for occupational mobility. Table v indicates that different indices produce slightly different representations of the male-female attainment processes. This is shown by reviewing the presence or absence of sex differences in the regression equations (Table v).

A researcher using the Blishen-McRoberts index to scale occupations would note that father’s occupation has less impact on the achievements of the daughter than on those of the son and might go on to discuss how plausible this seems in light of the sex-segregated occupational structure in which fathers would be less likely to facilitate female entry into their own occupation or know very much about the female occupational structure (see Boyd, 1982; 1985). A researcher using the Blishen-Carroll index would find that father‘s occupational status had the same effect on both the son’s and daughter’s occupational attainments, and would remain silent on this topic. Instead, sex differences in the effects of first job on current occupation combined with the sex differences in the effect of education on first job might lead to the conclusion that the occupational attainments of women are more influenced by immediately prior achievements than are those of men.‘4 A researcher using the total index to scale occupations would combine both interpretations concerning the influence of father’s occupation on occupational attainments and that of first job on current occupational attainment.

Data in Table v also indicate that the direction of sex differences in intergenerational mobility varies according to the index used to scale occupations. For all three indices, the gap between the means of father’s occupational status and the first job is larger for women than men. This gap reflects the sex-segregated occupational structure and the linkages between education and female-typed occupations (Gas- kill, 1982a; 1982b) which ensure that women are more likely to enter white-collar jobs, especially clerical jobs, compared to men who enter both blue and white-collar occupations (see Boyd, 1982; 1985). This pattern of a greater gap between origin and destination persists for women relative to men when means of the father’s status and respondent’s current occupational status are compared using the Blishen-McRoberts and Blishen-Carroll scale. However, when the total scale is used to represent occupations, women experience slightly less intergenerational mobility than men (Table v). Although the pattern is interesting, it should be noted that these reversals in male-female mobility are small when the BIishen- McRoberts and the total scale are compared.

Of course, the mean simply represents the average of an underlying distribution. Not everyone is average. Some persons come from lower than average socioeconomic backgrounds; others come from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. The third approach in assessing the substantive implications of the index-specific models asks if different indices alter conclusions about what it means to be a male or female from lower or higher socioeconomic origins. Data bearing on this question are provided by a modification of techniques used in a previous analysis of male-female Blishen-McRoberts status inequalities (Boyd, 1982). Table VI presents the first and current occupational statuses expected for males and females with identical educational and family background characteristics using the


index specific regression equations in Table v. In the first example, the offspring are from a family in which the father or head of the household held an occupation as a labourer in fabricating, repairing, installing, and repairing electrical and electronic equipment; in the second example, the offspring are from a family in which the father or head of household was employed as a secondary school teacher.*5

Regardless of the index used to scale occupations, the predicted first job scores are higher for women than for men from both lower and higher social origins. This higher first-job status for women is attributable to the greater influence of education on the first-job attainments of women in all the index-specific regression equations. As discussed earlier, it may reflect the location of female-labelled occupational training within the schooling system compared to many male- labelled occupations where apprentice or other on-the-job training mechanisms are employed (see Gaskill, 1982a; 1982b). Secretarial, teaching, and nursing occupations are examples of such schooling-occupational linkages.

However, the pattern of sex differences in current occupational status is not as clear cut as the pattern observed for first-job statuses. When the total index is used to scale occupations, women from both lower and higher social origins have current occupational statuses which are over two points lower than those of their male counterparts. When the Blishen-McRoberts index is employed, females and males from low social origins have similar occupational statuses, but women from higher social origins have a lower status than their male counterparts. When the Blishen- Carroll index is used to scale occupations, women from lower social origins have a current occupational status about two points lower than that of males whereas women from higher socioeconomic origins do over five points better than their male counterparts (Table VI, columns 3 and 7).

These patterns of relative (in)equality persist when raw differences are con- verted into standard deviation units (Table VI, columns 4 and 8), permitting comparison across scales. Consistent with earlier conclusions (Table VI), the data indicate that scaling occupations according to the total index produces results in which women from both low and high social origins are disadvantaged relative to men with respect to current occupational attainments. When the Blishen-Carroll index is employed, low social-origin women experience about the same magnitude (in standard deviation units) of disadvantage and high social origin women experience an advantage. Conversely, the differences in standard deviation units between the current occupational statuses of low social-origin women and men are negligi- ble when the Blishen-McRoberts scale is used but high social-origin women experience a disadvantage relative to men that is approximately of the magnitude observed when the total index is used.

C O N C L U S I O N S

This paper presents a third alternative to the Blishen-McRoberts and Blishen- Carroll indices by constructing a total index based on the educational and income characteristics of all incumbents of 498 occupations used in the 1971 Census calasification of occupations. The potential contribution of this total index for studies of sexual inequality is assessed initially by comparing the properties of the three measures. The comparisons reveal greater similarity between the total index and the Blishen-McRoberts index than between either index and the Blishen-

TABL

E V

ME

AN

S, S

TA

ND

AR

D D

EV

IAT

ION

S A

ND

ME

TR

IC C

OE

FFIC

IEN

TS

FOR

A M

OD

EL

OF

OC

CU

PAT

ION

AL

AT

TA

INM

EN

TS,

BY

TY

PE O

F SO

CIO

EC

ON

OM

IC S

TA

TU

S A

ND

SC

AL

E F

OR

FU

LL

TIM

E W

AG

E A

ND

SA

LA

RIE

D N

AT

NE

BO

RN

ME

N A

ND

WO

ME

N,

AG

E 2

5-64

IN

TH

E 1

973 C

AN

AD

IAN

LA

BO

UR

FO

RC

E

~

Fat h

e 1's

Mot

her'

s Fa

th er

rs

Resp

onde

nts

Firs

t C

urre

nt lo

b Siblings

Occ

upat

ions

Ed

ucat

ion

Educ

atio

n Ed

ucat

ion

lob

or In

terc

ept

Mea

ns

Mal

e Tota

l Sco

res

4.61

(3

.27)

4.

29

(3.0

9)

35.2

0 (1

2.08

) 36

.61

(12.

26)

7.60

(3

.55)

(3.5

7)

8.24

7.32

(3

.90)

7.

87

(3.9

2)

10.9

2 (3

.62)

11

.75

(2.7

3)

38.6

0 (1

3.31

) 42

.75

(12.

86)

43.9

9 (1

4.29

) 44

.62

(12.

92)

Fem

ale

Blis

hen-

McR

ober

ts

Mal

e 4.

61

(3.2

7)

4.29

(3

.09)

35.0

3 (1

3.06

) 36

.66

(13.

29)

7.60

(3

.55)

(3.5

7)

8.24

7.32

(3

.90)

7.

87

(3.9

2)

10.9

2 (3

.62)

11

.75

(2.7

3)

38.9

0 (1

4.08

) 45

.14

(12.

73)

4453

(1

4.93

) 47

.10

(12.

68)

Fem

ale

Blish

en-C

arro

ll'

Mal

e 4.

58

(3.2

7)

4.28

(3

.10)

37.0

9 (1

0.97

) 37

.84

(11.

03)

7.68

8.27

(3

.58)

(3.5

5)

7.43

(3

.95)

7.

91

(3.9

6)

11.0

4 (3

.68)

11

.81

(2.7

3)

39.6

2 (1

3.54

) 45

.35

(14.

24)

43.9

6 (1

4.54

) 46

.71

(14.

39)

Fem

ale

Met

ric

Coef

ficie

nts

Tota

l Sco

res

Firs

t Job

M

ale

Fem

ale

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e Fe

mal

e

-.11

1 -.1

11

,152

.0

59

.068

,0

68

,006

,0

06

2.05

7 2.

984

10.7

47

5.38

7

-.021

-.

021

,110

,0

41

,001

,0

01

,055

,0

55

1.21

9 1.

219

,453

,5

33

8.99

3 5.

624

TABL

E v

(Con

clud

ed)

~ ~

~~~~

~

~~

~ ~~

~~

~ ~

Cur

rent

lob

or I

nter

cept

Fa

ther

's M

othe

r's

Fath

er's

Resp

onde

nts

Firs

t Si

blin

gs

Occ

upat

ions

Ed

ucat

ion

Educ

atio

n Ed

ucat

ion

lob

Blis

hen-

McR

ober

ts

Firs

t Job

M

ale

-. 1

40

,173

,0

56

-.004

2.

177

-

9.33

2 Fe

mal

e - .140

.051

,0

56

- ,0

04

2.88

6 -

9.52

5 C

urre

nt O

ccup

atio

n M

ale

.015

,1

13

-.011

,0

62

1.22

3 ,4

70

8.51

4 Fe

mal

e -.

228

.025

-.0

11

.062

1.

223

,470

11

.191

Blis

hen-

Carr

oll'

Firs

t Job

M

ale

-.03

8 .l

o7

,069

,0

02

2.06

6 -

12.4

88

Fem

ale

-.03

8 ,1

07

.069

,0

02

3.27

4 -

2.22

6 C

urre

nt O

ccup

atio

n M

ale

,022

,0

68

-.03

1 .0

77

1.17

8 ,4

93

8.47

4 Fe

mal

e ,0

22

,068

-.

031

.077

1.

178

,602

2.

474

*Exc

lude

s tho

se 3

3 oc

cupa

tions

whi

ch h

ad n

o fe

mal

e inc

umbe

nts a

s of

1970

acco

rdin

g to

the

1971

Cen

sus.

TABL

E VI

PRE

DIC

TE

D O

CC

UPA

TIO

NA

L S

TA

TU

S O

UT

CO

ME

S FO

R M

EN

AN

D W

OM

EN

FR

OM

HIG

H A

ND

LO

W S

OC

IAL

OR

IGIN

S, U

SIN

G T

OT

AL

, B

LIS

HE

N-M

CR

OB

ER

TS

AN

D

BL

ISH

EN

-CA

RR

OL

L S

OC

IOE

CO

NO

MIC

IN

DIC

ES

Soci

al O

riR

ins

Low

: Lab

oure

r, F

abri

catio

n, E

lect

rica

l*

Hig

h: S

econ

dary

Sch

ool T

each

er'

Diff

eren

ce (F

emal

e-M

ale)

D

iffer

ence

(Fe

mal

e-M

ale)

Mal

e Fe

mal

e A

ctua

l Z

Scor

e M

ale

Fem

ale

Act

ual

Z S

core

Cha

ract

eris

tics

Fath

er's SES

Tota

l B

lishe

n-M

cRob

erts

B

lishe

n-C

arro

ll Fa

ther

's Ed

ucat

ion

Mot

her's

Edu

catio

n N

umbe

r of

Sibl

ings

R

espo

nden

t's E

duca

tion

Pred

icte

d Fi

rst l

ob SE

S~

To

tal

Blis

hen-

McR

ober

ts

Blis

hen-

Car

roll

Pred

icte

d C

urre

nt lo

b SE

S To

tal

Blis

hen-

McR

ober

ts

Blis

hen-

Car

roll

25.4

8 28

.71

25.3

3 3 4 6 9

25.4

8 28

.71

25.3

3 3 4 6 9

70.3

9 71

.77

80.1

8 15

15

1

16

70.3

9 71

.77

80.1

8 15

15

1

16

32.7

6 33

.26

33.8

5

33.3

7 36

.34

34.4

6

+.6

1 +3

.06

+.6

1

.04

.22

.04

55.3

6 57

.22

55.1

5

58.2

8 60

.00

64.2

2

i-2.

92

+2.7

8 +9

.07

+.20

+.

20

+.62

37.6

5 38

.63

37.7

3

35.4

7 38

.77

35.7

8

-2.1

8 +

.14

-1.9

5

-.I6

+ .

01

-.13

62.1

4 63

.87

60.6

8

59.9

0 61

.29

66.1

5

-2.2

4 -2

.58

i5.4

7

-.I6

-.1

8 f.

37

'CC

DO

=

853

8 fo

r oc

cupa

tions

in la

bour

ing

and

othe

r el

emen

tal

wor

k in

fab

ricat

ion,

rep

airin

g, i

nsta

lIing

, and

rep

airin

g el

ectri

cal a

nd el

ectron

ic eq

uipm

ent and C

CD

O =

273

3 fo

r sec

onda

ry sc

hool

teac

hers

. tF

irst j

ob s

core

s are

pre

dict

ed b

y us

ing

the

scal

e and

sex

spec

ific r

egre

ssio

n eq

uatio

ns in

Tab

le v

and

subs

titut

ing

the

valu

es fo

r bac

kgro

und

varia

bles

gi

ven

in p

anel

one

of

this

tab

le. C

urre

nt o

ccup

atio

nal S

ES s

core

s are

cal

cula

ted

in a

sim

ilar

fash

ion,

usi

ng t

he v

alue

s fo

r ba

ckgr

ound

var

iabl

es a

nd

preh

cted

firs

t job

stat

us.


Carroll index. However, the data reveal a stronger negative relationship between the percentage female and the rankings of occupations scaled by the total index compared to the relationship observed between the percentage female and the rankings produced by the male-derived Blishen-McRoberts index or the female- derived Blishen-Carroll index.

Research value of the total index is assessed further by index specific comparisons of sex differences in the occupational attainment process. Analyses reported here and elsewhere using the Blishen-McRoberts index (Boyd, 1982) show that women from high social origins are disadvantaged in their current occupational attainments in that they can be expected to have a lower occupational status than their male counterparts. Conversely, women from low social origins either are equal to (Table VI) or have a higher expected occupational status (Boyd, 1982) than low origin males. When the total scale is used, the magnitude of the male-female inequalities increases slightly. Compared to men, women have slightly less intergenerational mobility, and women from both low and high origins are disadvantaged in their current occupational attainments. Scaling occupations according to the Blishen-Carroll index dramatically changes these conclusions. Female intergenerational mobility is greater than that of men, and while women from low origins can be expected to have a current occupational status below that of men, women of high socioeconomic origins can be expected to obtain much higher occupational statuses (Table VI). These findings indicate that the use of the Blishen- Carroll index produces conclusions about male-female differences in occupational attainment which contrast with those obtained when total and Blishen-McRoberts indices are employed. But, despite the greater similarity of results when the total and Blishen-McRoberts scales are used, modest differences also exist.

These results invite considerations of which index is preferred when converting occupations into a socioeconomic status scale. For two reasons it appears that the total index is the preferred socioeconomic scale for use in further studies of sex differences in occupational attainment. First, the total index is based on the education and income characteristics of all incumbents in a given occupation. This avoids assigning scores to female-dominated occupations on the basis of male incumbents (the Blishen-McRoberts index) and vice-versa (the Blishen-Carroll index). The second reason is that the scaling of occupations into total scores produces results which are the most consistent with the argument that women in the labour force are disadvantaged relative to men (see Huber, 1980). Data on the net or expected occupational statuses of men and women in the labour force (Tables IV and VI) and on intergenerational mobility (Table v) indicate that the total index slightly enhances the level of male-female disparity in socioeconomic status compared to other indices.

Given the similarity of construction of socioeconomic indices, such findings based on the 1971 Census have implications for future indices and future studies of sexual inequality. In particular, this study indicates the utility of producing a total index compared to an index specific to men or to women only. The empirical analyses presented all point to the slightly greater sensitivity of the total index to male-female status inequalities, and they suggest that a socioeconomic index derived from the characteristics of all members of an occupation is the preferred index for occupational attainment studies of sexual inequality.

APP

EN

DE

X A

ME

TR

IC A

ND

ST

AN

DA

RD

IZE

D C

OE

FFIC

IEN

TS

FOR

A M

OD

EL

OF

OC

CU

PAT

ION

AL

AT

TA

INM

EN

T U

SIN

G B

LIS

HE

N-M

CR

OB

ER

TS

AN

D T

OT

AL

SO

CIO

EC

ON

OM

IC I

ND

ICE

S FO

R F

ULL

T

IME

, WA

GE

AN

D S

AL

AR

IED

NA

TIV

E B

OR

N M

EN

AN

D W

OM

EN

, A

GE

25-6

4 IN

TH

E 1

973 C

AN

AD

IAN

LA

BO

UR

FO

RC

E

Fat h

er's

M

othe

r's

Fath

er's

Resp

onde

nt's

Fi

rst

Sibl

ings

O

ccup

atio

n Ed

ucat

ion

Educ

atio

n Ed

ucat

ion

lob

Met

ric C

oeff

icie

nts

Tota

l Sco

res

Firs

t lob

M

ale

Inte

rcep

ts

10.4

81

6.25

4'

- ,0

85

(.W

-.I9

5 (.0

69)

,154

.050

* (.0

19)

(.012

) ,0

90

(. 048

) ,0

17

(.072

)

-.O

M

(. 04

6)

.065

(.0

71)

2.06

4 (.

040)

2.

965'

(.

OH

) Fe

mal

e

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e 8.

730

6.50

5

.010

(.

040)

-.

124

(.062

)

.I09

(.0

12)

,045

* (.0

17)

,005

(.0

47)

(.065

) -.0

17

.073

(.0

45)

-.00

1 (.0

63)

1.22

0 (.0

46)

1.22

1 (.

091)

,453

(.0

12)

.533

* (.0

19)

Fem

ale

Blis

hen-

McR

ober

ts

Mal

e Firs

t lob

,1

74

,045

* (.0

11)

(.018

)

.082

( .0

50)

-.01

1 (.

073)

9.03

6

10.4

64

-.I1

1 [ ,0

42)

- ,2

35

(. 070

)

- ,0

23

(.048

) ,0

40

(.07

1)

2.18

2 (.

042)

2.

876'

(.0

82)

Fem

ale

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e 8.

612

10.6

00

,016

(.0

41)

-.22

8*

(. 064

)

,113

.029

' [.0

16)

(.011

) .0

03

(.048

)

(.066

) - .0

51

,075

[. 0

46)

,021

(. 0

65)

1.22

8 (.

048)

1.

190

(.092

)

,460

(.0

12)

,502

(.

019)

Fe

mal

e

APP

EN

DIX

A

(con

tinu

ed)

Fath

er's

Mot

her'

s Fa

ther

's Re

spon

dent

's

Firs

t Si

blin

gs

Occ

upat

ion

Educ

atio

n Ed

ucat

ion

Educ

atio

n lo

b

Blis

hen-

Carr

oll

Mal

e Firs

t Job

-.0

23

(.046

) -.0

94

(.080

)

,118

(.0

14)

,077

(.

024)

.083

(.

055)

.0

27

(.085

)

-.006

(.

052)

,0

28)

( ,08

1)

2.05

9 [.

045)

* 3.

294%

( ,0

94)

12.0

53

Fem

ale

3.51

2'

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e ,0

27

(.O&)

-.0

04

(. 067

)

,077

(.0

14)

,046

( .0

20)

- ,0

65

(.052

) ,0

42

(.071

)

,117

(.

050)

-.0

12

(. 068

)

1.15

1 (.

050)

1.

296

(. 099

)

,494

8.

339

.591

* 2.

606'

(.0

12)

(.01

8)

Fem

ale

Stan

dard

Coe

ffic

ient

s To

tal S

core

s Fi

rst J

ob

Mal

e Fe

mal

e

R sq

uare

- ,0

21

-.047

,1

40

.048

,0

24

,005

-.0

05

,020

,5

62

,630

,4

17

.448

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e Fe

mal

e

Blis

hen-

McR

ober

ts

Mal

e Fe

mal

e

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e Fe

mal

e

Firs

t lob

,422

.5

31

,510

,5

59

.002

-.0

30

,092

.0

43

.001

- ,0

05

,020

,0

00

.309

,2

58

-.026

-.0

57

,162

.0

47

,021

-.0

03

- ,0

06

,012

,5

61

.617

,4

34

.427

.004

-.0

56

.099

,0

31

I001

-.0

15

,020

,0

06

.298

,2

56

,434

.5

04

.522

,5

22

APP

EN

DIX

A (

Con

clud

ed)

Fath

er’s

M

othe

r’s

Fath

er’s

R

espo

nden

t’s

Firs

t S

ibfi

n~s

Occ

upat

ion

Educ

atio

n Ed

ucat

ion

Educ

atio

n lo

b

Blis

hen-

Car

roll

Mal

e - ,0

06

.095

,0

22

-

Fem

ale

-.021

,0

59

,007

Firs

t lob

,0

02

,560

.0

08

.631

,3

70

.436

Cur

rent

Occ

upat

ion

Mal

e ,0

06

,058

-.

016

.032

,2

91

,461

.4

96

Fem

ale

- ,0

01

,036

,0

11

- ,0

03

.246

,5

85

,611

*Sig

nific

antly

diff

eren

t fro

m th

e co

rres

pond

ing

mal

e m

etri

c at

the

05 le

vel.

475 S O C I O E C O N O M I C I N D I C E S A N D SEXUAL INEQUALITY

NOTES

I An alternative possibility is to use Blishen-McRoberts scores to examine the occupational attainments of men and the Blishen-Carroll scores to measure the occupational attainments of females. One rationale for this approach argues that the two indices are more accurate depictions of the socioeconomic statuses of occupations for men and for women; a second rationale suggests that sex specific hierarchies of socioeconomic standing exist and are captured by the two scales (see Boyd and McRoberts, 1982; McRoberts and Boyd, 1982). While the use of the two scales is favoured by some students of stratification, the debate over two versus one scales is not resolved. This paper takes the position that one scale is preferred, largely because using two scales seems to lose sight of the major objective of socioeconomic indices: the production of a hierarchy of occupations, not a hierarchy uniquely specific to the characteristics of its incumbents. Results using two scales are presented in McRoberts and Boyd (1982).

z Several readers of this paper have questioned the production of a total 1971 index rather than a 1981 index. Two reasons exist for the focus on the 1971 index. First, Professors Bernard Blishen (York) and William Carroll (University of British Col- umbia) had begun collaborating on producing a 1981 scale at the time this investiga- tion was launched and funded. Second, part of the objective was to assess the consequences for status attainment research. The Canadian Mobility Study fielded in 1973 already was a major source of such research using the 1971 scale (Boyd et al., 1985). A 1971 total index provided continuity with this data set; indeed the use of a 1981 index to scale 1973 occupations might be less preferred than the continued use of 1971 based indices. Given the past 1961 and 1971 socioeconomic indexes (Blishen and McRoberts, 1976), the 1981 index probably will produce rankings similar to the 1971 index, and regression results using a 1981 index (if constructed in the same way as the 1971 index) also should be similar. There are also alternative ways to calculate socioeconomic scores of occupations. The intent of this research is not to preclude such alternative approaches but rather to show the implications of using a total scale compared to using alternative scales which previously have been extensively used in social science research.

3 The rankings of occupations in such studies is determined largely by the economic properties of the occupations involved (see Reiss, 1961) and the term 'prestige' may be a misnomer to the extent that the properties of authority and deference do not appear to be the most important criteria used in ranking occupations in these sorts of studies. Considerable debate however, persists over what the term 'prestige' represents (see Bielby, 1981: 15-16). In addition, a strong ongoing debate exists over the degree of consensus or disensus among subgroups with respect to occupational rankings and whether disensus reflects subgroup error or differential perceptions of reality (for recent articles see Balkwell, Bates and Garbin, 1982; Guppy, 1982; Guppy and Goyder, 1984; Hodge, Kraus, and Schild, 1982; Powell and Jacobs, 1983). A resolution of this debate has important implications for future research because socioeconomic scales using prestige assume a strong consensus by evaluators with respect to the relative evaluations of different groups.

4 The terminology is confusing. The data used in constructing the Blishen-McRoberts and Blishen-Carroll indices, as well as the total index discussed in this paper, are derived from unpublished tabulations produced from the 1971 Census of Population

.


and using the 1971 Census occupational classification. However, because the census income questions refer to 1970, the reference population is the 1970 labour force.

5 Included in these eighty-five occupational categories are six in which there are no female incumbents in the 1970 labour force. A second prediction equation, calculated using only those seventy-nine occupational categories in which there are both male and female incumbents, was not dramatically different from that presented in Table I (Y = 14.5139 + .2485 Income + .4047 Education with R. square of .8404).

6 All of the data presented in Table I are based on unpublished Statistics Canada cross- tabulations originally released to Bernard Blishen, who in turn supplied them to this project. As reported in Boyd (1983) minor differences exist between the prediction equations produced in Table I and those reported in Blishen and McRoberts (1976) and Blishen and Carroll (1978).

compiled from 465 census occupations. Restricting the analysis to 465 occupations for all indices does not change the conclusions reported in the text. That is, this truncation in the number of occupations is not responsible for the distributional differences between the Blishen-Carroll and the total and Blishen-McRoberts indices.

8 A similar table using the Pineo-Porter-McRoberts (1977) classification is available from the author. The overall conclusions using this classification are very similar to those based on Table III. Out of a fifteen-category classification (farmers are collapsed with farm labourers), Categories 6,7 , and 12 have a negative association between the percentage female and rank of the occupation as determined respectively by the Blishen-McRoberts, Blishen-Carroll and total scores. Readers should note that the rank order correlation for any given category is influenced by the number of occupations in that category, and comparisons should not be made down the columns in Table III without adjusting for attenuation using the Spearman-Brown formula (Guildford, 1954: 354). Such adjustments are not necessary if comparisons are made across indices by row, a strategy employed in the text.

9 The tendency of female-dominated occupations in the managerial category to have greater disparities in male-female wages than non-dominated categories is evident upon inspection of the data for the thirty-one occupational titles. It is also confirmed by a simple comparison of the ratio of male-female income levels. Within the managerial category, 37 per cent of the women and 84 per cent of the men earn $6,500 or more in 1970, a ratio of .++. However for the eight titles which had more than 35 per cent women, 24 per cent of the women and 82 per cent of the men had incomes of $6500 or more. This finding (and the ratio of .29 for female-male income) indicates the tendency of these ‘female dominated’ occupations to have a greater male-female income gap than is characteristic of the entire managerial and administrative category.

10 Multiple classification analysis (Andrews, Morgan, and Sonquist, 1971) is used in which the effects of education are constrained to be the same for both men and women. Subsequent tables explore a sex specific analysis using education and social origin variables.

11 The reference population for this analysis is not identical to the one reported in Boyd (1982; 1985) although there exists a 94 and 84 per cent overlap for males and females respectively. The slippage occurs because the original data, released to the Canadian Mobility Study, had a variable which labelled workers as full or part-time on the basis of additional information available from the Labour Force Survey portion of the ques-

7 The discerning reader will note that the statistics for the Blishen-Carroll index are


tionnaire. The data analyzed in this paper were obtained much later from Statistics Canada and from a database which did not have the constructed variable. As a result, full-time paid workers in this paper refer to those workers who are self-employed or salaried and who have either worked thirty-five hours of more in the reference week or who indicated when answering the question on current occupation that they usually worked thirty-five hours or more a week.

1 2 This is actually a Z score transformation of the difference in the means for males and females. As such, it also may be interpreted as the difference expressed in standard deviation units.

13 The dummy variable analysis using the Blishen-McRoberts index did not confirm a statistically significant difference in the intercepts of the male and female regression equations for first and current occupation (Appendix A). However, the effect of father’s socioeconomic status on first job and current occupational status is statistically different for men and women as is the effect of education on first job. Under such circumstances, Allison (1977) argues that intercept differences (or main effects) should be preserved. When sex differences in intercepts are retained for Blishen-McRoberts equation in which other insignificant effects are constrained to be the same (Table v), the sex differences in intercepts for current occupation in fact become statistically significant.

14 Another interpretation, supported by the standardized coefficients in Appendix A, is that current occupational status is more associated with first job status for women than men. Such higher association is consistent with the female sex typing of occupations, the related sex segregated occupational structure, and the reduced career mobility of women compared to men.

high) on the socioeconomic scales, but also because both had a mixed sex composition. According to the 1971 Census (Catalogue 94-717, Table z), 45 per cent of workers in the labouring and electronic work occupational title (CCDO = 8538) were female as were 45 per cent of the labour force in the secondary school teacher category. Other calculations can be done with other occupational titles as the reference groups. The magnitude of differences will vary but the pattern of different results by the index employed generally remains consistent.

15 These occupations were chosen not only because of their relative location (low and

REFERENCES

Allison, Paul 1977 ’Testing for Interaction in Multiple Regression. ‘ American Journal of Sociology 83

Andrews, Frank, James Morgan and John Sonquist 1971 Multiple Classification Analysis. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research. The

Balkwell, James W., Frederick L. Bates, Albeno P. Garbin 1982 ’Does the Degree of Consensus on Occupational Status Evaluations Differ by

Bielby, William T. 1981 ‘Models of Status Attainment.’ Pp. 3-26 in Donald Treiman and Robert V. Robert-

(July): 144-53

University of Michigan

Socioeconomic Stratum: Response to Guppy. ’ Social Forces 60 (June): 1183-89


son (eds.), Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 27 (vol. I). Greenwich Connecticut: JAI Press

Blau, Peter and Otis Dudley Duncan 1967 The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley Blishen, Bernard R. 1958 ’The Construction and Use of an Occupational Class Scale.’ Canadian Journal of

1967 ‘A Socioeconomic Index for Occupations in Canada. ‘ Canadian Review of Sociology

Blishen, Bernard R. and William K. Carroll 1978 ‘Sex Differences in a Socioeconomic Index for Occupations in Canada.’ Canadian

Blishen, Bernard R. and Hugh A. McRoberts 1976 ‘A Revised Socioeconomic Index for Occupations in Canada.’ Canadian Review of

Boyd, Monica 1982 ’Sex Differences in the Canadian Occupatimal Attainment Process.’ Canadian

Review of Anthropology and Sociology 19(1): 1-28 1983 Notes on the Total Index Project. Unpublished paper. Ottawa: Carleton University,

Department of Sociology and Anthropology 1985 ‘Education and Occupational Attainment of Native Born Men and Women.’ Chapter

7 in Monica Boyd et al. Ascription and Achievement. Ottawa: Carleton Library Series

Economics and Political Science 24: 519-31

and Anthropology 4: 41-53

Review of Sociology and Anthropology 15: 352-71

Sociology and Anthropology 13(1): 71-9

Boyd, Monica and Hugh A. McRoberts 1982 ‘Women, Men and Socioeconomic Indices: An Assessment.’ Pp. 129-60 in Mary

Powers (en.), Measures of Socioeconomic Status: Current Issues. Colorado: West- view Press

Boyd, Monica, John Goyder, Frank Jones, Hugh A. McRoberts, Peter C. Pineo, and John Porter

1985 Ascription and Achievement: Studies in Mobility and Status Attainment in Canada. Ottawa: Carleton Library Series

Cooney, Rosemary Santana, Alice Sokolove Clague, and Joseph J. Salvo 1982 ‘Status Attainment of Young White Men and Women: Two Socioeconomic Mea-

sures.‘ Pp. 161-99 in Mary G. Powers (ed.), Measures of Socioeconomic Status: Current Issues. Colorado: Westview Press

Duncan, Otis Dudley 1961a ‘A Socioeconomic Index for all Occupations.’ Pp. 109-38 in Albert J. Reiss Jr.

1961b ’Properties and Characteristics of the Socioeconomic Index.’ Pp. 139-61 in Albert J.

Featherman, David L. and Robert M. Hauser 1976 ’Sexual Inequalities and Socioeconomic Achievement in the United States, 1962-

1973 .’ American Sociological Review 41: 462-83 1978 Opportunity and Change. New York: Academic Press Featherman, David L. and Gillian Stevens 1982 ‘A Revised Socioeconomic Index of Occupational Status: Applications in the Analy-

sis of Sex Differences in Attainments.’ Pp. 83-128 in Mary Powers (ed.), Measures of Socioeconomic Status: Current Issues. Colorado: Westview Press

(ed.), Occupations and Social Status. New York: The Free Press

Reiss, Jr. (ed.), Occupations and Social Status. New York: The Free Press


Gaskill, Jane 1982a ’Education and Job Opportunities for Women: Patterns of Enrolment and Eco-

nomic Returns.’ Pp. 257-306 in Naomi Hersom and Dorothy E. Smith (eds.), Women and the Canadian Labour Force. Ottawa: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. (Minister of Supply and Services, Cat. No. CR22-8/1981E).

Issues.’ Atlantis 8 (Spring): 11-26 1982b ‘Perceptions of Skill and the Work of Women: Some Historical and Political

Guilford, J. P. 1954 Psychometric Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill Company Gujarati, Damodar 1970 ’Use of Dummy Variables in Testing for Equality Between Sets of Coefficients in

Two or More Regressions: A Note.’ The American Statistician 24 (February): 50-2 Guppy, L. Neil 1982 ‘On Intersubjectivity and Collective Conscience in Occupational Prestige Research. ’

Guppy, Neil and John C. Goyder 1984 ‘Consensus on Occupational Prestige: A Reassessment of the Evidence. ‘ Social

Forces 62 (March): 709-25 Hodge, Robert, Vered Kraus, and E. 0. Schild 1982 ‘Consensus in Occupational Status Ratings: Response to Guppy. ‘ Social Forces 60

Huber, Joan 1980 ‘Ransacking Mobility Tables.’ Contemporary Sociology 9 (January) : 5-8 Jacobs, Jerry 1981 On Comparing the Social Standing of Men and Women. Manuscript. Department of

Marini, Margaret Mooney 1980 ’Sex Differences in the Process of Occupational Attainment: A Closer Look.’ Social

McClendon, Meker J. 1976 ’The Occupational Attainment Processes of Males and Females.’ American Socio-

McRoberts, Hugh A. and Monica Boyd 1982 Measure for Measure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American

Pinro, Peter C. and John Porter 1967 ’Occupational Prestige in Canada.’ Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology

Pineo, Peter C., John Porter, and Hugh A. McRoberts 1977 ‘The 1971 Census and the Socioeconomic Classification of Occupations.’ Canadian

Powell, Brian and Jerry A. Jacobs 1983 ‘Sex and Consensus in Occupational Prestige Ratings.’ Sociology and Social Re-

search 67 (July): 392-404 Powers, Mary G. and Joan J. Holmberg 1978 ‘Occupational Status Scores: Changes Introduced by the Inclusion of Women. ’

Demography 15 (May): 183-204 1982 ’Occupational Status Scores: Changes Introduced by the Inclusion of Women. ’ Pp.

Social Forces 60 (June): 1178-82

(June): 1190-6

Sociology, Harvard University

Science Research 9 (December): 307-61

logical Review 41: 52-64

Sociological Association, San Francisco

4: 24-40

Review of Sociology and Anthropology 14: 91-102


55-82 in Mary Powers (ed.), Measures of Socioeconomic Status: Current Issues. Colorado. Westview Press

Reiss, Albert Jr. (ed.) 1961 Occupations and Social Status. New York: The Free Press Sewell, William H., Robert M. Hauser, and Wendy C. Wolf 1980 ’Sex, Schooling and Occupational Status.’ American Journal of Sociology 86

Specht, David A. and Robert Warren 1975 ‘Comparing Causal Models.’ Pp. 46-84 in David Heise (ed.), Sociological Methodol-

Treas, Judith and Andres Tyree 1979 ’Prestige Versus Socioeconomic Status in the Attainment Processes of American

Treiman, Donald and Kermit Terrell 1975 ‘Sex and the Process of Status Attainment: A Comparison of Working Men and

(November): 555-83

ogy, 1976. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Men and Women.’ Social Science Research 8: 201-21

Women.’ American Sociological Review 40: 174-200

Socioeconomic indices and sexual inequality: a tale of scales

Documents

Transcript of Socioeconomic indices and sexual inequality: a tale of scales