Corrigendum to “College as equalizer? Testing the selectivity hypothesis” [Soc. Sci. Res. 80 (2019) 216–229]
Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › Research › peer-review
Standard
Corrigendum to “College as equalizer? Testing the selectivity hypothesis” [Soc. Sci. Res. 80 (2019) 216–229]. / Karlson, Kristian Bernt.
In: Social Science Research, Vol. 91, 102458, 09.2020.Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Corrigendum to “College as equalizer? Testing the selectivity hypothesis” [Soc. Sci. Res. 80 (2019) 216–229]
AU - Karlson, Kristian Bernt
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - The author regrets that five estimates were wrongly reported in Table 4 in the published manuscript. The correct estimates are almost identical to the published ones. They are also all statistically insignificant as is the case for the published ones. Thus the correct estimates do not affect any of the conclusions reported in the study. The mistake is most likely the result of the author incorrectly updating the table's entries when revising the manuscript. The incorrect estimates concern the following entries in Table 4 in the manuscript: (1) Men, College degree holders, uncorrected; (2) Men, College degree holders, IPW-corrected; (3) Women, College degree holders, uncorrected; (4) Women, College degree holders, IPW-corrected; and (5) Women, College Degree Holders wo/Advanced Degree, Uncorrected. For the latter estimate, the standard error (and not the point estimate) is incorrectly reported. The correct point estimates, with correct standard errors in parenthesis, are: (1) Men, College degree holders, uncorrected: 0.065 (0.049)(2) Men, College degree holders, IPW-corrected: 0.059 (0.095)(3) Women, College degree holders, uncorrected: 0.003 (0.051)(4) Women, College degree holders, IPW-corrected: 0.013 (0.077)(5) Women, College Degree Holders wo/Advanced Degree, Uncorrected: (0.064)The author would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused.
AB - The author regrets that five estimates were wrongly reported in Table 4 in the published manuscript. The correct estimates are almost identical to the published ones. They are also all statistically insignificant as is the case for the published ones. Thus the correct estimates do not affect any of the conclusions reported in the study. The mistake is most likely the result of the author incorrectly updating the table's entries when revising the manuscript. The incorrect estimates concern the following entries in Table 4 in the manuscript: (1) Men, College degree holders, uncorrected; (2) Men, College degree holders, IPW-corrected; (3) Women, College degree holders, uncorrected; (4) Women, College degree holders, IPW-corrected; and (5) Women, College Degree Holders wo/Advanced Degree, Uncorrected. For the latter estimate, the standard error (and not the point estimate) is incorrectly reported. The correct point estimates, with correct standard errors in parenthesis, are: (1) Men, College degree holders, uncorrected: 0.065 (0.049)(2) Men, College degree holders, IPW-corrected: 0.059 (0.095)(3) Women, College degree holders, uncorrected: 0.003 (0.051)(4) Women, College degree holders, IPW-corrected: 0.013 (0.077)(5) Women, College Degree Holders wo/Advanced Degree, Uncorrected: (0.064)The author would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused.
U2 - 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102458
DO - 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102458
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 32933653
AN - SCOPUS:85089175826
VL - 91
JO - Social Science Research
JF - Social Science Research
SN - 0049-089X
M1 - 102458
ER -
ID: 247407500