Showing papers on "Vertical mobility published in 1984"
TL;DR: In this article, the authors reanalyzes 3-stratum intergenerational mobility classifications, assembled by Hazelrigg and Garnier for men in 16 countries in the 1960s and 1970s, and find substantial similarity in mobility and immobility across countries, but the exogenous variables do explain systematic differences among countries.
Abstract: This paper reanalyzes 3-stratum intergenerational mobility classifications, assembled by Hazelrigg and Garnier for men in 16 countries in the 1960s and 1970s. Log-linear and log-multiplicative models are used to compare mobility regimes and to estimate effects of industrialization, educational enrollment, social democracy, and income inequality on immobility and other parameters of the mobility process. Several models of mobility fit the data equally well, so criteria of plausibility and parsimony are applied to choose one model of stratum-specific immobility and another model of vertical mobility with uniform immobility. We find substantial similarity in mobility and immobility across countries, but the exogenous variables do explain systematic differences among countries. Cross-national variations are complex because most of the exogenous variables have different effects on different parameters of the mobility regime. Relative to other factors, industrialization and education have weaker effects on mobility regimes than has usually been supposed.
242 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1984
TL;DR: The institutions of managed meritelection as discussed by the authors have been criticised for not being fair in the selection of merite voters in the UK and the United States, as well as for their role in tax collection.
Abstract: Acknowledgements Introduction 1. Scotland: a meritelective system? 2. Comparison of Scotland with England and Wales 3. Comparison of Scotland with the United States 4. IQ + effort = merit 5. The institutions of managed meritelection 6. Was selection carried out fairly? 7. Meanings of key terms 8. Does deprivation affect life chances? 9. Market situation 10. Intelligence and occupational mobility 11. Intelligence and vertical mobility 12. Scottish society 13. Understanding other people's norms 14. Merit or desert? Notes References Index.
47 citations
TL;DR: This article analyzed English, French, and Swedish mobility tables from the early 1970s that were previously analyzed by Enkson, Gold thorpe & Portocarero and by Hope and found that the vertical dimension of mobility is stronger and more autonomous than one would conclude from earlier analyses.
Abstract: This paper presents new findings about English, French, and Swedish mobility tables from the early 1970s that were previously analyzed by Enkson, Gold thorpe & Portocarero and by Hope The former analysis focused on nonvertical aspects of mobility, while the latter gave priority to vertical mobility The reanalysis shows that the vertical dimension of mobility is stronger and more autonomous than one would conclude from earlier analyses At the same time, it is necessary to introduce several parameters for class inheritance in order to fit the data, and these parameters account for more of the association between class origins and destinations than does the vertical aspect of class mobility Educational attainment accounts for part of the vertical aspect of mobility, but income and occupational prestige do not help to explain it The new models provide direct evidence of a gradient in immobility across the three nations The present findings suggest complementarities between vertical and nonvertical models
37 citations