Table 1.
Attractiveness and Log Earnings of Men
| Variables | (1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1975 Earnings | 1992 Earnings | 1975 Earnings | 1992 Earnings | |
| Beauty (standardized) | 0.020*** (0.006) |
0.033*** (0.011) |
0.020*** (0.006) |
0.028*** (0.010) |
| IQ score (SD) | 0.106*** (0.006) |
0.172*** (0.010) |
0.049*** (0.006) |
0.070*** (0.011) |
| Education | ||||
| Some college | 0.076*** (0.020) |
0.201*** (0.031) |
||
| B.A. degree | 0.256*** (0.023) |
0.476*** (0.037) |
||
| M.A. and beyond | 0.306*** (0.028) |
0.596*** (0.044) |
||
| Vocational training ’75 | 0.049*** (0.014) |
0.096*** (0.025) |
||
| Experience | 0.018*** (0.005) |
−0.016 (0.012) |
||
| Experience2 | −0.000* (0.000) |
0.001** (0.000) |
||
| Tenure | 0.006*** (0.001) |
0.009*** (0.001) |
||
| Marital status | 0.130*** (0.017) |
0.176*** (0.028) |
||
| Resides outside Wisconsin | 0.154*** (0.014) |
0.197*** (0.024) |
||
| Father’s education | −0.003 (0.002) |
0.002 (0.004) |
||
| Mother’s education | 0.003 (0.002) |
0.007* (0.004) |
||
| Father executive | 0.030 (0.020) |
0.017 (0.035) |
||
| Family income ’57 | 0.022** (0.010) |
0.047*** (0.017) |
||
| Farm background | −0.001 (0.016) |
0.028 (0.028) |
||
| Medium hometown population | 0.020 (0.015) |
0.064** (0.027) |
||
| Large hometown population | 0.089*** (0.022) |
0.047 (0.038) |
||
| Number of siblings | 0.006** (0.002) |
0.008* (0.004) |
||
| Lived with both parents | −0.010 (0.023) |
−0.014 (0.040) |
||
| Mother employed | 0.011 (0.012) |
−0.000 (0.021) |
||
| High school class size | 0.000* (0.000) |
−0.000 (0.000) |
||
| Military service | 0.037*** (0.013) |
0.063*** (0.022) |
||
| Population at place of residence | −0.001 (0.001) |
0.002** (0.001) |
||
| Union | −0.040*** (0.013) |
−0.036 (0.030) |
||
| Constant | 10.619*** (0.006) |
10.636*** (0.010) |
9.975*** (0.089) |
9.635*** (0.201) |
| Observations | 2,703 | 2,220 | 2,445 | 1,978 |
| R2 | 0.120 | 0.113 | 0.308 | 0.358 |
Cell entries are OLS coefficient estimates (standard errors in parentheses). Significant at *10%, **5%, ***1%. The regressions exclude observations in the top and bottom 2% of the earnings distribution, minorities, cases missing multiple attractiveness scores, and the self-employed (included in this category are individuals who reported a wage but derived a majority of their income from their business and were self-employed in the other wave of the survey). Regressions in columns 3 and 4 also include industry dummies.