Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Courses, Instructors and - - PDF document

▶
table 1 descriptive statistics courses instructors and
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Courses, Instructors and - - PDF document

Dec 01, 2023 363 likes •492 views

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Courses, Instructors and Evaluations All Lower Division Upper Division Variable Course evaluation 4.022 4.060 3.993 (0.525) (0.563) (0.493) Instructor evaluation 4.217 4.243 4.196 (0.540) (0.609)

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Courses, Instructors and Evaluations

All Lower Division Upper Division Variable Course evaluation 4.022 4.060 3.993 (0.525) (0.563) (0.493) Instructor evaluation 4.217 4.243 4.196 (0.540) (0.609) (0.481) Number of students 55.18 76.50 44.24 (75.07) (109.29) (45.54) Percent evaluating 74.43 73.52 74.89 Female 0.359 0.300 0.405 Minority 0.099 0.110 0.090 Non-native English 0.037 0.007 0.060 Tenure track 0.851 0.828 0.869 Lower division 0.339

  • One credit

0.029

  • Number of courses

463 157 306 Number of faculty 94 42 79 __________________________________________________________________ NOTE: Means with standard deviations in parentheses. All statistics except for those describing the number of students, the percent evaluating the instructor and the lower- upper division distinction are weighted by the number of students completing the course evaluation forms.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Table 2. Beauty Evaluations, Individual and Composite Average Std. Dev. Standardized: Minimum Maximum Individual Ratings: Male, Upper Division—1 4.43 2.18

  • 1.57

2.10 Male, Upper Division—2 4.87 1.65

  • 2.34

2.50 Female, Upper Division—1 5.18 2.05

  • 2.03

1.84 Female, Upper Division—2 5.39 2.10

  • 2.10

2.20 Male, Lower Division 3.53 1.70

  • 1.49

2.04 Female, Lower Division 4.14 1.88

  • 1.67

2.05 Composite Standardized Rating: 0.83

  • 1.54

1.88

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Table 3. Weighted Least-Squares Estimates of the Determinants of Class Ratings All Males Females Lower Upper Division Division Variable Composite 0.275 0.384 0.128 0.359 0.166

  • stdzd. beauty

(0.059) (0.076) (0.064) (0.092) (0.061) Female

  • 0.239
  • ------- -0.345
  • 0.093

(0.085) (0.133) (0.104) Minority

  • 0.249

0.060

  • 0.260 -0.288
  • 0.231

(0.112) (0.101) (0.139) (0.156) (0.107) Non-native English

  • 0.253
  • 0.427
  • 0.262 -0.374
  • 0.286

(0.134) (0.143) (0.151) (0.141) (0.131) Tenure track

  • 0.136
  • 0.056
  • 0.041 -0.187

0.005 (0.094) (0.089) (0.133) (0.141) (0.119) Lower division

  • 0.046

0.005

  • 0.228 ---------
  • (0.111)

(0.129) (0.164) One-credit course 0.687 0.768 0.517 0.792

  • (0.166)

(0.119) (0.232) (0.101) R2 .279 .359 .162 .510 .126 N courses 463 268 195 157 306 N faculty 94 54 40 42 79 ____________________________________ NOTE: Robust standard errors in parentheses here and in Table 4.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Table 4. Alternative Estimates of the Relation Between Beauty and Class Ratings (lower- and upper-division classes) Variable Composite Formal Black Composite stdzd. beauty:

  • stdzd. beauty

Dress and white Above Below mean mean

  • 1. Photo bias

0.229 0.243 (dress) (0.047) (0.088) (N=463)

  • 2. Photo bias

0.267 0.088 (picture quality) (0.063) (0.106) (N=463)

  • 3. Photo bias

0.236 (department) (0.049) (N = 414)

  • 4. Asymmetric

0.237 - 0.318 beauty effect (0.096) (0.133) (N=463)

  • 5. Course fixed

0.177 effects (0.107) (N = 157) _______________ _____________________ NOTE: The equations reported in Rows 1-4 also include all the variables included in the basic equation in Column 1 of Table 3. The equation reported in Row 5 excludes variables in the vector Z.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Table 1. Fractions of Candidates by Type, and Their Winning Chances and Shares of Citations, 92 Contested AEA Elections 1959-2004 (N = 368)a (1) (2) (3) Characteristic Share of Candidates Win Probabilityb Share of CitationsC Female .125 .739 .102 (.065) (.011) Honorable .125 .696 .196 (.069) (.023) Top 5 School .370 .574 .320 (.043) (.016) Nonacademic .092 .471 .151 (.087) (.025) African-American .046 .412 .087 (.123) (.029) Theory/Econometrics .209 .416 .305 (.057) (.020) Future Nobelist .103 .605 .414 (.080) (.029) Share of Citations: Top Quartile .620 .495 (.051) (.012) 2nd Quartile .533 .283 (.052) (.004) 3rd Quartile .456 .166 (.052) (.003) Bottom Quartile .391 .057 (.051) (.003)

aStandard errors of means in parentheses. bIf candidates in the group had the same chance of electoral victory as the average candidate, each mean in this column

would be .5.

cIf candidates in the group had the same scholarly impact as the average candidate, each mean in the upper part of this

column would be .25.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Table 2. Conditional Multinomial Logit (CML) and Multinomial Multiple Response (MMR) Estimates of the Determinants of Electoral Victory, AEA Electionsa (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 1959-2004 1975-2004 Estimator: CML MMR CML MMR CML MMR Characteristic Female 1.732 1.699 1.359 1.349 2.270 1.744 3.674 2.622 (.377) (.380) (.306) (.322) (.472) (.360) (.987) (.604) Share of Citations 3.526 3.336 2.771 2.680 3.606 2.892 3.557 2.871 (.681) (.750) (.455) (.546) (.906) (.672) (.902) (.682) Honorable 1.071 1.018 0.843 0.782 0.689 0.581 0.705 0.597 (.357) (.380) (.280) (.306) (.418) (.353) (.420) (.356) Top 5 School 0.271 0.225 (.253) (.205) Nonacademic

  • 0.156
  • 0.040

(.442) (.307) African-American 0.087 0.139 (.602) (.379) Theory/Econometrics

  • 0.500
  • 0.332

(.305) (.272) Future Nobelist 0.270 0.118 (.423) (.292) Female*Women

  • 1.649 -1.089

in Other Election (.849) (.570) Log L

  • 139.89 -137.85 -140.64 -138.72
  • 88.41 -88.64 -86.06 -86.35

Number of candidates 368 240

aStandard errors in parentheses.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Figure 1. Percent Female Among Candidates and Winners, AEA Elections 1935-2004

10 20 30 40 1935-48 1949-58 1959-66 1967-74 1975-84 1985-94 1995-2004

Time Period Percent of Total

  • Pct. of Candidates
  • Pct. of Winners
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Figure 2. Membership, Voter Turnout and Nominating Committee, 1935-2004

15 30 45 60 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995

Year

  • Pct. Female Members, Pct.

Turnout

1 2 3 4

Women on Nominating Committee

  • Pct. Female Members
  • Pct. Voting
  • Nom. Comm. Female
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Table 1. Beauty Evaluations, Individual and Composite (312 AEA Candidacies)

Average Std. Dev. Standardized: Minimum Maximum Individual Ratings: Male 1 5.43 1.21

  • 2.84

2.96 Male 2 5.20 1.89

  • 2.23

2.02 Male 3 4.71 1.20

  • 3.10

3.58 Female 5.95 1.34

  • 2.19

2.27

Average Standardized Rating (Rij): 0.71

  • 1.80

2.71 Relative Average Standardized Rating (R*

ij):

0.58

  • 1.73

2.00

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Table 2. Multinomial Multiple Response Estimates of the Impacts of Several Independent Variables

  • n the Probability of Election, Elections 1966-2004, (N = 312)*
  • Ind. Var.:

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Citation Share 3.43 3.37 3.42 3.50 3.66 (0.79) (0.81) (0.78) (0.82) (0.85) Female 1.59 1.52 1.57 1.49 1.97 (0.34) (0.35) (0.34) (0.35) (0.56)

  • Rel. Ave. Stdzd.

0.221 0.322 Beauty (0.186) (0.212)

  • Rel. Ave. Stdzd.

0.936 1.330 Beauty > 0 (0.429) (0.525)

  • Rel. Ave. Stdzd.
  • 0.399 -0.477

Beauty <0 (0.378) (0.414) Female*Rel. Ave.

  • 0.428
  • Stdzd. Beauty

(0.475) Female*Rel. Ave.

  • 1.319
  • Stdzd. Beauty > 0

(0.837) Female*Rel. Ave. 0.351

  • Stdzd. Beauty <0

(1.135) Log L

  • 112.81 -112.07 -111.67
  • 110.30 -109.00

*Standard errors in parentheses here and in Table 3. Also included in each equation are indicators of whether the candidate had held or currently holds a high-level government position, whether he/she was in a top-five economics department, whether he she was not an academic, would eventually win a Nobel Prize, was a theorist or econometrician, was an African-American, and a continuous measure of years since Ph.D. (or other terminal degree).

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Table 3. Logit and Conditional Logit Estimates of the Determinants of the Probability of Election, Multiple Candidacies in Elections 1966-2004* (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

  • Cond. FE
  • Ind. Var.:

Logit with robust standard errors logit Citation Share 5.24 5.35 3.67 2.55 13.63 (1.48) (1.53) (1.79) (1.15) (5.17) Female 2.75 2.76 0.56 (0.75) (0.80) (1.07)

  • Rel. Ave. Stdzd.

0.353 0.636 0.466 0.637 Beauty (0.382) (0.542) (0.415) (0.598)

  • Rel. Ave. Stdzd.

1.567 Beauty > 0 (0.689)

  • Rel. Ave. Stdzd.
  • 0.508

Beauty <0 (0.549) Log L

  • 97.82 -95.92
  • 50.68 -51.69 -20.26

N (candidacies) 165 165 82 82 82 N (candidates) 73 73 33 33 33 *Also included in Columns (1) – (3) are indicators of whether the candidate had held or currently holds a high-level government position, where he/she was in a top-five economics department, whether he she was not an academic, would eventually win a Nobel Prize, was a theorist or econometrician, was an African- American, and a continuous measure of years since Ph.D. (or other terminal degree). The logit in column (4), and the conditional logit in column (5) include only the variables listed and the measure of years since degree.