Talk:Occupational segregation/Archives/2016

Suggestions for the Article

I want to reiterate that this is a well written and thought-out article. I just wanted to add a few areas for improvement based on my review.

First, as mentioned above, there are sections without direct citations. In the "Measuring Occupational Segregation" section you did not cite the source for measurement. I believe you are referencing http://www.sociology.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/cs12. The citations that are used are often outdated. Since this is an evolving topic that employs complex economic analysis, continued work and updated references are necessary to keep the article relevant.

Second, the article focuses on occupational segregation in the United States while it would be valuable to reference statistics in other countries for comparison purposes. This would also make the article more relevant for a global audience.

Third, there are a few areas missing from the article. As mentioned above, the article could benefit from a section on how occupational segregation is relevant for racial/ethnic disparities as well as gender disparities. Gender disparities themselves differ depending on race according to this study: Río, Coral, and Olga Alonso-Villar. "The Evolution Of Occupational Segregation In The United States, 1940-2010: Gains And Losses Of Gender-Race/Ethnicity Groups." Demography 52.3 (2015): 967-988. Business Source Complete. Web. 7 Apr. 2016. The section on "Measuring Occupational Segregation" also leaves out many statistical methods for analyzing vertical and horizontal occupational segregation. Lastly, the section on "Maintenance Mechanisms" focuses on issues on the female side and does not mention the effects that people hiring in different fields have on the process.

But again great work and thanks for focusing on such an important topic.

Slklose (talk) 20:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

• Right off the bat, having read the lede, there's no mention of self-selection, which is at least as common if not more so than selection by others. This is inherently biased. Some day or other, I'll have a look at the rest of the article to see whether that helps make things less biased.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 00:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed Changes

I am considering altering this page as part of a class assignment. I would love to keep a dialogue going about changes everyone wants to see and what I plan to change. First, I would like to update the methodology section because it is uncited and limited to a single option. Then I would like to add a section that examines whether the current methodology ignores gendered assumptions. Lastly, I would like to add a section that explains how intersectionality is relevant to the topic. Slklose (talk) 19:18, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Junankar's comment on this article

Dr. Junankar has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

Although this is an interesting entry, it limits the discussion of "occupational segregation" to that of genders. In fact, there is occupational segregation by colour, ethnicity, or migrant status as well. In most western countries the cleaners in (say) hotels come from a migrant country (usually from a poor third world country).

I would suggest that an economist who specialises on discrimination in the labour market is consulted about this entry. At least a link should be given to "discrimination". References Kenneth J. Arrow, "The Theory of Discrimination," in Discrimination in Labor Markets, ed. Orley Ashenfelter and Albert Rees (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1973)

Lang, Kevin, Poverty and Discrimination, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Junankar has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:

• Reference : Ham, Roger & Junankar, Pramod N. (Raja) & Wells, Robert, 2009. "Antagonistic Managers, Careless Workers and Extraverted Salespeople: An Examination of Personality in Occupational Choice," IZA Discussion Papers 4193, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)