Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 1 - 10 of 79

Health Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG 1.0) impact study: Three-year impacts report (Peck et al. 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Health Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG) on employment, education, earnings, and public benefit receipt three years after participants were…
Compensatory cognitive training for people with severe mental illnesses in supported employment: A randomized controlled trial (Twamley et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Compensatory Cognitive Training (CCT) on attaining competitive employment, weeks worked, wages earned, mental illness symptom severity, and…
Essays in education and labor economics (Boden 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of state ERA ratification on labor market outcomes for women. The authors used a difference-in-differences design to estimate the impacts of…
Employment outcomes from VA vocational services involving transitional work for veterans with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (Davis et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of engaging in transitional work on outcomes measuring competitive employment and income for U.S. military veterans with post-traumatic stress…
Three essays on immigration policy and labor market outcomes in the U.S. (Mukherjee, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the relationship between the extended length of time of the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program’s temporary work permit for foreign STEM graduates and…
Accounting for the gap: A firm study manipulating organizational accountability and transparency in pay decisions (Castilla, 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of organizational accountability and transparency policies on merit-based pay increases. The study used an interrupted time series design to…
The long-term effects of California’s 2004 Paid Family Leave Act on women’s careers: Evidence from U.S. tax data (Bailey et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of California’s 2004 Paid Family Leave Act (PFLA) on take-up of paid leave, along with employment, wage earnings, and self-employment income for…
The effects of paid family leave in California on labor market outcomes (Baum & Ruhm, 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the California Paid Family Leave Program (CA-PFL) on employment and wages. The study used a difference-in-differences analysis to compare…
Effectiveness of screened, demand-driven job training programs for disadvantaged workers: An evaluation of the New Orleans career pathway training (Baird et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the New Orleans Office of Workforce Development (OWD) Career Pathways training program on employment, earnings, and job satisfaction. This…
Transitional Community Jobs, Chicago, Illinois: A summary report of the program and its outcomes (Rynell & Beachy-Quick 2003)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Transitional Community Jobs (TCJ) on employment, earnings, and public benefit receipt outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental comparison group…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.