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 31 - 40 of 81

Workforce investment act services: Effect on dislocated worker reemployment (Walker 2006)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effects of employment and training services offered through the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) on employment and earnings outcomes. The author…
Mentor status, occupational context, and protégé career outcomes: Differential returns for males and females (Dougherty et al. 2013)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the role of informal mentoring on annual compensation, as well as the moderating effects of mentor status. The authors investigated similar research questions in…
Mentor status, occupational context, and protégé career outcomes: Differential returns for males and females (Dougherty et al. 2013)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the role of informal mentoring on annual compensation, as well as the moderating effects of mentor status. The authors investigated similar research questions in…
Mentor status, occupational context, and protégé career outcomes: Differential returns for males and females (Dougherty et al. 2013)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the role of informal mentoring on annual compensation, as well as the moderating effects of mentor status and gender. The authors investigated similar research…
Minnesota’s Affordable Homes Program: Evaluating the effects of a prison work program on recidivism, employment and cost avoidance (Northcutt Bohmert & Duwe 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The authors examine the impact of participation in Minnesota’s Affordable Homes Program (AHP) on post-release employment, earnings, and recidivism outcomes for people who were previously…
Does trade adjustment assistance make a difference? [TAA versus no TAA] (Reynolds & Palatucci 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on the employment and earnings of displaced manufacturing workers. The authors investigated similar research…
Employment services utilization and outcomes among substance abusing offenders participating in California’s Proposition 36 drug treatment initiative (Evans et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of California’s Proposition 36 employment services on employment, earnings, receipt of public benefits, and recidivism. The authors used a…
Twelve-month employment intervention outcomes for drug-involved offenders (Webster et al. 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a drug court employment intervention on participants’ employment and earnings one year after the intervention. The study is a randomized controlled…
Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes [Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits after WPRS only] (Noel 1998)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of reemployment services through the Worker Profiling and Reemployment System (WPRS) on unemployment insurance (UI) benefit receipt and earnings for…
Cost-effectiveness of targeted reemployment bonuses (O'Leary et al. 2005)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study examined the impact of the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration on the amount of Unemployment Insurance (UI) receipt and on earnings of UI claimants approximately one year after…

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.