The article provided an overview of experimental evaluations of unemployment insurance (UI) reforms conducted from 1977 to 1992 in the United States. These reforms typically tried to improve the…
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 101 - 110 of 171
Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The article’s objective was to assess how behavioral economics can inform labor policy reforms to increase policy efficiency. The authors used behavioral economic theory to explain barriers to…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study’s objective was to review the evidence of the effects of living-learning programs (LLPs)—shared residences at postsecondary institutions designed to bridge in- and out-of-class learning…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The authors described the Stevenson University School of the Sciences in Maryland as an example of an academic institution that deviated widely from the norm of female under-representation in STEM…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to examine how undergraduate women of color’s precollege characteristics and college experiences and the characteristics of their undergraduate institutions affected…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study described how women in academic STEM positions (compared with corporate environments) constructed their own mentoring networks; it also explored the mentoring configurations female…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study examined the enrollment patterns for low-income women and students with children (including mostly mothers and some fathers, collectively referred to as student parents) in STEM fields…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to suggest successful strategies for increasing the number of women and girls in STEM classes. The author used studies of other programs and lessons learned from personal…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study described the implementation of the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program at New York City College of Technology. This year-long program…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study examined institutional and student factors that had the greatest effect on students’ decisions to persist in STEM majors, emphasizing factors promoting STEM degree completion for female…
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.