Skip to main content

Table 2 Mean synthetic control weights per state in same division and other divisions, CPS data at state by quarter level, 1990 – 2011:Q2

From: More on recent evidence on the effects of minimum wages in the United States

  Mean synthetic control weight per same-division state Mean synthetic control weight per other-division state
Matched on: Residual Residual, 0 MW effect Teen empl. level Teen empl., 1-quarter diff. Teen empl., 4-quarter diff. Residual Residual, 0 MW effect Teen empl. level Teen empl., 1-quarter diff. Teen empl., 4-quarter diff.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
New England 0.029 0.025 0.038 0.032 0.016 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.019 0.020
Mid-Atlantic 0.015 0.013 0.026 0.015 0.010 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020
East North Central 0.010 0.010 0.008 0.010 0.016 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.020
West North Central 0.021 0.024 0.098 0.022 0.015 0.020 0.019 0.009 0.020 0.021
South Atlantic 0.027 0.027 0.022 0.020 0.026 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020 0.019
East South Central 0.039 0.040 0.029 0.041 0.025 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.020
West South Central 0.011 0.010 0.024 0.015 0.015 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.020
Mountain 0.017 0.017 0.023 0.027 0.025 0.020 0.021 0.020 0.019 0.019
Pacific 0.024 0.025 0.031 0.020 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.019 0.020 0.020
All 0.022 0.022 0.035 0.023 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.018 0.020 0.020
  1. Notes: Table reports calculations from synthetic control matching on all minimum wage increases in the sample period. The donor pool used consists of all states other than the treatment state. The estimates in columns (1), (2), (6), and (7) are based on residuals from panel data estimates of the log of the teen employment rate on fixed state and period effects and controls for the aggregate unemployment rate and the relative size of the teen population. The log of the minimum wage is included in the regression used in columns (1) and (6). (See NSW, 2014, for more details).