Skip to main content

Table 1 Wage premium of matched compared with mismatched graduates, by classification method

From: The changing graduate labour market: analysis using a new indicator of graduate jobs

 

SOC(HE)2010_GH

Freq. of graduates

Major groups 1 and 2

Major groups 1–3

Gottschalk-Hansen

SOC(HE)2010_EP

Employees and self-employed—SES 2012

 Graduate job

0.486***

0.435***

0.373***

0.451***

0.438***

0.436***

(0.041)

(0.043)

(0.042)

(0.041)

(0.043)

(0.041)

  R 2 (N = 1034)

0.276

0.221

0.223

0.242

0.244

0.259

Employees—QLFS 2013/2014

 Graduate job

0.524***

0.524***

0.404***

0.535***

0.463***

0.458***

(0.007)

(0.009)

(0.006)

(0.007)

(0.007)

(0.006)

  R 2 (N = 26,553)

0.347

0.271

0.294

0.342

0.303

0.320

Employees and self-employed in major groups 1, 3, and 4—SES 2012

 Graduate job

0.397***

0.263***

0.224**

0.285***

0.362***

0.339***

(0.071)

(0.077)

(0.100)

(0.064)

(0.065)

(0.076)

  R 2 (N = 414)

0.204

0.132

0.141

0.149

0.203

0.193

Employees in major groups 1, 3, and 4—QLFS 2013/2014

 Graduate job

0.335***

0.316***

0.249***

0.332***

0.300***

0.266***

(0.011)

(0.022)

(0.013)

(0.011)

(0.010)

(0.010)

  R 2 (N = 10,065)

0.265

0.204

0.231

0.250

0.258

0.247

  1. Note: OLS regression using calibrated survey weights with age, age squared, a gender dummy, and a full set of regional dummies with London as reference category as control variables. In SES, regions refer to the place of residence, whereas regions in QLFS capture the place of work. QLFS sample restricted to interviews in person. Asymptotically robust standard errors are shown in parentheses. All estimated wage premiums are statistically significant at least at the 5 % level. *p < .1; **p < .05; ***p < .01. Source: SES 2012, QLFS Q(1)2013-Q(4)2014