This article was originally submitted for publication to the Editor of Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science (AMPPS) in 2015. When the submitted manuscript was subsequently posted online (Silberzahn et al., 2015), it received some media attention, and two of the authors were invited to write a brief commentary in Nature advocating for greater crowdsourcing of data analysis by scientists. This commentary, arguing that crowdsourced research "can balance discussions, validate findings and better inform policy" (Silberzahn & Uhlmann, 2015, p. 189), included a new figure that displayed the analytic teams' effectsize estimates and cited the submitted manuscript as the source of the findings, with a link to the preprint. However, the authors forgot to add a citation of the Nature commentary to the final published version of the AMPPS article or to note that the main findings had been previously publicized via the commentary, the online preprint, research presentations at conferences and universities, and media reports by other people. The authors regret the oversight.

This study explores how life expectancy at age 35 has evolved across the income distribution in Sweden over time. We examine individual income for men 1970–2007 and family income for both men and women 1980–2007. During this period, income inequality increased in most western countries, but especially so in Sweden. Drawing on a large sample of the Swedish population, our results show that the gap in life expectancy between the richest and poorest fifths of the income distribution also increased. This was the case both for individual and family income. The increase was larger for men than for women, but the only group with stagnant life expectancy at age 35 was women in the lowest income quintile group. Between 1986 and 2007, the difference between the lowest and highest family income quintiles increased by about one year for women and by almost two years for men. The causes of death that most significantly contributed to the increased disparities among women were circulatory and respiratory diseases. For men, circulatory disease mortality alone caused most of the increased disparities.

This paper considers the role of gender in generating inequality of opportunity. Using data on long-run income for Swedish men and women, we explore to what extent income inequality is due to circumstances beyond individuals' control, such as gender and parental income, rather than to differences in individuals' choices. The key idea is that a society has achieved equality of opportunity if there is no income inequality that is due to circumstances. Analyzing men and women separately, we find that circumstances account for up to 31% of income inequality among men and up to 25% among women. We conclude that there is greater equality of opportunity among women than among men. When we analyze men and women together, treating gender as a circumstance, at most 38% of income inequality can be attributed to circumstances. Gender accounts for up to 13% of income inequality, making gender the single most important circumstance in accounting for inequality in long-run income in Sweden.