Gender-Based Favouritism in Workplace Training

Mitsakis, Fotios V.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-11644-6_6

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second issue is whether attitudes towards risk can shed light on the apparent underinvestment in training among certain groups of workers. Researchers often find, for example, that female, less-skilled, and older workers tend to receive less training than their otherwise similar co-workers (Mitsakis, 2019;Oosterbeek, 1996;Leuven and Oosterbeek, 1999). Risk preferences can also differ across labor market groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk preferences and training investments

Caliendo¹,

Cobb‐Clark²,

Obst³

et al. 2023

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk preferences and training investments

Caliendo¹,

Cobb‐Clark²,

Obst³

et al. 2023

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk Preferences and Training Investments

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze workers' risk preferences and training investments. Our conceptual framework differentiates between the investment risk and insurance mechanisms underpinning training decisions. Investment risk leads risk-averse workers to train less; they undertake more training if it insures them against future losses. We use the German SocioEconomic Panel (SOEP) to demonstrate that risk affinity is associated with more training, implying that, on average, investment risks dominate the insurance benefits of training. Crucially, this relationship is evident only for general training; there is no relationship between risk attitudes and specific training. Thus, as expected, risk preferences matter more when skills are transferable-and workers have a vested interest in training outcomes-than when they are not. Finally, we provide evidence that the insurance benefits of training are concentrated among workers with uncertain employment relationships or limited access to public insurance schemes.

show abstract

Risk Preferences and Training Investments

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze workers' risk preferences and training investments. Our conceptual framework differentiates between the investment risk and insurance mechanisms underpinning training decisions. Investment risk leads risk-averse workers to train less; they undertake more training if it insures them against future losses. We use the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) to demonstrate that risk affinity is associated with more training, implying that, on average, investment risks dominate the insurance benefits of training. Crucially, this relationship is evident only for general training; there is no relationship between risk attitudes and specific training. Thus, as expected, risk preferences matter more when skills are transferable -and workers have a vested interest in training outcomes -than when they are not. Finally, we provide evidence that the insurance benefits of training are concentrated among workers with uncertain employment relationships or limited access to public insurance schemes.

show abstract

Gender-Based Favouritism in Workplace Training

Cited by 4 publications

References 55 publications

Risk preferences and training investments

Risk preferences and training investments

Risk Preferences and Training Investments

Risk Preferences and Training Investments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About