3 ms·
Yes, but that’s not the relevant datum, because of selection effects. The relevant question is how well employed is the person who had a choice to do a Ph.D. or
by maxminminmax 9mo ago
Yes, but that’s not the relevant datum, because of selection effects. The relevant question is how well employed is the person who had a choice to do a Ph.D. or not compared to the counterfactual person who made an opposite choice.
As an example, an Ivy graduate makes more than state school graduate on average, but there was a study showing that those offered Ivy admission but deciding to go to a state school made just as much (that study setup has its own selection bias issues, but hopefully those gives an idea of what I mean).
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago> because of selection effects We're literally measuring a selection effect: that of pursuing a graduate degree. > there was a study showing that those offered Ivy admission but deciding to go to a state school made just as much Source? I'm not rejecting the hypothesis that this is a measurement error. But it's been observed across multiple countries for several generations. The burden of proof is on the hot take that graduate degrees in general are a bad economic bet. (Note: I don't have a PhD. I went to a state school. So you're hypothesis is tempting to believe, hence my scepticism.)