> That's why "equivalent education and experience", as flawed as our attempts to measure them might be, is a very important qualifier. It's important, but how

> That's why "equivalent education and experience", as flawed as our attempts to measure them might be, is a very important qualifier. It's important, but how does one really qualify for equivalent education and experience? Usually when I see articles make assertions about the wage gap, the nature of the control for that equivalency is not stated, and the reader is left to assume that Simpson's paradox has been addressed. Never answered are the question about whether they've controlled for, say, two different MD specializations with different earning potential, different courses taken during a single degree program, or degrees from different institutions, or any of the other potential educational backgrounds that might be relevant. Besides, in a market economy, education and experience are not valued, performance is, where sometimes future performance must be predicted. Education and experience are merely one predictor of performance. This CEO study is interesting because it sidesteps the equivalent education and experience question. But that still limits its applicability and leaves plenty of unanswered questions about why the differences were found.