[Futuregen] Examples for the possible proof of concept piece on care

[Ricardo Rodrigues]

Dear colleagues,

Ahead of our zoom tomorrow at 14h00 CET, we are sending you all a short 
example of what we had in mind regarding a possible proof of concept 
exercise for care on the methods to capture intersectionality between 
income and gender.

The example is actually best exemplified by the paper we attach 
(unfortunately they apply different methodologies to diffeent examples): 
depending on the method used, could we expect to have different results 
in terms of gender inequalities and what does this tell us about the 
best method to analyze these in care (one of the aims of WP3/FUTUREGEN)?

Effect modification (i.e. running regressions separately for men and 
women) is akin to testing if effects of income are different for men and 
women. Interactions basically tell us whether the gender effect changes 
across a 2nd variable (e.g. income), and gives us the combine effect of 
gender and income. Mediation provides the direct of gender on care and 
indirect effect of gender on care through income (e.g. this approach for 
example allows us to test whether there is a gender effect at all after 
including the mediator).

The purpose is to inform researchers and policy makers on the dangers of 
interpreting results that do not accurately reflect the real dynamics 
between predictors and proposing a gold-standard for analyses.

Was our thinking a bit clearer after this...? We can discuss it further 
tomorrow.

Best wishes,

Ricardo

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Scott and Siltanen (2017) Intersectionality feminist perspective.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1138418 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.euro.centre.org/pipermail/futuregen/attachments/20190813/fac3d316/attachment-0001.pdf>