Self-selection or sex discrimination: The essays on female scientists' and engineers' major and occupational selectio

This study attempts to answer whether highly educated females' underrepresentation in the scientific and engineering (S&E) labor market is the outcome of occupational segregation or the consequence of self-selection. To see this, two vital pieces of information have been studied: first, whether native female scientists' major or occupational selection are based on maximization of (expected) lifetime earnings? Second, whether supply-side attributes such as the time devoted to housework and caretaking could account for female scientists' eschewing of S&E related occupations and majors? If young female scientists take future household responsibilities into consideration while determining job skills, and if supply-side attributes could fully account for gender differences in job skills selection, then the self-selection hypothesis is the prevailing explanation for highly educated females' underrepresentation in the S&E labor market.;My research inspects immigrant female scientists' post-immigration human capital investment and earnings patterns. Many immigrant females intend to have children following immigration such that they plan to stop or reduce human capital investment during assimilation time. These females might experience declining or smoother earnings patterns following immigration and longer assimilation time. The job skills with greater atrophy couldn't be these immigrant females' better choices since these job skills hinder them from catching up to native scientists.;My research finds that (1) immigrant female scientists' longer assimilation time are positively correlated with the number of children aged under 6; (2) immigrant female scientists' post-immigration earnings patterns are non-monotonic; (3) immigrant females who plan to have children following immigration might anticipate future earnings losses such that they prefer majors and occupations with lower atrophy; (4) immigrant female scientists' major and occupational distributions would be very similar to immigrant male scientists' if immigrant female scientists didn't plan to stop or reduce human capital investment during assimilation time. Given these results, I conclude that there are innate gender differences in major and occupational distributions for scientists and engineers. These innate gender differences in major and occupational distributions don't belong to sex discrimination.