The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Meta-Analysis of Government-Sponsored Training Programs
Abstract
This study uses meta-analysis to synthesize findings from 31 evaluations of 15 voluntary government-funded training programs for the disadvantaged that operated between 1964 and 1998. On average, the earnings effects of the evaluated programs seem to have been largest for women, quite modest for men, and negligible for youths. For men and women, the earnings effects of training appear to have persisted for at least several years after the training was complete. Classroom skills training was apparently effective in increasing earnings, but basic education was not. There is no evidence that more expensive training programs performed better than less expensive ones. Although the United States has more than three decades of experience in running training programs, the programs do not appear to have become more effective over time.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
Rosenthal, R. (1991) · doi:10.4135/9781412984997 · Cited by 4,635
Estimating the Effect of Training Programs on Earnings
Ashenfelter, O. (1978) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.2307/1924332 · Cited by 1,515
Advances in statistical methods for meta‐analysis
Hedges, L. V. (1984) · New Directions for Program Evaluation · doi:10.1002/ev.1376 · Cited by 142
Cited by
Active Labour Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta‐Analysis
Card, D., Kluve, J., & Weber, A. (2010) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02387.x · Cited by 1,298
What Works? A Meta Analysis of Recent Active Labor Market Program Evaluations
Card, D., Kluve, J., & Weber, A. (2018) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1093/jeea/jvx028 · Cited by 990
The effectiveness of European active labor market programs
Kluve, J. (2010) · Labour Economics · doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2010.02.004 · Cited by 712
What Works? A Meta Analysis of Recent Active Labor Market Program Evaluations
Card, D., Kluve, J., & Weber, A. (2015) · doi:10.3386/w21431 · Cited by 136
Ibarrarán, P., & Rosas Shady, D. (2009) · Journal of Development Effectiveness · doi:10.1080/19439340902918094 · Cited by 122
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenberg, D. H., Michalopoulos, C., & Robins, P. K.
- Venue
- ILR Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2003-10
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-53
- ISSN
- 0019-7939 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-271X
- OpenAlex
- W2120167541
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 6.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Meta-Analysis of Government-Sponsored Training Programs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/001979390305700102
- The paper
- Greenberg, D. H., Michalopoulos, C., & Robins, P. K. (2003). A Meta-Analysis of Government-Sponsored Training Programs. ILR Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979390305700102
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.