This dissertation studies the differences in how men and women react to feedback or information about their performance in educational settings and how these differences might impact women’s decisions to stay away from traditionally male-dominated fields. The first chapter analyzes the gender differences in reaction to low performance during high school. I focus on the decision of North Carolina public high school students to enroll in advanced math or English classes after learning about their performance on statewide standardized tests in each subject. I find that women are more responsive to low-performing than men. Women that perform poorly on their tests are less likely than their higher-performance peers to enroll in advanced classes, while men's likelihood is the same regardless of performance. It has been documented that the probability of women continuing their studies in male-dominated fields -- like Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and business -- is more sensitive to their performance in relevant courses at the beginning of college relative to men. The second chapter studies these gender differences in grade sensitivity during college. Using novel survey data, I estimate students' sensitivity to grades and find that women value an extra grade point average (GPA) unit more than men. I find that anticipated discrimination in the labor market of male-dominated fields is important to understand this gender gap in grade sensitivity. I further provide evidence of the gender differences in beliefs about labor market discrimination in different fields. The last chapter investigates the dynamic effects of feedback in an experimental setting. I explore how individuals update their beliefs and choices in response to good or bad news over time in two domains: verbal skills and math. I find significant gender gaps in beliefs and choices before feedback: men are more optimistic about their performance and more willing to compete than women in both domains, but the gaps are significantly larger in math. Feedback significantly shifts individuals' beliefs and choices immediately after receiving it. However, there is substantial persistence of gender gaps over time. This is particularly true among the set of individuals who receive negative feedback.

Are heterogeneous labor market outcomes a product of markets efficiently allocating resources or the result of structural market failures which should be corrected through well-crafted policy? In order to address this fundamental question in modern economics, we must first understand the forces which shape individuals' earnings, employment, and occupational choices. This collection of essays provides new evidence to support several novel channels which influence labor markets. First, I evaluate the connection between technological change and labor market outcomes by bringing new data and methods to study the mechanization of American agriculture in the early 20th century. Using an instrumental variables estimation strategy, I find that exogenous increases in exposure to technological change generated occupational displacement for incumbent laborers, increased income inequality, and had important impacts on intergenerational mobility for the children of affected workers. Additionally, I investigate the connection between low-opportunity neighborhoods and public housing residents' labor market outcomes. Leveraging quasi-random variation in neighborhood quality due to a public housing demolition, I find that residents' wages increased after moving to higher-opportunity neighborhoods and that more intense supportive services improved post-move employment. Taken together, these essays provide new evidence that both large-scale factors like new technologies and local factors like neighborhood quality contribute to heterogeneity in labor market outcomes both historically and up to the present day.

This dissertation consists of two chapters. The first chapter studies children's skill formation technology while endogenizing the maternal age and child investments. I estimate the effect of a mother's age at childbirth on her child's health, skill level, educational attainment, and adulthood earnings. There is a tradeoff between delaying childbirth to provide a more secure economic environment for mother and child versus the potential negative biological consequences for a child of having an older parent. I quantify this tradeoff. The results indicate that a five-year decrease in the maternal age of educated women, ceteris paribus, results in over 0.50 std increase in the child’s skill level due to an increase in the child’s ability to acquire skills. However, if one adjusts child investment according to individuals’ wage profile conditional on reduced maternal age, the average child’s skill level decreases by 0.07 std. This reduction in children’s skill highlights the impact of lower inputs that children of younger mothers receive. The negative effect of foregone wages may be reduced through policy approaches. My policy analysis indicates implementing a two-year maternity leave policy that freezes mothers’ wages at the level before childbirth would reduce average maternal age at the first birth by about two years, while also increasing the average child’s skill level by about 0.22 std and future earnings by over 6%.

In chapter two, I study the impact of females' perceptions regarding their future fertility behavior on their human capital investments and labor market outcomes. I exploit a natural experiment to study the causal effect of fertility anticipation on individual's investments in human capital. I use the arguably exogenous variation in gender mix of children as an exogenous shock to the probability of further fertility. I document that having two children of the same gender is associated with about 5% lower wages for the mother compared to having two children of the opposite sexes. Mothers with same-sex children perceive themselves as more likely to bear one more child, and so less attached to the labor market, so invest less in human capital, and this is reflected in wages today.

There exists a notable gender gap in the field of economics. One explanation for this gap is the low supply of women entering the economics labor market. To understand the shortage of female economics students, I observe students at the undergraduate and graduate level. My data consists of a sample of current undergraduate students and a sample of past Ph.D. applicants at Arizona State University. The gender gaps in these samples, both at the undergraduate and graduate level, can largely be explained by the variation in mathematical preparation of the students. The data reveals that undergraduate male economics students are more frequently enrolled in higher level math courses compared to female undergraduate students. Likewise, a higher number of male Ph.D. applicants have stronger mathematical backgrounds relative to female Ph.D. applicants. This common factor might explain the higher supply of male students who apply and get accepted to postgraduate studies in economics, relative to female students, holding all else constant. I conclude with the following recommended interventions: make information regarding postgraduate opportunities in economics more readily available, and increase math requirements for a bachelor’s degree in economics at ASU.

Long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARCs) are a class of highly effective contraceptive methods that includes the hormonal IUD, the copper IUD and the Implant. Despite pregnancy prevention prevailing as the primary motivation for contraceptive use and the pill’s lower effectiveness in actual use, the birth control pill is the most commonly used method among people aged 18-24 years old. Through surveying 300 undergraduate female students from Arizona State University, we studied the impact of a visual resource, tiering methods by effectiveness, on the revision of likelihood of use for any contraceptive method and for LARCs in particular. We found that the visual resource significantly impacted likelihood of LARC use and that participants who cited pregnancy prevention as their only motivation for using a contraceptive method revised their likelihood of LARC use significantly more than participants who cited only hormonal benefit or more than one motivation.

Existing research into the health benefits of insurance fall into two major categories \u2014 observational and experimental. Observational studies have centered on data sets from before 2000 and focus on the mortality differences between the privately insured and the uninsured. Experimental studies began with Massachusetts' 2006 health reform and continued after the passage of the Affordable Care Act. These studies measure the effects of public insurance among the coverage expansion populations. These two bodies of literature come to ambiguous and contradictory conclusions to the mortality effects and health value of insurance. This study extends the observational methodologies to the publicly insured in samples from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in both the 1988-1994 survey and the 2001-2002 survey. Using the Cox Proportional Hazard model, this study estimates the hazard ratios faced by the privately and publicly insured compared to the uninsured. This study finds the publicly insured face hazards 1.5 times those of the uninsured (p<.001), while the privately insured do not face hazards significantly different from those of the uninsured. Literature suggests that some unobserved characteristic of the publicly insured are influencing their mortality. Interacting with participants health reveals that these differences across groups shrink as health declines. Experimental literature suggests that public insurance lowers the uninsured risk from "healthcare amenable" conditions. Treatment of these conditions may explain the hazard reductions among the uninsured in non-excellent health. The high risk of the publicly insured in excellent health defies explanation.