Table 1: Innovation by Childhood CZ/State, Gender and ...



Who Becomes an Inventor? The Importance of Exposure to InnovationCodebook for Online Data TablesNovember 2017Table 1: Innovation by Childhood CZ/State, Gender and Parent Income Tables 1a shows average patenting outcomes for children born in 1980-1984 by the commuting zone (CZ) in which they grew up, gender, and parent income. We restrict the sample to U.S. citizens as of 2013 to exclude individuals who are likely to have immigrated to the U.S. as adults, for whom we cannot measure parent income.We define a child as an inventor if he is listed on a patent application between 2001 and 2012 or grant between 1996 and 2014 (see Section II.B of the paper), and as a highly-cited inventor if he is among the 5% of inventors with the most patent citations by 2014 within his birth cohort. Each child is assigned a CZ based on ZIP code from which their parents filed their 1040 tax return in the year they were first claimed as dependents (which is typically 1996, as our tax data begin in 1996). Parents are assigned percentile ranks by ranking them based on their mean household income from 1996 to 2000 relative to other parents with children in the same birth cohort. See Section II of the paper for further details on the sample construction and variables definitions.We provide statistics on the fraction of inventors by childhood CZ pooling all children, by gender, and by parent income quintile. Cells with less than 10 children are omitted.Table 1b is analogous to Table 1a but presents results by childhood state of residence.Codebook for Table 1a – Innovation by Childhood CZ and Parent IncomeVariableDescriptionpar_czChildhood commuting zone of residencepar_cznameCommuting zone namepar_stateChildhood state Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) codepar_stateabbrvTwo-letter state abbreviationkid_countNumber of childreninventorShare of children who go on to become inventorstop5citShare of children with highly-cited patents (defined as being in the top 5% of the patent citation distribution among inventors of a given birth cohort, using raw number of citations)top5citaShare of children with highly-cited patents (defined as being in the top 5% of the patent citation distribution among inventors of a given birth cohort, dividing citations by the number of coinventors)inventor_cat_[c]Share of children who become inventors in technology category [c]Technology categories [c] are:1 – Chemical2 – Computers and communications3 – Drugs and medical4 – Electrical and electronic5 – Mechanical6 – Others7 – Design and planttop5cit_cat_[c]Share of children with highly-cited patents in technology category [c] (raw number of citations)top5cita_cat_[c]Share of children with highly-cited patents in technology category [c] (dividing citations by the number of coinventors)[outcome]_g_mIdentical to variable [outcome], but restricting the sample to males.[outcome]_g_fIdentical to variable [outcome], but restricting the sample to females.[outcome]_pq[quintile]Identical to variable [outcome], but restricting the sample to children whose parental income is in quintile [quintile] of the parent income distribution of the children’s birth cohort.Codebook for Table 1b – Innovation by Childhood State and Parent IncomeTable 1b contains the same variables as Table 1a with the exception of par_cz and par_czname, since observations are at the state level. Variables in Table 1b are defined identically to variables in Table 1a.Table 2: Innovation by Year of Birth, Gender, Age and Current CZ/StateTable 2a reports average patenting outcomes for individuals linked to the tax data in years 1996-2012 by year of birth, gender, age and commuting zone (CZ) of residence. We define an individual as an inventor if he or she is listed on a patent application between 2001 and 2012 or grant between 1996 and 2014 (see Section II.B of the paper), and as a highly-cited inventor if he or she is among the 5% of inventors with the most patent citations by 2014 within his or her birth cohort. Reported counts for each cell are computed from a 1% sample of the taxpayer database. Cells with fewer than 1000 taxpayers are omitted.Table 2b is analogous to Table 2a but presents results by birth cohort, age, and state of residence.See Section II and Online Appendix A of the paper for more details on the sample construction and variables definitions. Codebook for Table 2a – Innovation by Age Groups and Current CZVariableDescriptionczCurrent commuting zone of residencecznameCommuting zone namestateCurrent state Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) codestateabbrvTwo-letter state abbreviationcohortBirth cohortageAge at which patenting outcomes are measuredcountNumber of individualsinventorShare of individuals who file a patent applicationpatentsAverage number of patents granted among individuals top5citShare of individuals with highly-cited patents (defined as being in the top 5% of the lifetime citation distribution among inventors of a given birth cohort, using raw number of citations)top5citaShare of individuals with highly-cited patents (defined as being in the top 5% of the patent citation distribution among inventors of a given birth cohort, dividing citations by the number of coinventors)inventor_cat_[c]Share of individuals who have a patent application or grant in technology category [c].Technology class:1 – Chemical2 – Computers and communications3 – Drugs and medical4 – Electrical and electronic5 – Mechanical6 – Others7 – Design and plant[outcome]_g_mIdentical to variable [outcome], but restricting the sample to males.[outcome]_g_fIdentical to variable [outcome], but restricting the sample to females.Codebook for Table 2b – Innovation by Age Groups and Current StateTable 2b contains the same variables as Table 2a with the exception of cz and czname, since observations are at the state level. Variables in Table 2b are defined identically to variables in Table 2a.Table 3: Income of Inventors by Year and AgeThis table presents key statistics on the distribution of inventors’ income by year of birth and age. We provide the statistics for all inventors and for the sub-sample of highly-cited inventors. Cells with less than 10 inventors are omitted. We report statistics pertaining to three categories of inventors’ income: total income, wage income and non-wage income. Wage income is defined as the sum of earnings across all W-2 forms received by an individual in a given year. Non-wage income consists of self-employment income and capital income. Total income is the sum of wage income and non-wage income. Income is measured prior to the deduction of individual income taxes and employee-level payroll taxes. We measure all monetary variables in 2012 dollars, adjusting for inflation using the consumer price index (CPI-U). We round monetary values to the nearest $100.We define an individual as an inventor if he or she is listed on a patent application between 2001 and 2012 or grant between 1996 and 2014 (see Section II.B of the paper), and as an highly-cited inventor if he or she is among the 5% of inventors with the most patent citations by 2014 within his or her birth cohort. See section II and Online Appendix A of the paper for more details on the sample construction and variables definitions. Codebook for Table 3 – Income of Inventors by Year and AgeVariableDescriptionyearCalendar yearageAgecount_[sample]Number of individuals in sample [sample].[sample] is either: all – all inventors top5cit – inventors in the top 5% of the citation distribution of their birth cohort, using raw number of lifetime citationstotal_inc_[sample]_[stat]Statistic [stat] of the distribution of total individual income in sample [sample].[stat] is either:min – minimump[p] – percentile[p], for [p]= 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90max – maximumw2_inc_[sample]_[stat]Statistic [stat] of the distribution of W-2 wage earnings in sample [sample].nw_inc_[sample]_[stat]Statistic [stat] of the distribution of non-wage individual income in sample [sample].Table 4: Patent Rates by CollegeThis table presents estimates of students’ patent rates by the college they attended. We define the college each child attends as the institution the child attended for the greatest amount of time during the four calendar years in which the child turned 19-22. Colleges with less than 10 inventors are omitted.The sample pools all taxpayers born in the 1980-84 birth cohorts who attend college between the ages of 19-22. We restrict the sample to U.S. citizens as of 2013 to exclude individuals who are likely to have immigrated to the U.S. as adults (for whom we cannot measure parent income). We define an individual as an inventor if he or she is listed on a patent application between 2001 and 2012 or grant between 1996 and 2014 (see Section II.B of the paper), and as an highly-cited inventor if he or she is among the 5% of inventors with the most patent citations by 2014 within his or her birth cohort. In addition to patenting outcomes by institution for all students, we provide outcomes by students’ parent income quintile. Parents are assigned percentile ranks by ranking them based on their mean household income from 1996 to 2000 relative to other parents with children in the same birth cohort. Averaging over the five years from 1996 to 2000 allows us to obtain a proxy for parent lifetime income that is less affected by transitory fluctuations. For each college, we report the share of students who are inventors (unconditional and conditional on parents’ income quantile), the share of students in the top 5% of the patent citation distribution of their birth cohort (among all inventors matched to a college), as well as the total number of patents granted to students and patent citations received by students.Following established disclosure standards, we report estimates for each college using regression models that pool data across several colleges. As described in Chetty et al. (2017, Appendix C), the degree of error due to this blurring procedure is smaller than the degree of sampling error in the estimates. See section II and Online Appendix A of the paper for more details on the sample construction and variables definitions. References:Raj Chetty, John Friedman, Emmanuel Saez, Nicholas Turner, and Danny Yagan, Mobility Report Cards: The Role of Colleges in Intergenerational Mobility. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 23618, Revised Version, July 2017VariableDescriptionsuper_opeidInstitution OPEID / Cluster ID when combining multiple OPEIDsinstnmName of Institution / Super-OPEID ClustercountNumber of studentscount_pq[quintile]Number of students with parents in quintile [quintile] of the income distributioninventorShare of inventors among studentsinventor_pq[quintile]Share of inventors among students with parents in quintile [quintile] of the income distributiontop5citShare of students with highly-cited patents (defined as being in the top 5% of the lifetime citation distribution among all inventors of a given birth cohort matched to a college, using raw number of citations)top5citaShare of individuals with highly-cited patents (defined as being in the top 5% of the lifetime citation distribution among all inventors of a given birth cohort matched to a college, dividing citations by the number of coauthors)total_patentsTotal number of patents granted to studentstotal_citesTotal number of patent citations obtained by students ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download