A belated thank you for this. Definitely interesting and useful.

These two campuses (out of nine) admit more or less any UC-eligible students, so are not really affected by the SAT free policy. That's why they are excluded. Here are admissions shares of URMs with those two campuses included - the expanded y-axis obscures what is going on elsewhere.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER

As far as I know, the campus completely failed to deliver on that promise! It is a real shame - I think it would have been a real attraction (not to mention a safe place for him to park his bike).

I'm afraid I'm mostly to blame for this one!

Similar social interactions could bias twins-based estimates of heritability of education, employment, earnings, even IQ. This bias may be part of “missing heritability” – the tendency for twins studies to indicate greater heritability than those based on direct measurement of genes.

The tendency to work at the same firm isn’t because twins have genetic attractions to specific firms – it almost certainly means they like to work together. That kind of social interaction, if different for same-sex twins, biases twins estimates of heritability.

But we show that is misleading: SS twins are much more likely than OS twins to work at the same firm – meaning they have the same firm effect. When we remove the same-firm pairs from the sample, firm effects no longer appear heritable, and heritability of other outcomes shrinks.

On their face these results point to a genetic component of the variation in employment, earnings, and access to high-paying firms.

We find all outcomes are more strongly correlated among same-sex twins than among opposite-sex twins. OS twins look like siblings, but SS twins don’t. In the CTD, this indicates that labor market outcomes are moderately heritable – even the pay policy of the firm at which people work.

Discussion of the validity of the twins design has focused on the “shared environment” assumption, which is strong. We show there’s another problem with it, potentially more serious, when applied to social outcomes.

The “classical twins design” uses the contrast of identical vs. fraternal twins to measure the “heritability” of outcomes. We extend it to same-sex vs. opposite-sex twins. Heritability = the genetic component of outcomes, the share of variance due to genes rather than environment or chance.

We use Census Bureau data to study correlations among siblings and twins in labor market outcomes in the United States. Data cover the full population of eight birth cohorts, born 1983-1990. We observe employment and earnings as adults, and decompose earnings into person and firm effects a la AKM.

For obviously AI ones, I add to the template: "PS. You should know that your email reads like unfiltered AI writing. While I appreciate your apparent interest in my work, I'm not sure whether the interest is yours or the AI's. I don't think this is doing you any favors." Got anything better?