31
[FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional Skills, Education, and Health-Related Outcomes of High-Ability Individuals” 1 Peter Savelyev 2 Kegon T. K. Tan 3 The College of William & Mary The University of Rochester November 30, 2017 1 A version of this paper was presented to the 6 th Annual Health Econometrics Workshop in Toronto; to the 5 th ASHEcon Conference in Los-Angeles; to the IZA/OECD/World Bank Workshop on Cognitive and Noncognitive Skills in Bertinoro, Italy; to the Singapore Economic Review Conference; to the Empirical Micro Lunch at the University of Wisconsin at Madison; and to the Vanderbilt Empirical Applied Micro Work-In-Progress Lunch. We thank participants of these meetings for their productive feedback. We are also grateful to Laura Argys, Gabriella Conti, Thomas Deleire, Evan Elmore, Erik Meijer, Frank Sloan, Chris Taber, Benjamin Ward, and journal referees for their comments and suggestions, which greatly contributed to progress with this paper. Atticus Bolyard provided excellent proofreading of the manuscript. Peter Savelyev gratefully acknowledges research support from the College of William and Mary, the Grey Fund, and the ERC at the University of Chicago. Kegon Tan gratefully acknowledges the support of the Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Global Working Group sponsored by the Institute for New Economic Thinking. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest. Sponsors of this research did not participate in study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, or in writing the manuscript. The Terman data are provided by the ICPSR, Ann Arbor, MI. 2 Peter Savelyev, the corresponding author, is an Assistant Professor of Economics at The College of William & Mary, Research Assistant Professor at Vanderbilt University, and Research Affiliate at IZA. Address: Economics Department, College of William & Mary, 300 James Blair Drive, Tyler Hall Room 317, Williamsburg, VA 23185, USA. Email: [email protected]. Phone: 1(757)221-2371; Fax: 1(757)221- 1175. 3 Kegon Tan is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Rochester. Address: 280 Hutchison Road, Box 270156, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA. Email: [email protected].

[FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

[FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION]

Web Appendix to “Socioemotional Skills, Education, and Health-Related

Outcomes of High-Ability Individuals”1

Peter Savelyev2 Kegon T. K. Tan3

The College of William & Mary The University of Rochester

November 30, 2017

1A version of this paper was presented to the 6th Annual Health Econometrics Workshop in Toronto; tothe 5th ASHEcon Conference in Los-Angeles; to the IZA/OECD/World Bank Workshop on Cognitive andNoncognitive Skills in Bertinoro, Italy; to the Singapore Economic Review Conference; to the EmpiricalMicro Lunch at the University of Wisconsin at Madison; and to the Vanderbilt Empirical Applied MicroWork-In-Progress Lunch. We thank participants of these meetings for their productive feedback. We arealso grateful to Laura Argys, Gabriella Conti, Thomas Deleire, Evan Elmore, Erik Meijer, Frank Sloan, ChrisTaber, Benjamin Ward, and journal referees for their comments and suggestions, which greatly contributedto progress with this paper. Atticus Bolyard provided excellent proofreading of the manuscript. PeterSavelyev gratefully acknowledges research support from the College of William and Mary, the Grey Fund,and the ERC at the University of Chicago. Kegon Tan gratefully acknowledges the support of the HumanCapital and Economic Opportunity Global Working Group sponsored by the Institute for New EconomicThinking. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest. Sponsors of this research did not participate instudy design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, or in writing the manuscript. The Terman data areprovided by the ICPSR, Ann Arbor, MI.

2Peter Savelyev, the corresponding author, is an Assistant Professor of Economics at The College ofWilliam & Mary, Research Assistant Professor at Vanderbilt University, and Research Affiliate at IZA.Address: Economics Department, College of William & Mary, 300 James Blair Drive, Tyler Hall Room 317,Williamsburg, VA 23185, USA. Email: [email protected]. Phone: 1(757)221-2371; Fax: 1(757)221-1175.

3Kegon Tan is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Rochester. Address:280 Hutchison Road, Box 270156, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA. Email:[email protected].

Page 2: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Contents

A DETAILED REGRESSION RESULTS 1

B FACTOR ANALYSIS 10

B.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

B.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

C SUPPLEMENTARY RESULTS 17

References 28

Page 3: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

A DETAILED REGRESSION RESULTS

In order to present a large number of results effectively, the main paper contains only summary

regression tables, which show only statistically significant regression coefficients and levels of

significance denoted by asterisks. This Appendix provides the reader with a full set of p-values,

both before and after the stepdown adjustment.1 The adjusted p-values are more conservative:

they are never below the unadjusted ones, which is a property of the stepdown procedure. We also

show joint tests (effects of skills and education tested jointly for each outcome) and do stepdown

adjustment on the joint tests since joint tests are multiple. The adjusted joint tests are rejected in

most cases. All substantive results of these tables are already discussed in the main paper using

summary tables.

1The stepdown procedure involves ordering hypotheses by the absolute value of the t-statistic. We do so in ourcodes for every type of regressor, but for readers’ convenience we show hypotheses in their usual order in the outcometables.

1

Page 4: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Tabl

eA

-1:H

eavy

Dri

nkin

g

����

���

���

������

����

���

���� �

��

���

�������

���

���

��

���

���

���

������

����

���

���� �

��

���

�������

���

���

��������

����

�������

����

���

����� ���

���

���

����

��!"

#$�

!!#

%$&

����

��%"

����

����

����

$&�'�$#�

���(

�������

��)%

��!"

����

����

�%�

���"

�#)

%#�

����

*���

����

� �

��&

��&"

����

����

�#�

��&"

����

����

���+

,��

��-��

����

���)

��&"

&)�

�$)

��&�

��)"

��%

��!

���.

���

����

���

��

��%"

&�%

&�%

�%#

��%"

��!

�&!

����

,����

��

%%

���"

��#

�&#

��&

���"

�%&

&��

���/

��0

��

�1��

�,��

��

���- ��

���$

�%$"

#�)

#�)

���$

�&#"

����

����

���2 ��

�����

����

����

����

���

����

�������

����

���

����� ���

���

���

���

���"

!��

!��

�#)

��&#

���"

����

���

����

$&�

���(

�������

��&�

���"

���

���

��!

��&"

)�!

$�#

����

*���

����

� �

��!

��!"

#)!

#)!

�&&

��&"

���

��)

���+

,��

��-��

����

��&�

��$"

����

���

��&!

���"

����

�)�

���.

���

����

���

��

��)"

�%$

%%�

�%%

���"

�%�

���

����

,����

��

�$

��#"

���

���

��)

���"

����

����

���/

��0

��

�1��

�,��

��

���- ��

��&�

�%�"

�)�

&�#

��!#

�&#"

����

��!

���2 ��

����

���

����

����

���

����

�������

����

���

����� ���

���

�%!

���$

��&"

��%

!$�

��!

����

��)"

��!

��!

����

$��

���(

�������

��!

��&"

��$

��$

��%

��$"

!$%

!$%

����

*���

����

� �

��&

���"

��#

%��

�&�

��#"

����

����

���+

,��

��-��

����

���#

���"

��

�!�

��%�

��)"

����

�)�

���.

���

����

���

�!

���"

��

�&&

�%$

��)"

����

���

����

,����

��

�%

���"

��#

%��

��$

���"

��&

��&

���/

��0

��

�1��

�,��

��

���- ��

���&

���"

�&�

)&#

��$�

�%&"

����

����

���2 ��

��

)#

�)#

����

����

���

����

������

����

���

����� ���

���

�#)

����

��)"

#�$

$�$

%&)

��)�

��#"

����

����

����

$#�

���(

�������

��#�

��!"

����

����

��#

��!"

����

�&)

����

*���

����

� �

�&$

��&"

����

��$

�&&

��#"

����

����

���+

,��

��-��

����

��%

��%"

��%

��%

����

��$"

&)�

&)�

���.

���

����

���

�!

��%"

�#�

%!%

��&

���"

%�)

%�)

����

,����

��

�$

���"

%�!

%�!

�%�

��&"

���

&%�

���/

��0

��

�1��

�,��

��

���- ��

��%#

�&�"

%)%

##%

��))

���"

�%!

�%!

���2 ��

�����

����

���

���

3��

���

�4

���

Not

es:

Stat

istic

ally

sign

ifica

ntp

-val

ues

atth

e10

%le

vela

rebo

lded

.p

-val

ues

are

calc

ulat

edus

ing

boot

stra

pte

chni

ques

,and

furt

her

adju

sted

usin

gth

est

epdo

wn

proc

edur

e(R

oman

oan

dW

olf,

2005

).E

stim

atio

nis

cond

ition

alon

back

grou

ndva

riab

les

pres

ente

din

Tabl

e4

ofth

em

ain

pape

r.C

alcu

latio

nsar

eba

sed

onth

eTe

rman

data

.

2

Page 5: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Tabl

eA

-2:M

enta

lHea

lth

����

������

������ �

��������

���� ���

����������

�������

����

������

������ �

��������

���� ���

����������

�������

���������

����������������

���� �������� ������

���

� �

!� "#

��$

�%"

�%$

��&%

!� $#

����

����

����%"��'%"��

���(�������

���&

!���#

)��

"$"

�)$

!� &#

����

����

����*�������� �

�%)

!� "#

$ $

)��

��$%

!� �#

����

����

���+,����-������

��

!���#

�&)

�")

��%�

!� )#

&��

))

���.��� ������

%$

!� �#

����

����

%��

!� #

����

����

���� ,���� �

���

!� �#

")&

")&

��&

!� #

&&�

"��

���/��0�� �1���,���� ���- ��

���"

!��"#

)&�

"�%

�� �

!���#

$ �

&��

���2 ���

����

����

����

����

���������������������%"��

���� �������� ������

� )

�%$

!� "#

�%"

�%"

&)

��&)

!� �#

����

����

���(�������

����

!�� #

)��

)��

�)�

!� �#

����

����

����*�������� �

!� &#

�)%

&$�

��&&

!� �#

����

����

���+,����-������

�� )

!� )#

")

$$"

��

!� $#

"%)

"%)

���.��� ������

%�&

!� $#

����

����

% �

!� �#

����

����

���� ,���� �

���

!� �#

")"

%���

��%�

!� �#

$��

)&�

���/��0�� �1���,���� ���- ��

����

!��)#

���

�)�

��$

!�� #

��

�&�

���2 ���

����

����

����

����

���������������������%"$�

���� �������� ������

���

��

!��%#

%�&

��"

&

����

!� �#

����

����

���(�������

�%$

!���#

�%

"��

���

!� �#

%"�

%"�

����*�������� �

�%$

!� "#

�%�

)�"

��)

!� $#

&�

&�

���+,����-������

���

!� "#

)"$

)"$

����

!� )#

)�

$��

���.��� ������

%��

!� &#

����

����

%%%

!� %#

����

����

���� ,���� �

�%�

!� �#

�$$

"%�

��%

!�%"#

"��

"��

���/��0�� �1���,���� ���- ��

��%

!��"#

"&�

"&�

���

!���#

���

&�)

���2 ���

����

����

����

����

���������������������%"��

���� �������� ������

���

� �

!���#

�%"

"�

��)�

!� &#

����

����

���(�������

���"

!���#

&&&

"&�

�"%

!� &#

����

����

����*�������� �

�%

!� )#

�)%

�)%

�%�%

!� �#

����

����

���+,����-������

����

!��%#

%�%

�$$

���

!� )#

))

$")

���.��� ������

% �

!� &#

����

����

% �

!� #

����

����

���� ,���� �

��%&

!� �#

�"�

) "

��"

!� #

���

"�

���/��0�� �1���,���� ���- ��

���

!�$�#

���

&��

���

!���#

"�)

"�)

���2 ���

����

����

����

����

3������

�����

Not

es:

Stat

istic

ally

sign

ifica

ntp

-val

ues

atth

e10

%le

vela

rebo

lded

.p

-val

ues

are

calc

ulat

edus

ing

boot

stra

pte

chni

ques

,and

furt

her

adju

sted

usin

gth

est

epdo

wn

proc

edur

e(R

oman

oan

dW

olf,

2005

).E

stim

atio

nis

cond

ition

alon

back

grou

ndva

riab

les

pres

ente

din

Tabl

e4

ofth

em

ain

pape

r.C

alcu

latio

nsar

eba

sed

onth

eTe

rman

data

.

3

Page 6: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Tabl

eA

-3:G

ener

alH

ealth

����

������

������ �

��������

���� ���

����������

�������

����

������

������ �

��������

���� ���

����������

�������

������� �� �������������

���� �������� ������

���

� !

"� �#

��

$�%

% $

�&

"�&'#

! �

$'%

����&%!��&%$�

���(�������

��&

"� �#

$ &

% '

���

"�&!#

����

����

���)*�������� �

��%

"� �#

$!�

%�!

�&%

"�&!#

&$%

��

���+,����-������

��&$

"�&'#

'%

'%

��'

"�&�#

$'%

���

������� ������

��!!

"�&�#

����

����

�� &

"�&'#

&'�

&'�

���� ,���� �

��&�

"�&%#

�%!

�'!

���

"�&&#

�!'

%%

���.����� �/���,���� ���- ��

&&$

"��'#

����

����

�!$

"� $#

����

��

���0 ���

����

����

����

����

1�����������������&%!�

���� �������� ������

��&$

�� %

"�$$#

$'�

���

� %

�!�

"�'�#

!!$

!!$

���(�������

�� &

"��!#

��'

%!$

���&

"�'�#

&$&

��

���)*�������� �

��%$

"�$!#

& !

�$�

&��

"�'&#

���

&''

���+,����-������

�&��

"�'$#

���

���

�� %

"�'%#

$�&

%!!

������� ������

��&�

"�'&#

����

����

� �%

"�'$#

����

����

���� ,���� �

��%

"�' #

���

���

����

"�!!#

�%�

�%�

���.����� �/���,���� ���- ��

��

"&�$#

����

���

&$!

"&��#

&&!

���0 ���

����

����

����

����

1�����������������&%'�

���� �������� ������

���'

��&&

"�$�#

��

��

���!

&�'

"�' #

����

����

���(�������

�&�

"�� #

�$%

�$%

�&'

"�'$#

���

����

���)*�������� �

� %

"�$'#

$$�

�$�

�%$

"�' #

����

&!�

���+,����-������

��%!

"�' #

���

&!�

���

"�''#

%'$

%'$

������� ������

� $�

"�''#

����

����

� !

"�'$#

����

����

���� ,���� �

�� '

"�''#

$&�

%!!

�� �

"�!�#

$�&

%�

���.����� �/���,���� ���- ��

&�

"&��#

����

&'!

&!�

"&�'#

&��

&��

���0 ���

����

����

����

����

1�����������������&%$�

���� �������� ������

��$

�!�

"��&#

'

���

��&

�'$

"�'�#

�'&

$%�

���(�������

����

"���#

!�'

��'

��!�

"�$'#

'$�

'$�

���)*�������� �

�&�

"��&#

��'

��'

�$�

"��&#

� %

� %

���+,����-������

����

"�$�#

&!�

!!

�%!

"�$ #

����

�''

������� ������

� !&

"�$�#

����

����

� &&

"�'�#

����

����

���� ,���� �

� &

"�'!#

��!

�%'

��&&

"�!!#

�!&

%��

���.����� �/���,���� ���- ��

�$�

"&�%#

'�

'�

&%�

"& �#

����

!�

���0 ���

����

����

���

����

�������

2����

Not

es:

Stat

istic

ally

sign

ifica

ntp

-val

ues

atth

e10

%le

vela

rebo

lded

.p

-val

ues

are

calc

ulat

edus

ing

boot

stra

pte

chni

ques

,and

furt

her

adju

sted

usin

gth

est

epdo

wn

proc

edur

e(R

oman

oan

dW

olf,

2005

).E

stim

atio

nis

cond

ition

alon

back

grou

ndva

riab

les

pres

ente

din

Tabl

e4

ofth

em

ain

pape

r.C

alcu

latio

nsar

eba

sed

onth

eTe

rman

data

.

4

Page 7: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Tabl

eA

-4:P

hysi

calA

ctiv

ityan

dB

MI

����

������

������ �

��������

���� ���

����������

�������

����

������

������ �

��������

���� ���

����������

�������

��������

���� �������� ������

���

���

�����

��

���

���

���!�

"�

���#�������

��!$

�����

��$

���!!

��� �

����

������������� �

���"

���"�

�$%

����

�����

"$$

���&'����(������

���

���$�

%$�

����

�����

��"

���)��� ������

���%

���$�

� !

���

��� �

����

���� '���� �

��

�����

�%�

�����

�����

���

���*��+�� �,���'���� ���( ��

���

��! �

$�"

���$

��%$�

����

���- ���

!��

����

*./

���� �������� ������

� �

��"

���!�

��$

���%

����

�����

$��

���#�������

���

���%�

""

����!

�����

!%

������������� �

����

�����

%"%

�����

�����

�$�

���&'����(������

����

���%�

$$

�����

�����

���

���)��� ������

����

�����

���

����

�����

$!�

���� '���� �

���

�����

���

����"

���$�

�%"

���*��+�� �,���'���� ���( ��

���!

��!��

���

����

��!!�

���- ���

!$

%��

�����0� 1�

���� �������� ������

!�%

��%�

��%��

�"!

�%��

����

��!%�

���

���#�������

���"

��%!�

���

���

��%%�

���

������������� �

���

��!%�

���

�� �

��! �

�!%

���&'����(������

����

��%��

"%�

��%�

��!$�

��$

���)��� ������

���

��!%�

���"

��!$�

%!"

���� '���� �

���

�����

"!�

����

���"�

��

���*��+�� �,���'���� ���( ��

�$"

��$��

���

�� %

���"�

� �

���- ���

���

� �

2������

.����

Not

es:S

tatis

tical

lysi

gnifi

cant

p-v

alue

sat

the

10%

leve

lare

bold

ed.S

tepd

own

adju

stm

enti

sno

tper

form

edfo

rthi

sta

ble

sinc

eou

tcom

esof

each

type

are

mea

sure

don

lyon

ceov

ertim

e,an

dso

ther

eis

nom

ultip

lehy

poth

esis

test

ing

for

thes

eou

tcom

esw

ithre

spec

tto

year

sof

obse

rvat

ion.

See

step

dow

nad

just

men

tfor

“eve

rsm

oked

”in

Tabl

eA

-7,a

spa

rtof

the

adju

stm

entf

ora

grou

pof

vari

able

ssu

mm

ariz

ing

beha

vior

over

the

lifet

ime.

Est

imat

ion

isco

nditi

onal

onba

ckgr

ound

vari

able

spr

esen

ted

inTa

ble

4of

the

mai

npa

per.

Cal

cula

tions

are

base

don

the

Term

anda

ta.

5

Page 8: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Tabl

eA

-5:G

roup

Mem

bers

hip

����

���

���

������

����

���

���� �

��

���

�������

���

���

��

���

���

���

������

����

���

���� �

��

���

�������

���

���

�����

������

��� �

����

���

����� ���

���

���

���

�!"#

!�$

$!�

�$�

���

�!$#

�%�

�%�

����!

�&�'!�%�

����

�������

���

�!�#

��"

��"

��&

�!&#

�$�

��&

���(

)��

�����

� �

��&

���#

��*

*!!

���

�!�#

����

$&�

����

���

��+��

����

��$

��$#

��!

�"*

���

�!*#

*$&

"�"

���,

���

����

���

�$

�!�#

"*�

"*�

��!!

�!$#

$��

%�!

����

�����

��

�%

�!$#

*"!

*"!

��!�

�!!#

����

����

���-

��.

��

�/��

����

��

���+ ��

�%%

�$$#

����

����

�"&

���#

!��

��$

���0 ��

�&

��

&��

����

����

1�

���

������

��� ���

���!

�&�

����

���

����� ���

���

�*

�%

!%�

!!*#

!*%

��$

�&

$*

�"%

���#

$&�

�"%

����

�������

�!$"

!�&#

�&&

*�%

�!��

!��#

�"!

��!

���(

)��

�����

� �

!$�

!!!#

�$$

&��

��$

�"*#

$��

%!�

����

���

��+��

����

�*%

��%#

**�

�!%

�$&

��*#

��"

��"

���,

���

����

��!

�!

�"*#

�$"

%�&

����

��"#

$**

�$�

����

�����

����$

�"*#

��"

&*"

�!�*

��"#

!!!

!!!

���-

��.

��

�/��

����

��

���+ ��

�"�

!�*#

����

����

�&*

!*&#

����

���

���0 ��

����

���

!!&

!!&

1�

���

������

��� ���

���!

�*�

����

���

����� ���

���

!*

%*

!"%

��"#

����

!�"

��

!&

���

!��#

���

!�

��

����

�������

�&%

!�&#

���

�!�

��$&

!$�#

�%*

�%*

���(

)��

�����

� �

!%�

!�&#

����

$$$

���!

!$�#

��$

��$

����

���

��+��

����

���

!!�#

�*"

�*"

�*"

!!&#

���

����

���,

���

����

���!�&

���#

�&&

*$*

���"

!��#

��%

��%

����

�����

��!��

���#

!&$

$*�

�!�

!�&#

����

����

���-

��.

��

�/��

����

��

���+ ��

"��

!*$#

����

����

!!

��

!�"#

�!�

�!�

���0 ��

�����

����

����

����

1�

���

������

��� ���

���!

�%�

����

���

����� ���

���

�*

%�

���

!*&#

%�%

%�%

$&

�$

��$$

!&�#

"!�

��$

����

�������

�&"

!%�#

!!�

$�&

!&�

!%&#

$�$

�&!

���(

)��

�����

� �

�!$�

!*�#

$&%

$&%

�!"�

!&�#

��$

*�*

����

���

��+��

����

�!$*

!��#

$"$

"��

�**

!&&#

����

!��

���,

���

����

��!

�*

!$�#

&*&

%"*

��!&

!��#

����

�*�

����

�����

��$*�

!�"#

����

����

$��

!�!#

����

����

���-

��.

��

�/��

����

��

���+ ��

!�

!$

�*%#

����

����

!*

�!

�&&#

����

��

���0 ��

�����

����

����

����

2��

���

�3

���

Not

es:

Stat

istic

ally

sign

ifica

ntp

-val

ues

atth

e10

%le

vela

rebo

lded

.p

-val

ues

are

calc

ulat

edus

ing

boot

stra

pte

chni

ques

,and

furt

her

adju

sted

usin

gth

est

epdo

wn

proc

edur

e(R

oman

oan

dW

olf,

2005

).E

stim

atio

nis

cond

ition

alon

back

grou

ndva

riab

les

pres

ente

din

Tabl

e4

ofth

em

ain

pape

r.C

alcu

latio

nsar

eba

sed

onth

eTe

rman

data

.

6

Page 9: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Tabl

eA

-6:M

arri

age

Stat

us

����

���

���

������

����

���

���� �

��

���

�������

���

���

��

���

���

���

������

����

���

���� �

��

���

�������

���

���

�������

���

��

����

���

����� ���

���

���

���

����

!��

"#!

���

�!$

���!

����

���

���%

�������

��!

��!�

��#

��#

��!

����

!�$

!�$

���&

'���

����

� �

����

����

#$�

#$�

��!�

���"

����

���

���(

)��

��*��

����

��"

���#

���

���

����

���$

��#

���

����

���

����

���

��

����

��"

#"�

�!"

����

����

�!�

����

)����

���!$

���!

����

!�#

���"

���#

�!�

$"�

���+

��,

��

�-��

�)��

��

���* ��

��"

��!!

����

����

����

��!!

�#�

�#�

���. ��

�����

����

����

��

����

���%

���

����

���

����� ���

���

"��

���$

��!#

#�!

#�!

��"

���

��!�

����

����

���/

������

���

��

���%

�������

��!"

��$�

"#"

���

��"�

��!�

��

�#!

���&

'���

����

� �

����

��$�

���

#�$

���

��!�

���

���

���(

)��

��*��

����

�!#

��$!

!#�

�#�

�$�

��!#

$��

�!�

����

���

����

������

��$�

�$$

�$$

����

��!$

�#"

�#"

����

)����

�����

��!�

���

���

��!

��!�

�!�

���

���+

��,

��

�-��

�)��

��

���* ��

�!#

����

���

����

�!�

��"�

���

����

���. ��

�!

$�

!$�

���

����

&����

��0

�� ��

����

���

����� ���

���

�$$

��"�

��!!

����

!��

���

��!$

���"

����

����

���%

�������

�$#

��!�

�"�

"��

���

����

����

����

���&

'���

����

� �

�!$

���#

!""

�#�

��!�

���"

����

���

���(

)��

��*��

����

���$

��!�

���

�!�

���

����

#��

#��

����

���

����

���

��

��!�

���

#$$

�!"

���!

����

�!�

����

)����

��

��

����

�#"

#$�

����

����

����

!�"

���+

��,

��

�-��

�)��

��

���* ��

��$#

��$�

!�!

!�!

����

��!�

��$

#�#

���. ��

����

���

����

����

&����0

�� ��

����

���

����� ���

���

!�$

��$!

��!�

!!�

�!"

!��

����

��!!

���

����

���%

�������

�$�

��$!

!"�

���

�$#

��!"

���

��#

���&

'���

����

� �

�!�

��!�

!��

�!#

��!�

��!$

$#!

�#�

���(

)��

��*��

����

��$�

��!�

����

$!$

��"�

��!�

����

$��

����

���

����

���

"�

��!�

���

!$�

�!�

��!�

!$�

$$�

����

)����

��

!!

��!!

$��

���

���!

���#

���

���

���+

��,

��

�-��

�)��

��

���* ��

����

��"�

��

����

��$�

��""

����

���

���. ��

�����

���

����

���

0��

��

���

����

���

�1�

���

����

���

����� ���

���

��"

��$"

���#

����

!�$

���

��""

����

����

����

���%

�������

�!!

���#

!�$

��#

�$�

���"

����

���

���&

'���

����

� �

�!�

����

����

!#�

���"

���!

��$

��$

���(

)��

��*��

����

�$"

����

����

���

��!

���$

��"

#��

����

���

����

���

!�

����

����

!""

�!�

���!

����

�!#

����

)����

��

��

����

�"�

���

���!

����

���

���

���+

��,

��

�-��

�)��

��

���* ��

���"

��!�

����

����

��"!

��!�

���

$$�

���. ��

�����

����

����

����

2��

���

��

���

Not

es:

Stat

istic

ally

sign

ifica

ntp

-val

ues

atth

e10

%le

vela

rebo

lded

.p

-val

ues

are

calc

ulat

edus

ing

boot

stra

pte

chni

ques

,and

furt

her

adju

sted

usin

gth

est

epdo

wn

proc

edur

e(R

oman

oan

dW

olf,

2005

).E

stim

atio

nis

cond

ition

alon

back

grou

ndva

riab

les

pres

ente

din

Tabl

e4

ofth

em

ain

pape

r.C

alcu

latio

nsar

eba

sed

onth

eTe

rman

data

.

7

Page 10: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table A-7: Lifetime Outcomes

���� ������

���

��� � ��������

���� ���

����������

������� ���� ������

���

��� � ��������

���� ���

����������

�������

������������������ ���� �������� ������ ��� ���� ��!" #$% #$% &$% ���� ��&" ���� ����

���'������� ��(& ��!" ���� ���� �&� ���" �!� %��

����)�������� � ��% ��%" ���� ��� �#� ��%" ��� ���

���*+����,������ ���( ��%" %(� !&� ��%� ��(" ��� &!�

���-��� ������ ��� ��&" %�$ (#� �&# ��&" ��� %&(

���� +���� � �&& ���" ��& ��� ��% ���" �%! ((&

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ���$ �&$" #�� !%& ���$ �%#" ���� ����

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

�����2� �� ���� �������� ������ %�� ���� ���" �#� #�# ��� ���( �%�" ���� ����

���'������� ���$ ��%" (�� $!� ��# ���" (## $�(

����)�������� � ��& �%�" ($& ($& �#( �%#" ��% &�&

���*+����,������ ���& ���" $%� $%� ��( �%!" ��& #!�

���-��� ������ ��& �%�" #�� !#� ��$ �%!" �&� �&�

���� +���� � ��� �&&" $�� $$# ��( �&$" #%& $($

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� �!$ �!�" �$% #%& �#� ��$" �(! &��

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

*���'�+���3��� � ���� �������� ������ $�� ��( ��!" ��� �%% $&( ��� ��&" $#$ $#$

���'������� ��� ��$" $!� $!� ��% ��%" (%� (%�

����)�������� � ��% ���" �&! #$% ��� ���" ��� &�%

���*+����,������ ��& ��&" $�� $$& ��$ ���" �%� !!�

���-��� ������ ��& ��(" !#( !#( ���� ��&" &(% �((

���� +���� � ��# ��&" �!$ $%# ���( ���" ��� �#&

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� �## �&&" ��� �## �!% ��(" ���� ����

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

�������� ��� ���� �������� ������ �&� ��&� ��(" ��� (�� ��� ���� ���" ��� ����

���'������� �&# �&�" �%� (&� �&$ ��%" ��� &%&

����)�������� � ��( ��#" �!� (�% ���� ��&" &(! &(!

���*+����,������ ��&! ��#" �� �&$ ��%� ��#" ���� &!�

���-��� ������ �%� ��(" ��� &�� ��# ���" �&� ���

���� +���� � ��� ���" &�! !&! ���� ��$" �&� $&�

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ���� �%#" ��� ���� ��&( �%%" ���� ����

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

�����4 �56��� ���� �������� ������ %#& ��# ��$" &&$ �(! %�� ��(� ���" ���� ����

7�����������/ ���'������� ���( �&%" !&� $(! �!� ��(" ���� ����

����)�������� � ��! ��$" ��$ !(� ���� ��%" ���� ��%

���*+����,������ ���� �&�" %($ $�! ���� ��!" #(! #(!

���-��� ������ ��� ��#" ���� ���� �&% ���" ���� ����

���� +���� � ��� ��&" $!( $!( ��( ���" !�� $�!

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ���$ �%$" !(% !(% ���# �%%" ��� ���

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

-�����4 �56��� ���� �������� ������ !(& ��% ��&" �!� (�( $�# ��� ���" %#� #!�

8������������/ ���'������� ���� ��&" #�� $#$ ��&� ��%" ��� ���

����)�������� � ��$ ���" #&# !(� ��$ ��%" �#% �!&

���*+����,������ ���# ���" �%� ((& ��� ��&" ##% !(�

���-��� ������ ��%% ��!" ���� ���� ���� ���" ��% %(#

���� +���� � ���( ��$" &$# !�� ��& ���" (�� (��

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ��# �&�" ���� ���� �%# ��#" ���� ���

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

6������ 7����

Notes: Statistically significant p-values at the 10% level are bolded. p-values are calculated using bootstrap techniques,and further adjusted using the stepdown procedure (Romano and Wolf, 2005). Estimation is conditional on backgroundvariables presented in Table 4 of the main paper. Calculations are based on the Terman data.

8

Page 11: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table A-8: Midlife Outcomes

���� ������ ������ � ��������

���� ���

����������

������� ���� ������ ������ � ��������

���� ���

����������

�������

������������� ���� �������� ������ ��� ���� ���! �"# ��� $%� ���� ���! ���� ����

���&������� ���� ��'! ���� ��� �"� ��'! ��� ��%

���()�������� � �%# ��%! ���� ��' �%% ���! ��� �$#

���*+����,������ ��$ ��$! "�� "�� ���� ��#! %�" %�"

���-��� ������ ��' ��$! ��� $%� ��% ��"! $�� $��

���� +���� � ��# ���! $"� �'� �$� ��%! ��" %#�

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ��$� �%�! $�� ��� ���� �"�! �$' �%�

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

2� ��&�+���3��� �� ���� �������� ������ �"�� ��� �"%! ��" '"� $%�$ ��$$ �%#! '�� '��

���&������� �%' ���! ��% $�# �%� ��%! $�$ ���

���()�������� � ��$# �"�! $"� ��� ��'� �%�! ��$ $��

���*+����,������ ��$" ���! $'� ��� �"" �%%! ��� ���

���-��� ������ ��" �$�! %"$ %"% ���% ���! �� ��"

���� +���� � �$"� ��'! ��� ���� $�� ���! ���� ����

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ���$ �"�! ���� ���� �"�� �%%! ���� ����

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

4�����������/ ���� �������� ������ $%% ��% �$�! %$� '#� �#% ��'� ���! ���� ����

���&������� ���# �$%! ��' ��# �#� ���! ���� ����

���()�������� � ��� ��'! �'� '�# ���� ��%! ���� ����

���*+����,������ ��%% �$�! �$# $�� �$� ��'! �'� %��

���-��� ������ ��$ ���! ���� ���� ��� ���! ���� ����

���� +���� � ���� ��%! %#$ ��$ ��# ���! �"� '#�

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ��%� �"�! %�$ ��� ��$ �%%! #%� #%�

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

5������������/ ���� �������� ������ ��� �%' �'�! "�� '## ���� �"� �"'! $�� "�"

���&������� ���� �'�! $#" ��� ��%� ��"! "�" "�"

���()�������� � ��� ���! '$� '$� ��' ���! $�' $�'

���*+����,������ ��'� ���! �"� %$' �#% ���! ���� $��

���-��� ������ ��%� ���! ���� ���� ���� �"'! ���� ����

���� +���� � ��� �"%! ��% ��" ���� �%%! '$� '$�

���.��/�� �0���+���� ���, �� ��� ��#! "'" "'� �#� ���! ��$ ���

���1 ��� ���� ���� ���� ����

6������ 4����

Notes: Midlife outcomes represent year 1960, which correspond approximately to age 50. Statistically significantp-values at the 10% level are bolded. p-values are calculated using bootstrap techniques, and further adjusted usingthe stepdown procedure (Romano and Wolf, 2005). Estimation is conditional on background variables presented inTable 4 of the main paper. Calculations are based on the Terman data.

9

Page 12: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

B FACTOR ANALYSIS

In this section we present a justification for the five-factor measurement system used in the esti-

mated model. Factors that are close to the Big Five were first identified in the Terman data by

psychologists (Martin and Friedman, 2000; Martin et al., 2007), but these authors did not docu-

ment their factor analysis. To be sure of our factor model specification, we reanalyse the measures

and find factors that are similar to those obtained by psychologists.

This analysis builds on results from Savelyev (2017), who analyzes the 1922 measures in search

of childhood factors related to the Big Five personality taxonomy and finds three such factors,

namely childhood Conscientiousness, Openness, and Extraversion. This paper complements the

1922 measures with measures of Agreeableness and Neuroticism from 1940 to complete the Big

Five. It would be ideal to base these two additional factors on 1922 measures, but such data are not

available. Previous research by psychologists based on the same data also did not find satisfying

measures of Agreeableness and Neuroticism among the 1922 measures.

Factor analysis is broken into two standard parts: (1) the exploratory factor analysis (EFA)

and (2) the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).2 EFA establishes the number of factors and the

clustering of measures by factors. CFA tests the specification and confirms a factor model with

exclusion restrictions that are implied by EFA. The final confirmed factor model is embedded as a

measurement system in the main statistical model in the paper.

B.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

EFA establishes the number of latent factors behind a set of available measures. Our set of mea-

sures includes measures of childhood Conscientiousness, Openness, and Extraversion, as estab-

lished in Savelyev (2017), plus available 1940 measures of Agreeableness and Neuroticism, as

suggested by psychologists (Martin et al., 2007).

While we are guided by the prior papers to expect five latent factors, we still conduct an analysis

2See, for instance, the Web appendix to Savelyev (2017) available online for a detailed discussion aimed ateconomists of technicalities related to exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.

10

Page 13: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

of the number of factors as a precaution against possible model misspecification. Our choice of

the number of factors is informed by a variety of tests typically used for this purpose, including the

scree test3 (see Figure B-1), the Horn’s test4, the minimum average partial correlation criterion,5

and the Onatski test6 (see Table B-1 for a summary of results). As usual, these tests give somewhat

different numbers, so we have to choose between 4- and 5-factor models.7

The next standard step in EFA is to perform a specific oblique rotation such as quartimin

conditional on the established number of factors. We apply the quartimin rotation separately for

4 and 5 factors. We keep measures in the analysis that have a factor loading of at least 0.4 for

the factor extracted from it. This is a conservative threshold that allows us to keep some less-

informative proxies but exclude especially weak ones.8

Conditional on five factors, we obtain a diagonal structure presented in Table B-2, which sup-

ports of the five-factor representation (see factor loadings that are greater than 0.4 in bold, all of

which happen to be diagonal elements), We can therefore dismiss the four-factor specification for

missing important heterogeneity that supports an additional latent factor dimension.

Hence, we have established a set of measures, each of which is strongly loaded on one of five

factors and only weakly loaded on other factors under the quartimin rotation shown in Table B-2.

The next step is CFA, which tests the specification of the factor model implied by EFA.

B.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

In our CFA, we compare two alternatives for the main models, both in line with the EFA (see Table

B-3). In model B, we impose stringent exclusion restrictions such that each measure loads on one

3The scree test is a visual test using a plot of the eigenvalues from the covariance matrix of the measures.4This test, suggested by Horn (1965), is based on comparing the eigenvalues from the observed covariance matrix

against eigenvalues from a randomly drawn covariance matrix.5The criterion is based on Velicer (1976).6The test is proposed in Onatski (2009).7 Another test for the number of factors is the Guttman-Kaiser rule. The rule is based on the absolute cutoff for

the eigenvalues, where the number of eigenvalues greater than one indicates the number of factors. The rule providesan upper–bound on the number of factors usually leading to an overestimation of the optimal number. In our case, therule suggests 7–8 factors, considerably more than all other methods.

8Excluding weak proxies by using a threshold set by the statistician is a standard procedure in EFA.

11

Page 14: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

and only one factor corresponding to the diagonal elements in Table B-2 (such a measure is called

“dedicated”). In model A, we allow factors to load on multiple measures when the correlations

between certain factors and measures are present even though weak.

We present standard model fit statistics which show a better fit for model A. As they should, CFI

and TLI are above 90% for models of type A, while RMSEA are below 5%.9 We choose model A

as our primary model since exclusion restrictions are better empirically justified, leading to better

fit statistics. Since cross-loadings introduced in model A are comparatively weak, latent factors are

still interpreted based on the diagonal loadings. Non-diagonal loadings represent the fact that real-

life measures may not be purely dedicated: a measure of one particular factor may also correlate

with another. For instance, while “leadership” is mainly a measure of Extraversion, we find that it

also somewhat correlates with Openness. Thus, we find a well-justified model specification while

relaxing the overly-restrictive assumption that each measure is dedicated to only one factor.

The five factors as defined here are similar to corresponding factors defined in other papers

looking at the Terman data (Martin and Friedman, 2000; Martin et al., 2007), but the literature

uses indexes based on dedicated measures (like in model B), not latent factors with cross-correlated

measures (like in model A).

9The Chi-squared test is rejected for both models, but we expect this test to be most likely rejected even for a goodfit for studies with modest or high sample sizes, as discussed in detail in the Web Appendix to Savelyev (2017).

12

Page 15: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Figu

reB

-1:S

cree

Plot

s

(a)M

ales

(b)F

emal

es

01234567

Eigenvalues

12

34

56

78

910

Num

ber

of fa

ctor

s

01234567

Eigenvalues

12

34

56

78

910

Num

ber

of fa

ctor

s

Not

es:A

scre

epl

otis

apl

otof

the

eige

nval

ueso

btai

ned

from

the

vari

ance

-cov

aria

nce

mat

rix

ofth

eps

ycho

logi

calm

easu

res,

orde

red

from

the

larg

estt

oth

esm

alle

st.

The

inte

rpre

tatio

nof

the

plot

isto

look

fort

he“e

lbow

”or

kink

tode

term

ine

the

num

bero

ffac

tors

(scr

eete

st).

Aft

erth

eki

nk,a

dditi

onal

fact

ors

(“sc

ree”

)do

little

toex

plai

nth

eva

rian

cein

the

mea

sure

s.

13

Page 16: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table B-1: Procedures Determining the Number of Factors

����� �������

��������

� �

�������

� �

��������

� �

����������

� �

Notes: (a)Scree test is obtained based on Figure B-1. (b)Horn’s test is executed using a code from Dinno (2009).(c)Minimum average pairwise correlation criterion is based on Velicer (1976). (d)The Onatski test is based on Onatski(2009). The upper–bound on the number of factors is estimated to be 7 for males and 8 for females for our case basedon the Guttman–Kaiser rule.

14

Page 17: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table B-2: Factor Loadings Estimated as Part of the EFA (Oblique Quartimin Rotation)

Openess Desire to know .630 .100 .003 .061 .013 .690 .148 .035 .060 .004

Originality .564 .099 .154 .024 .013 .668 .076 .071 .035 .041

Intelligence .687 .111 .026 .021 .029 .676 .090 .063 .010 .006

Conscientiousness Prudence .088 .563 .014 .090 .070 .150 .625 .020 .006 .027

Conscientiousness .007 .935 .009 .036 .007 .033 .896 .008 .044 .000

Truthfulness .121 .708 .018 .002 .013 .051 .749 .062 .048 .045

Extraversion Fondness for large groups .041 .088 .713 .045 .017 .024 .114 .647 .015 .001

Leadership .285 .046 .570 .097 .047 .167 .035 .605 .074 .018

Popular with other children .017 .168 .659 .048 .000 .054 .080 .817 .057 .011

Agreeableness Easy to get along with .015 .001 .076 .389 .380 .061 .031 .053 .527 .251

Avoids arguments .073 .010 .005 .603 .121 .093 .013 .061 .534 .025

Critical .033 .013 .021 .685 .089 .074 .036 .058 .631 .083

Tactful .052 .033 .059 .805 .036 .107 .056 .013 .776 .153

Unfeeling .092 .023 .014 .683 .010 .007 .084 .007 .582 .096

Domineering .080 .100 .101 .584 .050 .122 .098 .077 .457 .042

Inflated opinion of self .001 .134 .015 .634 .142 .025 .012 .058 .619 .094

Neuroticism Miserable .015 .101 .108 .044 .791 .069 .065 .021 .097 .780

Touchy .143 .057 .032 .305 .491 .005 .051 .011 .121 .577

Periods of loneliness .005 .061 .061 .028 .657 .241 .097 .056 .042 .619

Lonely when with others .049 .058 .024 .093 .510 .178 .021 .012 .036 .609

Remorseful and regretful .032 .062 .013 .018 .611 .090 .125 .017 .004 .713

Lack self confidence .051 .035 .229 .346 .510 .126 .003 .045 .248 .494

Worry about humiliating experiences .063 .106 .082 .055 .631 .058 .136 .003 .056 .808

Emotionally unstable .041 .042 .055 .036 .748 .021 .033 .069 .135 .733

Easily hurt .079 .121 .007 .039 .676 .127 .080 .087 .156 .812

Hard to be serene .208 .112 .109 .051 .768 .010 .036 .068 .233 .659

Moody .083 .055 .020 .039 .691 .071 .031 .035 .110 .635

Sensitive .037 .062 .016 .020 .581 .140 .079 .008 .119 .657

Factor Loadings

Females Males

Notes: Factor loadings greater than 0.4 are bolded and italicized.

15

Page 18: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table B-3: CFA Estimates: Factor Loadings and Model Fit Statistics

������������

�����������

������������

�����������

������������

�����������

������������

�����������

�������������������

�������� ��� ������� ���� ������� � �� ������� ��� �������

����������������� ���� ������ ���� ������� �� ������ ��� �������

������������ ���� ������� ���� ����� � �� � ������ �� � �������

����������� ����� ������� � � ����� ������� � �

����������������������� ����� ������� � � ����� ������ � �

�����������

�������������� ��� ������� ��� ������� �� ������ ��� ����� �

��� ��!���" ��� ������� ���� ������� ��� ������� ��� �������

#������ ���� ���$ ���� �� ���� ���� �� ��� ������� ��� �������

������� �� �� ������� � � ��� � ������� � �

!��������� ����� ������� � � ����� ������ � �

����������������������� ��� �" ������ � � ����#� ����� � �

$%���&�������$�

%�������������!� �� ���&� ��� ������� � �� ������� ��� ������� �$� �������

'�!������& � � ������� ��$� ������� � �� ����� � ���� �������

��&��!��������������������� �� � ������� ���� ������ ���� ���� � ���� ����� �

'���(����� ���) ���� �� � � ������ ������� � �

����������� ����"� ���� �� � � ����)" ������� � �

*+����,�������*�

���(!�"���� ���!��� ����� �$� ������� ��$ ������� ����� ������� ��� �������

���)*�����!� �+���� � ������� � �� ������ �$ ������ �� �������

���������!� ,� � ������� ,���� ������� ,�� ������� ,��� ����� �

����!����� ��� ������� ��� ������� ���� ������� ��� �������

���-������� ,�� ����� � ,� � ������� ,� � ������� ,��� ����� �

�����+������� ,� $� ������� ,� �$ ������� ,� �� ������� ,� � �������

���#���!�����&������������� ,��� ������� ,�� ������� ,� �� ������ ,�$� ������

!������(���(������ ����� ���� � � � �$$ ������ � �

-���.�,���/�������+�%��������� ���#� ������� � � �� )� ������ � �

$����.��� ����� ������� � � ���)� ������ � �

0�����,������� ��� #" ������ � � ����� ������� � �

1������&� ���"� ������� � � �� �# ������ � �

���������������� ����#� ���� �� � � ���#) ���� �� � �

2���������/�2�

���.����!/�� ���$ ���� �� ���� ���� �� ��� ���� �� ��� ���� �

��������" � �� ������� � �� ������� � � ������� � �� �������

������������������������ ��� ������� ��� ������� � ������ �� ������

���'����"����������������� �� ������� ��$ ������� � $� ������ � $� �������

���0�+��������!����� ������ ��� ������� ���� ������� ��� ������� �� �������

���'!������������������ � � ������� �$$� ������� ��$ ������ � �$ ������

���1���"�!/������+���!��� ��2&�������� ���� ���� � ���� ���� �� �� ������� �$ �������

���(+�����!��"�����!/�� ���� ���� � ���� ���� � ��$ ����� � �� � ����� �

���(!���"����� �� ������� ���$ ���� �� ��� ������� ��� ������

���3!������/�������� ��� ������� ���� ������� �� � ������� ��$� ������

���.���" � � ������� � $ ������� ���� ������ ���� ������

���4������*� �� ������� � �� ������� � � ������ � �� ������

$��.��+������+���� ����# ������� � � ����"� ������ � �

�������� �� �" ������� � � ����� ������� � �

3��������������

�+�����((�����/

��&���

��/������&�(������%��45�

'�����!��������%�'!5�

6���/����7���������(�����%�/������681$*�

1�/�����9� #"� #"� ��� ���

����� ����� ����# �����

����# ��""� ��� # ��"�)

����� ��"#� ����� ��" �

����� ����� ����� �����

�)#�� "���� �� �� ))"��

��� ��� ��� ���

8���� 4�/����

/����* /����: /����* /����:

Notes: Loadings above 0.4 are in bold.

16

Page 19: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

C SUPPLEMENTARY RESULTS

Below we present miscellaneous supplementary results that support the paper.

Survival by Health Behaviors and Health Figures C-1–C-3 document survival functions by

health behaviors and health status and demonstrate expected correlations between survival and

beneficial health behaviors, health-enhancing lifestyles, and self-reported health. In particular, we

see that heavy drinking and being overweight are negatively associated with survival for both men

and women, though a smaller portion of women are heavy drinkers or overweight, and so results

for women are less precise (see Figure C-1). In Figure C-2 we see that marriage is associated with

longevity for men and women. We also see a positive correlation between group memberships

and men’s longevity. For women, the survival difference is imprecise. Finally, we see associa-

tions between health measures and survival in Figure C-3. For men, differences are strong for

both general and mental health. For women, we see some difference for general health and no

distinguishable difference for mental health. Figures for health provide another representation of

a well-known paradox: women seem to be less healthy than men but live longer. Indeed, a higher

share of women report poor or fair health in the Terman sample, but women with poor or fair health

are twice as likely to survive to age 80, compared to men (50% for women vs 25% for men).

Correlations Among the Big Five Personality Traits Table C-1 presents correlations among

Big Five personality traits for the Terman population, grouped by gender. These correlations are in

line with those documented in the Big Five literature, though some peculiarities exist, which might

be specific to the Terman population.

For comparison of our estimates with the literature, we use a meta-analysis by van der Linden

et al. (2010), which provides correlations among each Big Five Personality trait. Because genders

are pooled in the meta-analysis, we compare the correlations from the meta-analysis to the average

of our Terman male/female correlations.

The correlation between Conscientiousness and Neuroticism is negative in the meta-analysis.

17

Page 20: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

We estimate it to be both negative for women and negative on average (for men and women).

The Conscientiousness-Agreeableness correlation is positive in the literature. We obtained

positive estimates too, but only the estimate for males is statistically significant.

Extraversion and Agreeableness correlate positively in the meta-analysis. We find a positive

correlation on average, with only the estimate for males being statistically significant.

Neuroticism-Agreeableness are negatively correlated in the literature. We find a negative cor-

relation on average, but it is only statistically significant for men.

The literature reports a positive correlation between Extraversion and Openness. We find it

positive for Terman men, statistically insignificant for women, and positive on average.

Openness and Conscientiousness show a positive, borderline statistically significant correlation

in the general population. Likewise, they show a positive (and statistically significant) correlation

for the Terman sample.

Finally, Conscientiousness and Extraversion are positively correlated, according to the meta-

analysis. We find the correlation to be positive for men, but negative for women. The correlation

coefficients are similar by gender and give a small negative average.

Specification Robustness Checks In our main specification we control for both skills and ed-

ucation. Only Conscientiousness, Openness, Extraversion, and IQ are measured in early life (in

1922, at about age 12) before the college education choice is made. To control for the full set of

Big Five traits, in our main model we also control for Neuroticism and Agreeableness, which were

measured in 1940 (about age 32).

One concern with adding Neuroticism and Agreeableness is that they could be affected by

education. On the other hand, dropping them may lead to the omitted variable bias in the education

coefficient, and so neither model is preferable ex ante. We provide a robustness check in which

we control for 1922 skills only and compare the education coefficient with our main model that

controls for both 1922 and 1940 skills. We show that the alternative specification does not make a

difference.

18

Page 21: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Another robustness check is related to associations between skills and outcomes. Control-

ling for education in our main model could bias the conditional associations between skills and

outcomes. Our second robustness check shows that there is no practical difference between con-

trolling for education or not. This result has to do with the lack of any strong relationship between

the Big Five and education in the Terman sample, as documented in a companion paper (Savelyev,

2017).

Tables C-2 and C-3 show the robustness results described above for men and women. Panels

(A) and (C) of each table present statistically significant coefficients for our main results. Panels

(B) and (D) present the corresponding coefficients based on robustness checks. By comparing

panel (A) with panel (B), and panel (C) with panel (D), we conclude that the estimates are close

and specification makes no practical difference.

Placebo Test Table C-4 presents three placebo tests for each gender. We expect to find effects of

education on health-related life-outcomes, but we expect to find no effect of education on predeter-

mined health outcomes, which include “Normal Birth or no Birth Problems,” “Childhood health,”

and “Childhood energy.” We regress each of these predetermined outcomes on the education vari-

able conditional on other controls, skills, and IQ. We test and do not reject any individual test

(p-values for the tests range from 0.232 to 0.813). The result supports our conditional indepen-

dence assumption.

The Role of Selection The literature reports substantial selection on skills and observables (Bi-

jwaard et al., 2015; Conti et al., 2010). We perform a similar exercise for Terman data and find

no such selection. We view this not as a contradiction to previous work, but as a supplementary

result obtained for a unique high-IQ population. Figure C-4 presents education coefficients with

a full set of controls and without any controls and shows that results are almost identical, with an

exception of mental health.

19

Page 22: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Figure C-1: Survival by Health Behaviors and Their Proxies

(a) Heavy Drinking, Males (b) Heavy Drinking, Females

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

No (399) Yes (259) No (403) Yes (104)

(c) Overweight, Males (d) Overweight, Females

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age2

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

01

00

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

Normal (470) Abnormal (106) Normal (433) Abnormal (29)

Notes: Heavy drinking is an indicator of whether the subject has ever reported drinking heavily over the period of1940–1960. Overweight refers to subjects who had a BMI above 25 in 1940. Survival graphs are based on life-tablecalculations; standard errors above and below the estimate are represented by the thinner lines. Calculations are basedon the Terman data.

20

Page 23: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Figure C-2: Survival by Lifestyles

(a) Group Membership, Males (b) Group Membership, Females

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Surv

ival P

robabili

ty, %

45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

Low (297) High (264) Low (252) High (180)

(c) Ever Divorced, Males (d) Ever Divorced, Females

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Surv

ival P

robabili

ty, %

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age2

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

01

00

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

No (461) Yes (168) No (360) Yes (122)

Notes: For group membership in 1950, “high” refers to subjects having a greater number of organization membershipsthan the median, “low” for at or below the median. “Ever divorced” indicates whether the subject was divorced at leastonce. Survival graphs are based on life-table calculations; standard errors above and below are represented by thethinner lines. Calculations are based on the Terman data.

21

Page 24: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Figure C-3: Survival by Self-Reported Health

(a) General Health, Males (b) General Health, Females

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Surv

ival P

robabili

ty, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

Good or Very Good (600) Poor or Fair (48) Good or Very Good (435) Poor or Fair (63)

(c) Mental Difficulty, Males (d) Mental Difficulty, Females

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age2

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

01

00

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Su

rviv

al P

rob

ab

ility

, %

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Participant’s Age

No (374) Yes (265) No (266) Yes (229)

Notes: General health indicates whether the subject has ever experienced poor or fair health over the years 1940–1960.Mental difficulty indicates whether or not the subject experienced any mental difficulty over the years 1950–1960.Survival graphs are based on life-table calculations; standard errors above and below the estimate are represented bythe thinner lines. Calculations are based on the Terman data.

22

Page 25: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table C-1: Correlations Among the Big Five Personality Traits

Males

Openness 0.387 *** 1

(0.048)

Extraversion 0.147 * 0.238 ** 1

(0.089) (0.097)

Agreeableness 0.183 *** -0.03 0.161 ** 1

(0.065) (0.064) (0.063)

Neuroticism 0.028 0.052 -0.044 -0.179 **

(0.053) (0.055) (0.057) (0.080)

Females

Openness 0.425 *** 1

(0.058)

Extraversion -0.232 * 0.038 1

(0.124) (0.109)

Agreeableness 0.027 -0.036 -0.06 1

(0.074) (0.079) (0.079)

Neuroticism -0.109 * 0.131 * -0.071 -0.14

(0.058) (0.067) (0.071) (0.087)

Conscientio-

usnessOpenness Extraversion Agreeableness

Notes: We estimate 5-factor models separately for men and women and identify correlations among latent factors.Standard errors are reported in parentheses. Statistical significance is represented by asterisks, where ***,** and *

indicate p < 0.01, 0.05, and 0.10 respectively. Calculations are based on the Terman data.

23

Page 26: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table C-2: Specification Robustness Check Males

Lifetime Outcomes, Males

A. Lifetime Outcomes, Main Model

1940–1960 Ever Drank Heavily -.055 .061 -.109

1991 Ever Smoked -.107

1940–1960 Any Organization .084

Ever Divorced -.055 -.137

Ever Poor/Fair MH -.071 .085 .134

Never Poor/Fair GH

B. Lifetime Outcomes, Robustness checks*

1940–1960 Ever Drank Heavily -.061 .064 -.106

1991 Ever Smoked -.105

1940–1960 Any Organization .084

Ever Divorced -.062 -.136

Ever Poor/Fair MH -.072 .084 .134

Never Poor/Fair GH

C. Midlife Outcomes, Main Model

Drank Heavily -.072

# of Organizations .327 1.501

Mental Difficulty -.080 .091 -.101 .120

General Health -.211

D. Midlife Outcomes, Robustness checks*

Drank Heavily -.075

# of Organizations .368 1.477

Mental Difficulty -.080 .091 -.101 .120

General Health -.210

EducationConscientio-

usnessOpenness Extraversion

Agreeable-

nessNeuroticism IQ

Notes: In panels (A) and (C) only coefficients of the main model with p < 0.15 (after stepdown adjustment) arereported, while a blank cell refers to a coefficient with p-value above 0.15. These are the same coefficients that arereported in the main paper. The results are typeface coded so that bolded coefficients refer to associations that areconsidered in the literature to be beneficial for longevity (such as a decrease in heavy drinking or an increase in socialparticipation), and italicized coefficients refer to adverse associations. Estimation is conditional on background vari-ables presented in Table 4 of the main paper. In panels (B) and (D), coefficients are reported that are correspondingto those in panels (A) and (C), but for alternative models: for skills coefficients, we use an alternative model thatdoes not control for education. For education coefficients, we use an alternative model that controls for skills mea-sured in 1922 (Conscientiousness, Openness, and Extraversion), but omits skills measured in 1940 (Neuroticism andAgreeableness). Calculations are based on the Terman data.

24

Page 27: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table C-3: Specification Robustness Check Females

Lifetime Outcomes, Females

A. Main Model

1940–1960 Ever Drank Heavily -.073

1991 Ever Smoked

1940–1960 Any Organization

Ever Divorced -.111

Ever Poor/Fair MH .152

Never Poor/Fair GH -.044 .116

B. Robustness checks(a)

1940–1960 Ever Drank Heavily -.074

1991 Ever Smoked

1940–1960 Any Organization

Ever Divorced -.120

Ever Poor/Fair MH .153

Never Poor/Fair GH -.052 .128

C. Midlife Outcomes, Main Model

Drank Heavily

# of Organizations -.352 1.213

Mental Difficulty .123

General Health -.241

D. Midlife Outcomes, Robustness checks*

Drank Heavily

# of Organizations -.299 1.175

Mental Difficulty .126

General Health -.245

EducationConscientio-

usnessOpenness Extraversion

Agreeable-

nessNeuroticism IQ

Notes: In panels (A) and (C) only coefficients of the main model with p < 0.15 (after stepdown adjustment) arereported, while a blank cell refers to a coefficient with p-value above 0.15. These are the same coefficients that arereported in the main paper. The results are typeface coded so that bolded coefficients refer to associations that areconsidered in the literature to be beneficial for longevity (such as a decrease in heavy drinking or an increase in socialparticipation), and italicized coefficients refer to adverse associations. Estimation is conditional on background vari-ables presented in Table 4 of the main paper. In panels (B) and (D), coefficients are reported that are correspondingto those in panels (A) and (C), but for alternative models: for skills coefficients, we use an alternative model thatdoes not control for education. For education coefficients, we use an alternative model that controls for skills mea-sured in 1922 (Conscientiousness, Openness, and Extraversion), but omits skills measured in 1940 (Neuroticism andAgreeableness). Calculations are based on the Terman data.

25

Page 28: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Table C-4: Placebo Tests

Predetermined Health Outcomes Males Females

Normal Birth or no Birth Problems -0.054 -0.016

(0.045) (0.045)

[0.232] [0.731]

Childhood Health -0.043 -0.099

(0.078) (0.087)

[0.579] [0.259]

Childhood Energy 0.038 -0.019

(0.071) (0.082)

[0.594] [0.813]

Notes: Each of three predetermined health outcomes is regressed on education, latent skills, and a full set of back-ground variables excluding that one predetermined outcome. Coefficients for education are reported. Standard errorsare in round parentheses. p-values are in square parentheses. Calculations are based on the Terman data.

26

Page 29: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Figure C-4: Selection Bias in the Terman Data

(a) Males-.

2-.

10

.1.2

Education C

oef.

Hea

vy D

rinking

Ove

rweigh

t

Phy

sica

l Exe

rcise

Eve

r Sm

oked

Any

Mem

bers

hips

Eve

r Divor

ced

Men

tal H

ealth

Gen

eral H

ealth

(b) Females

-.2

-.1

0.1

.2

Education C

oef.

Hea

vy D

rinking

Ove

rweigh

t

Phy

sica

l Exe

rcise

Eve

r Sm

oked

Any

Mem

bers

hips

Eve

r Divor

ced

Men

tal H

ealth

Gen

eral H

ealth

Full Model No Controls

Notes: Coefficients for education are shown for two cases: (1) “full model” (conditional on latent skills and back-ground variables) and (2) “no controls model” (a univariate model with education as the only regressor). Calculationsare based on the Terman data.

27

Page 30: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

References

Bijwaard, G. E., H. v. Kippersluis, and J. Veenman (2015). Education and health: The role of

cognitive ability. Journal of Health Economics 42, 29–43.

Conti, G., J. J. Heckman, and S. Urzua (2010, May). The education-health gradient. American

Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 100(2), 1–5.

Dinno, A. (2009). Implementing Horn’s Parallel Analysis for Principal Component Analysis and

Factor Analysis. The Stata Journal 9, 291–298.

Horn, J. L. (1965). A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis. Psychome-

trika 30, 179–185.

Martin, L. R. and H. S. Friedman (2000). Comparing personality scales across time: An illustrative

study of validity and consistency in life-span archival data. Journal of Personality 68(1), 85–110.

Martin, L. R., H. S. Friedman, and J. E. Schwartz (2007). Personality and mortality risk across the

life span: The importance of conscientiousness as a biopsychosocial attribute. Health Psychol-

ogy 26(4), 428–436.

Onatski, A. (2009). Testing Hypotheses About the Number of Factors in Large Factor Models.

Econometrica 77, 1447–1479.

Romano, J. P. and M. Wolf (2005, March). Exact and approximate stepdown methods for multiple

hypothesis testing. Journal of the American Statistical Association 100(469), 94–108.

Savelyev, P. A. (2017). Socioemotional skills, education, and longevity of high-ability individuals.

Unpublished manuscript, The College of William & Mary, Department of Economics.

van der Linden, D., J. te Hijenhuis, and A. Bakker (2010). The general factor of personality:

A meta-analysis of big five intercorrelations and a criterion-related validity study. Journal of

Research in Personality.

28

Page 31: [FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION] Web Appendix to “Socioemotional

Velicer, W. (1976). The relation between factor score estimates, image scores, and principal com-

ponent scores. Educational and Psychology Measurement 36, 149–159.

29