Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T18:53:06.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sample-Selection Bias and Height Trends in the Nineteenth-Century United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2019

Ariell Zimran*
Affiliation:
Ariell Zimran is Assistant Professor of Economics, Vanderbilt University, PMB 351819, 2301 Vanderbilt Place, Nashville, TN 37235-1819 and Faculty Research Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research. E-mail: ariell.zimran@vanderbilt.edu.

Abstract

After adjusting for sample-selection bias, I find a net decline in average stature of 0.64 inches in the birth cohorts of 1832–1860 in the United States. This result supports the veracity of the Antebellum Puzzle—a deterioration of health during early modern economic growth in the United States. However, this adjustment alters the trend in average stature in the same cohort range, validating concerns over bias in the historical heights literature. The adjustment is based on census-linked military height data and uses a two-step semi-parametric sample-selection model to adjust for selection on observables and unobservables.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I am indebted to Joel Mokyr, Joseph Ferrie, and Matthew Notowidigdo for encouragement and guidance, and to Ann Carlos (the editor), William Collins, and anonymous referees for detailed comments on several drafts of this paper. I also thank Ran Abramitzky, Hoyt Bleakley, Louis Cain, John Cawley, Stephanie Chapman, Carola Frydman, Seema Jayachandran, John Komlos, Peter Koudijs, Thomas Mroz, Aviv Nevo, Sangyoon Park, Pedro Sant’Anna, Yannay Spitzer, Richard Steckel, Benjamin Ukert, and Carlos Villareal for helpful suggestions and insightful comments. Thanks are also due to Roy Mill for access to the dEntry transcription system; to seminar participants at Northwestern University, the London School of Economics, Vanderbilt University, the University of Colorado Boulder, the University of Queensland, the Australian National University, the University of Melbourne, and Stanford University; to participants in the 2013 Asian Meetings of the Econometric Society, the 2015 Western Economic Association International Graduate Student Dissertation Workshop and Conference, the 2015 European Historical Economics Society Conference, the 2015 Illinois Economic Association Conference, the 2015 Social Science History Association Conference, and the 2015 H2D2 Research Day at the University of Michigan for helpful comments; and to Christie Jeung for excellent research assistance. This project was supported by the Northwestern University Center for Economic History, the Balzan Foundation, a Northwestern University Graduate Research Grant, and an Economic History Association Dissertation Fellowship. Computations were performed on the Social Sciences Computing Cluster at Northwestern University and on the Advanced Computing Cluster for Research and Education at Vanderbilt University. This project, by virtue of its use of the Union Army Data, was supported by Award Number P01 AG10120 from the National Institute on Aging. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Aging or the National Institute of Health. This is a revised version of Chapter 2 of my dissertation. Previous versions of this paper were titled “New Perspectives on Historical Standards of Living: Evidence from US Military Enlistment in the Late Nineteenth Century,” “Does Sample-Selection Bias Explain the Industrialization Puzzle? Evidence from Military Enlistment in the Nineteenth-Century United States,” and “Does Sample-Selection Bias Explain the Antebellum Puzzle? Evidence from Military Enlistment in the Nineteenth-Century United States.” All errors are my own.

References

REFERENCES

A’Hearn, Brian. “The Antebellum Puzzle Revisited: A New Look at the Physical Stature of Union Army Recruits during the Civil War.” In The Biological Standard of Living in Comparative Perspective, edited by Komlos, John and Baten, Jörg, 250–67. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
Amemiya, Takeshi. Advanced Econometrics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Andrews, Donald W. K., and Schafgans, Marcia M. A.. “Semiparametric Estimation of the Intercept of a Sample Selection Model.” Review of Economic Studies 65, no. 3 (1998): 497517.10.1111/1467-937X.00055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Martha, Cole, Connor, Henderson, Morgan, et al. “How Well Do Automated Linking Methods Perform in Historical Samples? Evidence from New Ground Truth.” NBER Working Paper No. 24019, Cambridge, MA, 2017.Google Scholar
Bernardo, C. Joseph, and Bacon, Eugene H.. American Military Policy: Its Development Since 1775. Harrisburg: The Telegraph Press, 1955.Google Scholar
Bodenhorn, Howard, Guinnane, Timothy W., and Mroz, Thomas A.. “Sample-Selection Bias in the Historical Heights Literature.” Working Paper, Cowles Foundation, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 2014.Google Scholar
Bodenhorn, Howard, Guinnane, Timothy W., and Mroz, Thomas A.. “Sample-Selection Biases and the Industrialization Puzzle.” Journal of Economic History 77, no. 1 (2017): 171207.10.1017/S0022050717000031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffman, Edward M. The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784–1898. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
Cosslett, Stephen R.Efficient Estimation of Discrete-Choice Models.” In Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, edited by Manski, Charles F. and McFadden, Daniel, 51111. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Costa, Dora L., and Kahn, Matthew E.. “Cowards and Heroes: Group Loyalty in the American Civil War.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, no. 2 (2003): 519–48.10.1162/003355303321675446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, Dora L., and Kahn, Matthew E.. “Deserters, Social Norms, and Migration.” Journal of Law and Economics 50, no. 2 (2007): 323–53.10.1086/511321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, Dora L., and Steckel, Richard H.. “Long-Term Trends in Health, Welfare, and Economic Growth in the United States.” In Health and Welfare during Industrialization, edited by Steckel, Richard H. and Floud, Roderick, 4790. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Craig, Lee A.Antebellum Puzzle: The Decline in Heights at the Onset of Modern Economic Growth.” In Handbook of Economics and Human Biology, edited by Komlos, John and Kelly, Inas. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Das, Mitali, Newey, Whitney K., and Vella, Francis. “Nonparametric Estimation of Sample Selection Models.” Review of Economic Studies 70 (2003): 3358.10.1111/1467-937X.00236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deaton, Angus. “Height, Health, and Development.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, no. 33 (2007): 13232–7.10.1073/pnas.0611500104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Defense. Selected Manpower Statistics: Fiscal Year 1997 (DIOR/M01-97). Washington, DC: GPO, 1997.Google Scholar
Easterlin, Richard. “Intergenerational Differences in Per Capita Income, Population, and Total Income, 1840–1950.” In Trends in the American Economy in the Nineteenth Century, Conference on Research in Income and Wealth, 73140. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960.Google Scholar
Eli, Shari, Salisbury, Laura, and Shertzer, Allison. “Ideology and Migration after the American Civil War.” Journal of Economic History 78, no. 3 (2018): 822–61.10.1017/S0022050718000384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floud, Roderick, Fogel, Robert W., Harris, Bernard, et al. The Changing Body: Health, Nutrition, and Human Development in the Western World since 1700. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011.10.1017/CBO9780511975912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floud, Roderick, Wachter, Kenneth W., and Gregory, Anabel S.. Height, Health and History: Nutritional Status in the United Kingdom, 1750–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.10.1017/CBO9780511983245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogel, Robert W.Nutrition and the Decline in Mortality since 1700: Some Preliminary Findings.” In Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth, edited by Engerman, Stanley L. and Gallman, Robert E., 439556. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986.Google Scholar
Fogel, Robert W.Economic Growth, Population Theory, and Physiology: The Bearing of Long-Term Processes on the Making of Economic Policy.” American Economic Review 84, no. 3 (1994): 369–95.Google Scholar
Fogel, Robert W., Costa, Dora L., Haines, Michael R., et al. Aging of Veterans of the Union Army: Version M-5. Chicago: Center for Population Economics, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, Department of Economics, Brigham Young University, and the National Bureau of Economic Research, 2000.Google Scholar
Fogel, Robert W., Engerman, Stanley L., Floud, Roderick, et al.Secular Changes in American and British Stature and Nutrition.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 14, no. 2 (1983): 445–81.10.2307/203716CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foner, Jack D. The United States Soldier between Two Wars: Army Life and Reforms, 1865–1898. New York: Humanities Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Frisancho, A. Roberto. Human Adaptation and Accommodation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Gallman, Robert E.Dietary Change in Antebellum America.” Journal of Economic History 56, no. 1 (1996): 193201.10.1017/S0022050700016077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haines, Michael R.Growing Incomes, Shrinking People—Can Economic Development Be Hazardous to Your Health?Social Science History 28, no. 2 (2004): 249–70.Google Scholar
Heckman, James J.Sample-Selection Bias as a Specification Error.” Econometrica 47, no. 1 (1979): 153–61.10.2307/1912352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICPSR. United States Historical Election Returns, 1824–1968 (ICPSR 1) [machine-readable database]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, 1999.Google Scholar
Jayachandran, Seema, and Pande, Rohini. “Why Are Indian Children so Short? The Role of Birth Order and Son Preference.” American Economic Review 107, no. 9 (2017): 2600–29.10.1257/aer.20151282CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein, Roger W., and Spady, Richard H.. “An Efficient Semiparametric Estimator for Binary Response Models.” Econometrica 61, no. 2 (1993): 387421.10.2307/2951556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komlos, John. “The Height and Weight of West Point Cadets: Dietary Change in Antebellum America.” Journal of Economic History 47, no. 4 (1987): 897927.10.1017/S002205070004986XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komlos, John. “On the Biological Standard of Living of African-Americans: The Case of the Civil War Soldiers.” In The Biological Standard of Living in Comparative Perspective, edited by Komlos, John and Baten, Jörg, 236–49. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
Komlos, John. “A Three-Decade History of the Antebellum Puzzle: Explaining the Shrinking of the US Population at the Onset of Modern Economic Growth.” Journal of the Historical Society 12, no. 4 (2012): 395445.10.1111/j.1540-5923.2012.00376.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komlos, John, and A’Hearn, Brian. “The Decline in the Nutritional Status of the US Antebellum Population at the Onset of Modern Economic Growth.” NBER Working Paper No. 21845, Cambridge, MA, 2016.Google Scholar
Lindert, Peter H., and Margo, Robert A.. “Table Cc1-2: Consumer Price Indexes, for All Items, 1774–2003.” In Historical Statistics of the United States, edited by Carter, Susan B., Gartner, Scott Sigmund, Haines, Michael R., et al., 3.158–9. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Manson, Steven, Schroeder, Jonathan, Van Riper, David, et al. IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 12.0 [Database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2017.Google Scholar
Margo, Robert A.Regional Wage Gaps and the Settlement of the Midwest.” Explorations in Economic History 36 (1999): 128–43.10.1006/exeh.1999.0714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margo, Robert A., and Steckel, Richard H.. “Heights of Native-Born Whites during the Antebellum Period.” Journal of Economic History 43, no. 1 (1983): 167–74.10.1017/S0022050700029144CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mokyr, Joel, and Ó Gráda, Cormac. “Height and Health in the United Kingdom 1815-1860: Evidence from the East India Company Army.” Explorations in Economic History 33 (1996): 141–68.10.1006/exeh.1996.0007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newey, Whitney K.Two-Step Series Estimation of Sample Selection Models.” Econometrics Journal 12, no. S1 (2009): S217–29.10.1111/j.1368-423X.2008.00263.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Register of Enlistments in the US Army, 1798–1914. National Archives Microfilm Publication M233, 81 Rolls. Records of the Adjutant General’s Office, RG94. Washington, DC: National Archives, 1780s1917.Google Scholar
Ruggles, Steven, Genadek, Katie, Goeken, Ronald, et al. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 6.0 [machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2015.Google Scholar
Steckel, Richard H., and Ziebarth, Nicolas. “Selectivity and Measured Catch-up Growth of American Slaves.” Journal of Economic History 76, no. 1 (2016): 109–38.10.1017/S0022050716000437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivedi, Anjani. “Why Chinese Men Are Dying Despite Rising Income.” Wall Street Journal (25 February 2017): B.10.Google Scholar
Vella, Francis. “Estimating Models with Sample Selection Bias: A Survey.” Journal of Human Resources 33, no. 1 (1998): 127–69.10.2307/146317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weigley, Russell F. History of the United States Army. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967.Google Scholar
Zehetmayer, Matthias. “The Continuation of the Antebellum Puzzle: Stature in the US, 1847-1894.” European Review of Economic History 15 (2011): 313–27.10.1017/S1361491611000062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimran, Ariell. “Replication: Sample-Selection Bias and Height Trends in the Nineteenth-Century United States.” Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 12 December 2018. http://doi.org/10.3886/E107742V1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Zimran supplementary material

Zimran supplementary material 1

Download Zimran supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1.2 MB