Are you (not) expecting? The unforeseen benefits of job training on teenage pregnancy

IZA Journal of Labor & Development

Table 4 Heterogeneous effects of JE on pregnancy

	Independent variables (h _i)
	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Dependent variable:	Married/cohabiting	# of children	Rosenberg scale	Life- Quality
Pregnancy
Treatment when h _i=0	−0.077	−0.105^a	–	–
	(0.047)	(0.048)	–	–
Treatment at percentile 5 of h _i	–	–	−0.119	−0.250^b
	–	–	(0.089)	(0.079)
Treatment at percentile 10 of h _i	–	–	−0.108	−0.211^b
	–	–	(0.071)	(0.066)
Treatment at percentile 25 of h _i	–	–	−0.088^a	−0.133^b
	–	–	(0.047)	(0.046)
Treatment at percentile 50 of h _i	–	–	−0.073^a	−0.066
	–	–	(0.041)	(0.042)
Treatment at percentile 75 of h _i	–	–	−0.056	−0.006
	–	–	(0.054)	(0.051)
Treatment at percentile 90 of h _i	–	–	−0.056	0.064
	–	–	(0.054)	(0.070)
Treatment at percentile 95 of h _i	–	–	−0.050	0.111
	–	–	(0.061)	(0.086)
h _i	0.128	0.017	−0.011	−0.013^b
	(0.080)	(0.056)	(0.008)	(0.005)
Treatment* h _i	0.050	0.092	0.006	0.014^a
	(0.108)	(0.075)	(0.010)	(0.006)
Observations	564	564	564	564

Note: h _icorresponds to baseline characteristics: a dummy variable for whether women were married or cohabiting (model 1); the number of children (model 2); the Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale (model 3); and the Life-Quality Index (model 4). All models include a dummy variable for whether the follow-up interview was in 2011 and a variable for individual’s age. Robust standard errors clustered at the course level in parentheses
^aSignificant at 5 %, ^bSignificant at 1 %