The dual-axis line chart compares the female labor force growth rate (blue line) and the male labor force growth rate (orange line) during periods of economic expansions.

• Female Growth Rate:
  • The female growth rate shows more pronounced fluctuations, especially in the earlier decades (pre-1960), where the spikes are much higher compared to the male growth rate. This suggests that during the earlier periods of economic expansion, female labor force participation was much more volatile.
  • Over time, the volatility has somewhat decreased, but there are still occasional large spikes, particularly around the COVID-19 period in 2020.
• Male Growth Rate:
  • The male growth rate remains relatively stable with fewer fluctuations compared to the female growth rate. The spikes and drops in male labor force participation are generally smaller.
  • Similar to females, there is a notable spike in male growth around 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, although it is less dramatic than for females.

Overall, the chart suggests that while both male and female labor force growth rates fluctuate during expansions, female participation has historically been more volatile. This could be due to various societal and economic factors influencing women’s participation in the workforce over time.

The box plot compares the distribution of growth rates between females and males during economic expansions.

• Female Growth Rate: The box plot shows a relatively narrow interquartile range (IQR), indicating that the majority of female growth rates during expansions fall within a smaller range, closer to 0. The presence of several outliers above 0.03 and below -0.02 indicates that there are occasional periods of high and low growth outside the typical range, but most of the data is clustered closer to 0. The median is slightly above 0, indicating a small but positive average growth rate for females during expansions.

• Male Growth Rate: The male growth rate distribution also has a relatively narrow IQR but slightly wider than the female distribution. The data is similarly centered around 0, but the median is closer to 0 than for females. There are also several outliers on the positive end (above 0.03), indicating occasional high growth rates during expansions. However, the male growth rate distribution appears slightly more varied than the female growth rate, with a larger spread of values within the quartiles.

Conclusion: Both female and male growth rates during expansions tend to be centered around 0, with females showing a slightly more positive median growth rate. However, both genders experience outliers, indicating that while growth is typically steady, there can be periods of both significant increases and decreases for both male and female labor force participation during expansions.

This bar chart shows that the average female employment growth rate during expansions is significantly higher than the male growth rate. The cyan bar representing females is more than double the height of the magenta bar for males, indicating that female labor force participation tends to accelerate more during expansions.

The t-test results show a T-statistic of approximately 3.06 and a P-value of 0.0023, indicating that there is a statistically significant difference between the growth rates of female and male labor force participation during expansion periods. The low P-value suggests that the null hypothesis (that there is no difference between the two growth rates) can be rejected.

This insight supports the hypothesis that female labor force participation grows faster than male labor force participation during economic expansions.