This work examines the validity of the two main assumptions of relative risk-aversion models of educational inequality. We compare the Breen-Goldthorpe (BG) and the Breen-Yaish (BY) models in terms of their assumptions about status maintenance motives and beliefs about the occupational risks associated with educational decisions. Concerning the first assumption, our contribution is threefold. First, we criticise the assumption of the BG model that families aim only at avoiding downward mobility and are insensitive to the prospects of upward mobility. We argue that the loss-aversion assumption proposed by BY is a more realistic formulation of status-maintenance motives. Second, we propose and implement a novel empirical approach to assess the validity of the loss-aversion assumption. Third, we present empirical results based on a sample of families of lower secondary school leavers indicating that families are sensitive to the prospects of both upward and downward mobility, and that the loss-aversion hypothesis of BY is empirically supported. As regards the risky choice assumption, we argue that families may not believe that more ambitious educational options entail occupational risks relative to less ambitious ones. We present empirical evidence indicating that, in France, the academic path is not perceived as a risky option. We conclude that, if the restrictive assumptions of the BG model are removed, relative-risk aversion needs not drive educational inequalities.

这项工作检验了有关教育不平等的相对风险规避模型的两个主要假设的有效性。我们比较了Breen-Goldthorpe（BG）模型和Breen-Yaish（BY）模型，它们基于状态维持动机的假设以及对与教育决策相关的职业风险的信念。关于第一个假设，我们的贡献是三倍。首先，我们批评BG模型的假设，即家庭仅旨在避免向下流动，并且对向上流动的前景不敏感。我们认为，BY提出的损失厌恶假设是状态维持动机的一种更现实的表述。其次，我们提出并实施了一种新颖的经验方法来评估损失规避假设的有效性。第三，我们基于对初中离校生家庭的样本提出了实证结果，表明家庭对上下流动的前景都很敏感，并且BY的损失厌恶假设得到了经验支持。关于风险选择的假设，我们认为家庭可能不相信较雄心勃勃的教育选择相对较雄心勃勃的教育选择具有职业风险。我们提供的经验证据表明，在法国，学术道路并不被视为一种冒险的选择。我们得出的结论是，如果消除了BG模型的限制性假设，则相对风险厌恶并不一定会导致教育不平等。并且BY的损失厌恶假设得到了经验支持。关于风险选择的假设，我们认为家庭可能不相信较雄心勃勃的教育选择相对较雄心勃勃的教育选择具有职业风险。我们提供的经验证据表明，在法国，学术道路并不被视为一种冒险的选择。我们得出的结论是，如果消除了BG模型的限制性假设，则相对风险厌恶并不一定会导致教育不平等。并且BY的损失厌恶假设得到了经验支持。关于风险选择的假设，我们认为家庭可能不相信较雄心勃勃的教育选择相对较雄心勃勃的教育选择具有职业风险。我们提供的经验证据表明，在法国，学术道路并不被视为一种冒险的选择。我们得出的结论是，如果消除了BG模型的限制性假设，则相对风险厌恶并不一定会导致教育不平等。