對於如何產生「高教育則保証高所得」現象的解釋，則仍莫表一是。持人力資本論主賬之學者強調「絕對」的教育水準：擁有較高學壓之勞工能創造較高之生產力；雇主們又依所屬勞工的生產力而決定其薪資。另一方面，主張篩選論（或稱文憑主義）之學者們則傾向於強調教育成就的「相對」高低：雇主們以求職者之學歷條件或其對工作內容之配合度為篩選依據。換言之，勞工的薪資所得，是一種經過勞動市場排序分配的結果，未必和個別勞工所累積的人力資本有關。這兩種說法都有相當的理論基礎，但遺憾的是，對此二者進行比較分析的研究扔非常有限。我們一方面設計了估算篩選理論的量化指標，使用 1979 年至 1998 年台灣地區人力運用調查資料進行分析；一方面歷時兩年，對台灣地區三十四家企業的人事主管進行深入訪談，期能對台灣的文憑主義是否僅為一迷思，作出更客觀的評斷。綜合我們的研究結果，人力資本的累積與篩選假說的機制，對勞工的薪資都存在著相當程度的影響；但文憑對員工在企業內未來的升遷與發展則無太大的作用。換言之，文憑在勞動市場中雖有其重要性，但其「迷思」亦同時存在。尤其，因社會大眾對文憑主義之盲目崇拜，更產生了許多不良影響。另外，我們整理出業界對教育大量擴張的疑慮和對文憑主義的看法，企業用人、培訓、員工升遷的制度與管道，以及員工之教育及其流動性的相關說明等。相信對未來探討學校教育與勞動市場之間連結的相關研究，能提供一個新的討論基礎。

While there is widespread agreement that the correlation between education and socioeconomic attainment is significant, many researchers disagree about the nature of the mechanisms that generate the observed correlation. Two fundamentally different perspectives on the link between schooling and socioeconomic status are the human capital view and the credentialing view. In this paper, we use both quantitative data analysis and qualitative in — depth interview to examine the “myth” of credentialism in Taiwan’s labor market. On the one hand, the data from 1979 to 1998 Taiwan Manpower Utilization Surveys are used to investigate the human capital versus screening explanations of the effect of schooling on personal wage. The results indicate that each index has significant effects on personal wage rates. On the other hand, we interviewed the director of the department of human resources for 34 firms. We found that a worker’s credentials are useful for entering the labor market, but has little affect on her/his development in the future career. We thus suggest that the link between schooling and socioeconomic status involves processes relating to both human capital formation and to credentialing or labor market screening. Furthermore, we are skeptical of the conventional wisdom that credentialism plays an overwhelming role in Taiwan’s labor market.