Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T07:20:41.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PREDICTING CONTRACEPTIVE USE FROM AN EGALITARIAN MODEL OF WOMEN'S OVERALL HOUSEHOLD POWER VIS-À-VIS CONVENTIONAL POWER MODELS AND THIRD VARIABLES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2012

FEDERICO R. LEÓN
FEDERICO R. LEÓN*
Affiliation:
León & Bustamante Consultores, Peru
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Research on gender power in contraceptive use has focused on whether women have an active role in household decision-making (the participation model) or on the extent of their control of domestic decisions (the control model); it has also addressed the joint effects of power, age, education and work. Findings published in this journal (Woldemicael, 2009) suggest a third power model according to which wives make joint decisions with their husbands on important domestic areas and autonomous decisions on secondary matters (the egalitarian model). In analyses of Demographic and Health Survey data sets from 46 countries, the egalitarian model explained contraceptive use better than the control and participation models in 19 out of 20 countries outside sub-Saharan Africa; its superiority was less overwhelming in this sub-continent. Power effects on contraceptive use that depend on women's education, age and work for cash are larger in sub-Saharan Africa than in other world regions, whereas independent power effects differ little regionally, suggesting the action of a personality factor. Situational specification of decision importance and direct measurement of women's assertiveness are needed to improve the explanation of contraceptive behaviour.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , July 2013 , pp. 497 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

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.)

References

Ainsworth, M., Beegle, K. & Nyamette, A. (1996) The impact of women's schooling on fertility and contraceptive use: a study of fourteen Sub-Saharan Africa countries. World Bank Economic Review 10, 85–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al Riyami, A., Afifi, M. & Mabry, R. M. (2004) Women's autonomy, education, and employment in Oman and their influence on contraceptive use. Reproductive Health Matters 12, 144–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albania Institute of Statistics/Institute of Public Health & ICF Macro (2010) Albania Demographic and Health Survey, 2008–09. Tirana, Albania.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. & Eswaran, M. (2009) What determines female autonomy? Evidence from Bangladesh. Journal of Development Economics 90, 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanc, A. K. (2001) The effect of power in sexual relationships on sexual and reproductive health: an examination of the evidence. Studies in Family Planning 32, 189–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carli, L. L. (2001) Gender and social influence. Journal of Social Issues 57, 725–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casique, I. (2003) Uso de anticonceptivos en México: ¿Qué diferencia hacen el poder de decisión y la autonomía femenina? Papeles de Población 35, 209–233.Google Scholar
Chavoshi, M. H., Abbasi-Shavazi, M. J. & McDonald, P. (2004) Women's autonomy and reproductive behavior in Iran. In Biennial Conference of the Australian Population Conference. Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., Terracciano, A. & McCrae, R. R. (2001) Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81, 322–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eysenck, H. J. & Eysenck, M. W. (1985) Personality and Individual Differences: A Natural Science Approach. Plenum, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feingold, A. (1994) Gender differences in personality: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 116, 429–456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, B. S., Zaslavsky, A. M., Ezzati, M., Peterson, K. E. & Mitchell, M. (2009) Contraceptive use, birth spacing, and autonomy: an analysis of the Oportunidades program in rural Mexico. Studies in Family Planning 40, 51–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghuman, S. J., Lee, H. J. & Smith, H. L. (2004) Measurement of Women's Autonomy According to Women and their Husbands: Results from Five Asian Countries. PCS Research Report No. 04-556, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1993) The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist 48, 26–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Govindasamy, P. & Malhotra, A. (1996) Women's position and family planning in Egypt. Studies in Family Planning 27, 328–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gray, E. & McDonald, P. (2010) Using a reproductive life course approach to understand contraceptive method use in Australia. Journal of Biosocial Science 42, 43–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heaton, T. B., Huntsman, T. J. & Flake, D. F. (2005) The effects of status on women's autonomy in Bolivia, Peru, and Nicaragua. Population Research & Policy Review 24, 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogan, D. P., Berhanu, B. & Hailemariam, A. (1999) Household organization, women's autonomy, and contraceptive behavior in southern Ethiopia. Studies in Family Planning 30, 302–314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jejeebhoy, S. J. (2002) Convergence and divergence in spouses' perspectives on women's autonomy in rural India. Studies in Family Planning 33, 299–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kishor, S. & Gupta, K. (2009) Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment in India. International Institute for Population Sciences, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Kishor, S. & Subaiya, L. (2008) Understanding women's empowerment: a comparative analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys data. DHS Comparative Studies Report No. 20.Google Scholar
Kulczycki, A. (2008) Husband–wife agreement, power relations and contraceptive use in Turkey. International Family Planning Perspectives 34, 127–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lazarus, A. A. (1966) Behaviour rehearsal vs non-directive therapy vs advice in effecting behaviour change. Behavioral Therapy Research 4, 209–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
León, F. R. (2011) Does professed religion moderate the relationship between women's domestic power and contraceptive use in India? Open Family Studies Journal 4, 1–8.Google Scholar
León, F. R., Lundgren, R., Sinai, I. & Jennings, V. (2011) The role of need for contraception in the evaluation of interventions to improve access to family-planning methods. Evaluation Review 35, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maccoby, E. E. & Jacklin, C. N. (1974) The Psychology of Sex Differences. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Malhotra, A., Schuler, S. R. & Boender, C. (2002) Measuring Women's Empowerment as a Variable in International Development. World Bank's Social Development Group, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Mason, K. O. & Smith, H. L. (2000) Husbands' versus wives' fertility goals and use of contraception: the influence of gender context in five Asian countries. Demography 37, 299–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, K. O., Smith, H. L. & Morgan, S. P. (1998) Muslim women in the non-Islamic countries of Asia: do they have less autonomy than their non-Muslim neighbors? In Annual Meeting of American Sociology Association. San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
Moursund, A. & Kravdal, O. (2003) Individual and community effects of women's education and autonomy on contraceptive use in India. Population Studies 57, 285–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mumtaz, Z., Slaymaker, E. & Salway, S. (2005) Condom use in Uganda and Zimbabwe: exploring the influence of gendered access to resources and couple-level dynamics. In Kishor, S. (ed.) A Focus on Gender: Collected Papers using DHS Data. ORC Macro.Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. I. (1994) Psychometric Theory (3rd edn). McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Roy, T. K. & Niranjan, S. (2004) Indicators of women's empowerment in India. Asia-Pacific Population Journal 19, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saleem, S. & Bobak, M. (2005) Women's autonomy, education and contraception use in Pakistan: a national study. Reproductive Health Matters 2, 8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sathar, Z., Callum, C. & Jejeebhoy, S. (2001) Gender, region, religion and reproductive behaviour in India and Pakistan. In IUSSP, XXIV General Population Conference, Salvador, Brazil.Google Scholar
Schuler, S. R., Kashemi, S. M. & Riley, A. P. (1997) The influence of changing rules and status in Bangladesh's fertility transition. Evidence from a study of credit programs and contraceptive use. World Development 25, 563–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, F., Amin, S. & Naved, R. T. (2001) Saving/credit group formation and change in contraception. Demography 38, 267–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
United Nations Development Programme (2007) Human Development Report 2007–2008. United Nations, New York.Google Scholar
Wahba, P., Saunders, J. & McCroskey, J. C. (2005) Temperament and brain systems as predictors of assertive communication traits. Communication Research Report 23, 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woldemicael, G. (2009) Women's autonomy and reproductive preferences in Eritrea. Journal of Biosocial Science 41, 161–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed