Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T17:40:04.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, MARITAL STATUS AND CHILDLESSNESS IN MEN AND WOMEN: AN ANALYSIS OF CENSUS DATA FROM SIX COUNTRIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2011

MARTIN FIEDER ,
SUSANNE HUBER  and
FRED L. BOOKSTEIN
MARTIN FIEDER
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Vienna, Austria
SUSANNE HUBER
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Vienna, Austria Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Austria
FRED L. BOOKSTEIN
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Vienna, Austria Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This study compares the effects of two distinct forms of human capital – income and education – on marital status and childlessness separately by sex in six different countries. Nearly 10 million individual records on individuals aged 16 to 50 were used from censuses from Brazil, Mexico, Panama, South Africa, USA and Venezuela dating from 2000 or later, to analyse the relationship between education, income and marital status and childlessness in men and women. Regarding income, the findings for both outcome variables are strongly consistent across all six countries. Highest-income males and lower-income females have the highest proportion of ever-married and the lowest proportion of childlessness (using a proxy for childlessness: own children in the household or not). There is no corresponding consistency of findings as regards education either between the sexes or among the countries. To conclude, a lower percentage of low-income men are selected by females, because for women male status and resources provided by men are important criteria in mate selection. Therefore a higher proportion of low-income men remain unmarried and childless. Thus selection seems to play a role in modern societies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 43 , Issue 5 , September 2011 , pp. 619 - 635
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Ahituv, A. & Lerman, R. I. (2007) How do marital status, work effort, and wage rates interact? Demography 44, 623–647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ambert, A-M. (2005) Cohabitation and Marriage: How are they Related? The Vanier Institute of the Family.Google Scholar
Barrett, L., Dunbar, R. & Lycett, J. (2001) Human Evolutionary Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, F. D., Kahn, L. M. & Waldfogel, J. (2000) Understanding young women’s marriage decisions: the role of labor and marriage market conditions. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 53, 624–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (1988) Reproductive success in three Kipsigis cohorts. In Clutton-Brock, T. H. (ed.) Reproductive Success. University Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 419–438.Google Scholar
Burgess, S., Propper, C. & Aassve, A. (2003) The role of income in marriage and divorce transitions among young Americans. Journal of Population Economics 16, 455–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1999) Evolutionary Psychology. The New Science of the Mind. Allyn and Bacon, Boston.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. & Barnes, M. (1986) Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50, 559–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chagnon, N. A. (1988) Life history, blood revenge and warfare in a tribal population. Science 239, 985–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fieder, M. & Huber, S. (2007) The effects of sex and childlessness on the association between status and reproductive output in modern society. Evolution and Human Behavior 28, 392–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fieder, M., Huber, S., Bookstein, F. L., Iber, K., Schäfer, K., Winckler, G. & Wallner, B. (2005) Status and reproduction in humans: new evidence of the validity of evolutionary explanations on basis of a university sample. Ethology 111, 940–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsberg, J. L. & Tullberg, B. S. (1995) The relationship between cumulative number of cohabiting partners and number of children for men and women in modern Sweden. Ethology and Sociobiology 16, 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamplova, D. (2009) Educational homogamy among married and unmarried couples in Europe. Does the context matter? Journal of Family Issues 30, 28–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopcroft, R. L. (2006) Sex, status, and reproductive success in the contemporary United States. Evolution and Human Behavior 27, 104–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, S., Bookstein, F. L. & Fieder, M. (2010) Socio-economic status, education, and reproduction in modern women: an evolutionary perspective. American Journal of Human Biology 22, 578–587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irons, W. (1979) Natural selection, adaptation and human social behaviour. In Chagnon, N. A. & Irons, W. (eds) Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behavior: An Anthropological Perspective. Duxbury Press, North Scituate, pp. 213–237.Google Scholar
Mamum, A. A. (2008) Effects of Employment on Marriage: Evidence from a Randomized Study of the Job Corps Program. Final Report 17th December 2008. Mathematica Policy Research Inc. URL: http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/PDFs/family_support/effectemploymarriage.pdfGoogle Scholar
Mealey, L. (1985) The relationship between social status and biological success: a case study of the Mormon religious hierarchy. Ethology and Sociobiology 6, 249–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakosteen, R. A. & Zimmer, M. A. (1997) Men, money, and marriage: are high earners more prone than low earners to marry? Social Science Quarterly 78, 66–82.Google Scholar
Nettle, D. & Pollet, T. V. (2008) Natural selection on male wealth in humans. American Naturalist 172, 658–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skirbekk, V. (2008) Fertility trends by social status. Demographic Research 18, 145–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smock, P. J. (2000) Cohabitation in the United States: an appraisal of research themes, findings, and implications. Annual Reviews of Sociology 26, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stearns, S. C., Byars, S. G., Govindaraju, D. R. & Ewbank, D. (2010) Measuring selection in contemporary human populations. Nature Reviews Genetics 11, 611–622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vining, D. R. (1986) Social versus reproductive success: the central theoretical problem of human socio-biology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, 167–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voland, E. (1990) Differential reproductive success in the Krummhorn population. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26, 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeden, J., Abrams, M. J., Green, M. C. & Sabini, J. (2006) Do high-status people really have fewer children? Human Nature 17, 377–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xie, Y., Raymo, J. M., Goyette, K. & Thornton, A. (2003) Economic potential and entry into marriage and cohabitation. Demography 40, 351–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziliak, S. T. & McCloskey, D. N. (2008) The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Costs Us Jobs, Justice, and Lives. University of Michigan Press, Michigan.Google Scholar