Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 305–327 | Cite as

Neighbors and neighborhoods: effects on marriage timing



Studies of neighborhoods can benefit from data and theoretical frameworks that allow them to examine the differences between neighborhoods and neighbors. Without this distinction, it is unclear if it is characteristics of the people or the place that are associated with individual outcomes. Using data from the Chitwan Valley Family Study, I explore the differences between neighbors and neighborhoods and their associations with marriage timing. I hypothesize three mechanisms whereby neighbors influence individuals: information sharing, social modeling, and sanctions and rewards among a close primary residential group. I explore three domains in which these mechanisms are likely to operate: education, media consumption, and attitudes. Results indicate that when neighbors have attitudes favoring later marriage and being single, marriage rates decrease, even when controlling for measures that describe the neighborhood’s access to important resources in the form of institutions and services.


Marriage Neighborhoods Neighbors Nepal Social change 


  1. Abbott, A. (1997). Of time and space: The contemporary relevance of the Chicago School. Social Forces, 75, 1149–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Akers, R. L., Krohn M. D., Lanza-Kaduce L., & Radosevich, M. (1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 636–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allison, P. D. (1982). Discrete-time methods for the analysis of event histories. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 61–98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Axinn, W. G. (1993). The effects of children’s schooling on fertility limitation. Population Studies, 47, 481–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Axinn, W. G., & Barber, J. S. (2001). Mass education and fertility transition. American Sociological Review, 66, 481–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Axinn, W. G., Barber, J. S., & Ghimire, D. J. (1997). The neighborhood history calendar: A data collection method designed for dynamic multilevel modeling. Sociological Methodology, 27, 355–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Axinn, W. G., & Thornton, A. (1992). The influence of parental resources on the timing of the transition to marriage. Social Science Research, 21, 261–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Axinn, W. G., & Yabiku, S. T. (2001). Social change, the social organization of families, and fertility limitation. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1219–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  11. Barber, J. S. (2004). Community social context and individualistic attitudes toward marriage. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(3), 236–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barber, J. S., & Axinn, W. G. (1998). The impact of parental pressure for grandchildren on young people’s entry into cohabitation and marriage. Population Studies, 52, 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Barber, J. S., Murphy, S., Axinn, W. G., & Maples, J. (2000). Discrete-time multilevel hazards analysis. Sociological Methodology, 30, 201–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Barber, J. S., Pearce, L. D., Chaudhury, I., & Gurung, S. (2002). Voluntary associations and fertility limitation. Social Forces, 80(4), 1269–1301.Google Scholar
  15. Becker, G. S. (1991). A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Bennett, J. B., & Lehman, W. E. K. (1999). Employee exposure to coworker substance use and negative consequences: The moderating effects of work group membership. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bennett, L. (1983). Dangerous wives and sacred sisters: Social and symbolic roles of high caste women in Nepal. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Bernardi, L. (2003). Channels of social influence on reproduction. Population Research and Policy Review, 22(5–6), 527–555.Google Scholar
  19. Blalock, H. M. (1984). Contextual-effects models: Theoretical and methodological issues. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 353–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Blossfeld, H.-P., & Huinink, J. (1991). Human capital investments or norms of role transition? How women’s schooling and career affect the process of family formation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(1), 143–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Boardman, J. D., Powers, D. A., Padilla, Y. C., & Hummer, R. A. (2002). Low birth weight, social factors, and developmental outcomes among children in the United States. Demography, 39, 353–368.Google Scholar
  22. Bongaarts, J., & Watkins, S. C. (1996). Social interactions and contemporary fertility transitions. Population and Development Review, 22(4), 639–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Brewster, K. L. (1994). Neighborhood context and the transition to sexual activity among young black women. Demography, 31, 603–614.Google Scholar
  24. Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G. J., Klebanov, P. K., & Sealand, N. (1993). Do neighborhoods influence child and adolescent development? American Journal of Sociology, 99(2), 353–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Burgess, E. W. (1967). Can neighborhood work have a scientific basis? In R. E. Park, E. W. Burgess, & R. D. McKenzie (Eds.), The city (pp. 142–155). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Caldwell, J. C. (1982). Theory of fertility decline. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  27. Carlstein, T. (1982). Time resources, society, and ecology: On the capacity for human interaction in space and time. London, England: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  28. Cooley, C. H. (1909). Social organization. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  29. Crane, J. (1991). The epidemic theory of ghettos and neighborhood effects on dropping out and teenage childbearing. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1226–1259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Degraff, D. S., Bilsborrow, R. E., & Guilkey, D. K. (1997). Community-level determinants of contraceptive use in the Philippines: A structural analysis. Demography, 34, 385–398.Google Scholar
  31. Duncan, G. J., Connell, J. P., & Klebanov, P. K. (1997). Conceptual and methodological issues in estimating causal effects of neighborhoods, family conditions on individual development. In J. Brooks-Gunn, G. J. Duncan, & J. L. Aber (Eds.), Neighborhood poverty, volume 1: Context and consequences for children (pp. 219–250). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Erbring, L., & Young, A. A. (1979). Individuals and social structure: Contextual effects as endogenous feedback. Sociological Methods and Research, 7, 396–430.Google Scholar
  33. Garner, C. L., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1991). Neighborhood effects on educational attainment: A multilevel analysis. Sociology of Education, 64, 251–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goldscheider, F. K., & Waite, L. J. (1986). Sex differences in the entry into marriage. American Journal of Sociology, 92(1), 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Goode, W. J. (1970). World revolution and family patterns. New York: Free.Google Scholar
  36. Greenwell, L., Leibowitz, A., & Klerman, J. A. (1998). Welfare background, attitudes, and employment among new mothers. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Guneratne, A. (1996). The tax man cometh: The impact of revenue collection on subsistence strategies in Chitwan Tharu society. Studies in Nepali History and Society, 1(1), 5–35.Google Scholar
  38. Heimer, K., & Matsueda, R. L. (1994). Role-taking, role commitment, and delinquency: A theory of differential social control. American Sociological Review, 59, 365–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hogan, D. P., & Kitagawa, E. M. (1985). The impact of social status, family structure, and neighborhood on the fertility of black adolescents. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 825–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Homans, G. (1950). The human group. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  41. House, J. S., & Mortimer, J. (1990). Social structure and the individual: Emerging themes and new directions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jacoby, H. C. (2000). Access to markets and the benefits of rural roads. Economic Journal, 110, 713–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jencks, C., & Mayer, S. E. (1990). Residential segregation, job proximity, and black job opportunities. In L. E. Lynn Jr., &M. M. McGreary (Eds.), Inner-city poverty in the United States (pp. 187–222). Washington: National Academic.Google Scholar
  44. Kohn, M. L., Slomczynski, K. M., Janicka, D., Khmelko, V., Mach, B. W., Paniotto, V., et al. (1997). Social structure and personality under conditions of radical social change: A comparative analysis of Poland and Ukraine. American Sociological Review, 62, 614–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Macy, M. W., & Flache, A. (1995). Beyond rationality in models of choice. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marini, M. M. (1980). Sex differences in the process of occupational attainment: A closer look. Social Science Research, 9, 307–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Massey, D. S., & Espinosa, K. E. (1997). What’s driving Mexico–U.S. migration? A theoretical, empirical, and policy analysis. American Journal of Sociology, 104, 939–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mayer, S. E., & Jencks, C. (1989). Growing up in poor neighborhoods: How much does it matter? Science, 243, 1441–1445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McBroom, W. H., & Reed, F. W. (1992). Toward a reconceptualization of attitude-behavior consistency. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 205–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McKenzie, R. D. (1921). The neighborhood: A study of local life in the city of Columbus, Ohio. American Journal of Sociology, 27, 344–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McKenzie, R. D. (1968). The scope of human ecology. In A. H. Hawley (Ed.), Roderick D. McKenzie on human ecology (pp. 19–32). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  53. Montgomery, M. R., & Casterline, J. B. (1996). Social learning, social influence, and new models of fertility. Population and Development Review, 22(Suppl.), 151–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Montgomery, M. R., Gragnolati, M., Burke, K. A., & Paredes, E. (2000). Measuring living standards with proxy variables. Demography, 37, 155–174.Google Scholar
  55. Morenoff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology, 39, 517–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Petersen, T. (1991). Time-aggregation bias in continuous-time hazard-rate models. Sociological Methodology, 21, 263–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Peterson, R. D., Krivo, L. J., & Harris, M. A. (2000). Disadvantage and neighborhood violent crime: Do local institutions matter? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37, 31–63.Google Scholar
  58. Rankin, B. H., & Quane, J. M. (2000). Neighborhood poverty and the social isolation of inner-city African American families. Social Forces, 79, 139–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Raymo, J. M. (2003). Educational attainment and the transition to first marriage among Japanese women. Demography, 40(1), 83–103.Google Scholar
  60. Reed, H. B., & Reed, M. J. (1968). Nepal in transition: Educational innovation. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  61. Rindfuss, R. R. (1991). The young adult years: Diversity, structural change, and fertility. Demography, 28(4), 493–512.Google Scholar
  62. Rosenfeld, R. A. (1980). Race and sex differences in career dynamics. American Sociological Review, 45(4), 583–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sampson, R. J. (1991). Linking the micro- and macrolevel dimensions of community social organization. Social Forces, 70, 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Gannon-Rowley, T. (2002). Assessing ‘neighborhood effects’: Social processes and new directions for research. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 443–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 603–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sastry, N., Ghosh-Dastidar, B., Adams, J., & Pebley, A. R. (2000). The design of a multilevel longitudinal survey of children, families, and communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey. RAND Working Paper No. 00–18.Google Scholar
  67. Schwartz, S. H., & Ames, R. E. (1977). Positive and negative referent others as sources of influence: A case of helping. Sociometry, 40, 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shrestha, N. R., & Bhattarai, K. (2003). Historical dictionary of Nepal. Lanham: The Scarecrow.Google Scholar
  69. South, S. J., & Baumer, E. P. (2000). Deciphering community and race effects on adolescent premarital childbearing. Social Forces, 78, 1379–1407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sprague, J. (1982). Is there a micro theory consistent with contextual analysis? In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Strategies of political inquiry (pp. 99–122). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  71. Teachman, J., & Crowder, K. (2002). Multilevel models in family research: Some conceptual and methodological issues. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 280–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Thornton, A. (1991). The influence of parents’ marital history on the marital cohabitational experiences of children. American Journal of Sociology, 96(4), 868–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Thornton, A. (2001). The development paradigm, reading history sideways, and family change. Demography, 38, 449–465.Google Scholar
  74. Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G., & Teachman, T. (1995). The influence of educational experiences on cohabitation and marriage in early adulthood. American Sociological Review, 60, 762–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Thornton, A., & Fricke, T. E. (1987). Social change and the family: Comparative perspectives from the West, China, and South Asia. Sociological Forum, 2, 746–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thornton, A., & Lin, H.-S. (1994). Social change and the family in Taiwan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  77. Tienda, M. (1991). Poor people and poor places: Deciphering neighborhood effects of poverty outcomes. In J. Huber (Ed.), Macro–micro linkages in sociology (pp. 244–262). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  78. Upchurch, D. M., Aneshensel, C. S., Sucoff, C. A., & Levy-Storms, L. (1999). Neighborhood and family contexts of adolescent sexual activity. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 920–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Vartanian, T. P. (1999). Childhood conditions and adult welfare use: Examining neighborhood and family factors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 225–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  81. Wirth, L. (1964). The scope and problems of the community. In A. J. Reiss Jr. (Ed.), Louis Wirth on cities and social life: Selected papers (pp. 165–177). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  82. Yabiku, S. T. (2004). Marriage timing in Nepal: Organizational effects and individual mechanisms. Social Forces, 83, 559–586.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social and Family DynamicsArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations