Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 47–80 | Cite as

A Closer Look at the Second Demographic Transition in the US: Evidence of Bidirectionality from a Cohort Perspective (1982–2006)

  • Jennifer B. KaneEmail author


Second demographic transition (SDT) theory posits that increased individualism and secularization have contributed to low fertility in Europe, but very little work has directly tested the salience of SDT theory to fertility trends in the US. Using longitudinal data from a nationally representative cohort of women who were followed throughout their reproductive years (National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 cohort, NLSY79), this study examines the role of several key indicators of the SDT (secularization, egalitarianism, religious affiliation, and female participation in the labor market) on fertility behavior over time (1982–2006). Analyses employ Poisson estimation, logistic regression, and cross-lagged structural equation models to observe unidirectional and bidirectional relationships over the reproductive life course. Findings lend support to the relevance of SDT theory in the US but also provide evidence of “American bipolarity” which distinguishes the US from the European case. Furthermore, analyses document the reciprocal nature of these relationships over time which has implications for how we understand these associations at the individual-level.


Second demographic transition Low fertility US fertility Reciprocal models 



The author wishes to thank Paul Amato, Alan Booth, and Nancy Landale for helpful comments on earlier drafts. Support for this work was provided by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Interdisciplinary Training in Demography (Grant No. T32 HD007514, PI: Gordon DeJong) to the Pennsylvania State University Population Research Institute. Opinions reflect those of the author and not necessarily those of the granting agencies.


  1. Barber, J. S. (2001). The intergenerational transmission of age at first birth among married and unmarried men and women. Social Science Research, 30, 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, G. S. (1960). An economic analysis of fertility. In G. B. Roberts (Ed.), Demographic and economic change in developed countries (pp. 209–240). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Becker, G. S. (1991). Treatise on the family. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bhrolchain, M. N. (1992). Period paramount? A critique of the cohort approach to fertility. Population and Development Review, 18(4), 599–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bielby, W. T., & Hauser, R. M. (1977). Structural equation models. Annual Review of Sociology, 3, 137–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bumpass, L. L. (1990). What’s happening to the family? Interactions between demographic and institutional change. Demography, 27(November), 483–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caldwell, J. C. (2001). The globalization of fertility behavior. Population and Development Review, 27(Supplement), 93–115.Google Scholar
  8. Casterline, J. B. (2001). The pace of fertility transition: National patterns in the second half of the twentieth century. Population and Development Review, 27(Supplement), 17–52.Google Scholar
  9. Cleland, J., & Wilson, C. (1987). Demand theories of the fertility transition: An iconoclastic view. Population Studies, 41(1), 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cunningham, M., Beutel, A. M., Barber, J. S., & Thornton, A. (2005). Reciprocal relationships between attitudes about gender and social contexts during young adulthood. Social Science Research, 34(4), 862–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Chen, F., Paxton, P., & Kirby, J. B. (2003). Finite sampling properties of the point estimates and confidence intervals of the RMSEA. Sociological Methods and Research, 32, 208–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forste, R., & Tienda, M. (1996). What’s behind racial and ethnic fertility differentials? Population and Development Review, 22(Supplement), 109–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guzzo, K. B., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2007). Multipartnered fertility among young women with a nonmarital first birth: Prevalence and risk factors. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 39, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayford, S. R., & Morgan, S. P. (2008). Religiosity and fertility in the United States: The role of fertility intentions. Social Forces, 86(3), 1163–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hofferth, S. L. (1987). The social and economic consequences of teenage childbearing. In C. Hayes & S. L. Hofferth (Eds.), Risking the future: Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and childbearing (Vol. II, pp. 123–144). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hoffman, S. D., & Maynard, R. A. (2008). Kids Having Kids: Economic costs and social consequences of teen pregnancy (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kent, M., & Mather, M. (2002). What drives US population growth? Population Bulletin, 57(4), 1–43.Google Scholar
  18. Lesthaeghe, R. (1983). A century of demographic and cultural change in Western Europe: An exploration of underlying dimensions. Population and Development Review, 9(3), 411–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lesthaeghe, R. (1998). On theory development: Applications to the study of family formation. Population and Development Review, 24(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lesthaeghe, R. (2010). The unfolding story of the second demographic transition. Population and Development Review, 36(2), 211–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lesthaeghe, R., & Neels, K. (2002). From the first to the second demographic transition: An interpretation of the spatial continuity of demographic innovation in France, Belgium and Switzerland. European Journal of Population, 18, 325–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lesthaeghe, R., & Neidert, L. (2006). The second demographic transition in the United States: Exception or textbook example? Population and Development Review, 32(4), 669–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lesthaeghe, R., & Surkyn, J. (1988). Cultural dynamics and economic theories of fertility change. Population and Development Review, 14(1), 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Sutton, P. D., Ventura, S. J., Menacker, F., & Kirmeyer, S. (2006). Births: Final data for 2004. National Vital Statistics Report, 55(1), 1–102.Google Scholar
  26. McLanahan, S. (2004). Diverging destinies: How children are faring under the second demographic transition. Demography, 41(4), 607–627.Google Scholar
  27. McQuillan, K. (2004). When does religion influence fertility? Population and Development Review, 30(1), 25–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moors, G. (2003). Estimating the reciprocal effect of gender role attitudes and family formation: A log-linear path model with latent variables. European Journal of Population, 19, 199–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moors, G. (2008). The valued child: In search of a latent attitude profile that influences the transition to motherhood. European Journal of Population, 24, 33–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morgan, S. P. (2003). Is low fertility a twenty-first-century demographic crisis? Demography, 40(4), 589–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Morgan, S. P., & Rackin, H. (2010). The correspondence between fertility intentions and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, 36(1), 91–118.Google Scholar
  32. Morgan, S. P., & Rindfuss, R. R. (1999). Reexamining the link of early childbearing to marriage and subsequent fertility. Demography, 36, 59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morgan, S. P., & Taylor, M. G. (2006). Low fertility at the turn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 375–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mosher, W. D., & Bachrach, C. A. (1996). Understanding U.S. fertility: Continuity and change in the National Survey of Family Growth, 1988–1995. Family Planning Perspectives, 28, 4–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mosher, W. D., Williams, L. B., & Johnson, D. P. (1992). Religion and fertility in the United States: New patterns. Demography, 29(2), 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Musick, K., England, P., Edgington, S., & Kangas, N. (2009). Education differences in intended and unintended fertility. Social Forces, 88(2), 543–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mustillo, S., Landerman, L. R., & Land, K. C. (2012). Modeling longitudinal count data: Testing for group differences in growth trajectories using average marginal effects. Sociological Methods and Research, 41(3), 467–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. NLSY79 User’s Guide: A guide to the 1979–2006 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth Data. (2008). Available via Cited 1 March 2010.
  39. Ogden, P. E., & Hall, R. (2004). The second demographic transition, new household forms and the urban population of France during the 1990’s. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 29(1), 88–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Preston, S. (1987). Changing values and falling birth rates. Population and Development Review, S12, S176–S195.Google Scholar
  41. Population Reference Bureau. (2009). 2007 World Population Data Sheet. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from
  42. Quesnel-Vallée, A., & Morgan, S. P. (2003). Missing the target? Correspondence of fertility intentions and behavior in the U.S. Population Research and Policy Review, 22(5–6), 497–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reher, D. S. (2007). Towards long-term population decline: A discussion of relevant issues. European Journal of Population, 23, 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Robinson, W. C. (1997). The economic theory of fertility over three decades. Population Studies, 51, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smock, P. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States: An appraisal of research themes, findings and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Surkyn, J., & Lesthaeghe, R. (2004). Value orientations and the second demographic transition (SDT) in Northern, Western and Southern Europe: An update. Demographic Research, Special Collection 3, Article 3, 45–86.Google Scholar
  47. van de Kaa, D. J. (1987). Europe’s second demographic transition. Population Bulletin, 42(1), 1–57.Google Scholar
  48. Ventura, S. J., Bachrach, C. A., Hill, L., Kaye, K., Holcomb, P., & Koff, E. (1995). The demography of out-of-wedlock childbearing. In U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Report to Congress on Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing (pp. 1–80). Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  49. Westoff, C. F., & Jones, E. F. (1979). The end of ‘Catholic’ fertility. Demography, 16(2), 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Westoff, C. F., & Marshall, E. A. (2010). Hispanic fertility, religion and religiousness in the U.S. Population Research and Policy Review, 29(4), 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carolina Population CenterUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA 

Personalised recommendations