Demography

, Volume 49, Issue 2, pp 629–650

The Proximate Determinants of Educational Homogamy: The Effects of First Marriage, Marital Dissolution, Remarriage, and Educational Upgrading

Article

Abstract

This paper adapts the population balancing equation to develop a framework for studying the proximate determinants of educational homogamy. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth on a cohort of women born between 1957 and 1964, we decompose the odds of homogamy in prevailing marriages into four proximate determinants: (1) first marriages, (2) first and later marital dissolutions, (3) remarriages, and (4) educational attainment after marriage. The odds of homogamy among new first marriages are lower than among prevailing marriages, but not because of selective marital dissolution, remarriage, and educational attainment after marriage, as has been speculated. Prevailing marriages are more likely to be educationally homogamous than new first marriages because of the accumulation of homogamous first marriages in the stock of marriages. First marriages overwhelmingly account for the odds of homogamy in prevailing marriages in this cohort. Marital dissolutions, remarriages, and educational upgrades after marriage have relatively small and offsetting effects. Our results suggest that, despite the high prevalence of divorce, remarriage, and continued schooling after marriage in the United States, the key to understanding trends in educational homogamy lies primarily in variation in assortative mating into first marriage.

Keywords

Educational homogamy Assortative mating Marriage Remarriage Divorce 

Supplementary material

13524_2012_93_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (534 kb)
ESM 1(PDF 534 kb)
13524_2012_93_MOESM2_ESM.dta (22 kb)
ESM 2(DTA 22 kb)
13524_2012_93_MOESM3_ESM.dta (10 kb)
ESM 3(DTA 10 kb)

References

  1. Becker, G. (1974). Theory of marriage: Part II. Journal of Political Economy, 82, S11–S26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, G. S., Landes, E. M., & Michael, R. T. (1977). An economic analysis of marital instability. Journal of Political Economy, 85, 1141–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackwell, D. L., & Lichter, D. T. (2000). Mate selection among married and cohabiting couples. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 275–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bongaarts, J. (1978). A framework for analyzing the proximate determinants of fertility. Population and Development Review, 4(1), 105–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bumpass, L. L., & Call, V. R. A. (1989). The timing of marriage and education (National Survey of Families and Households Working Paper No. 10). Madison: University of Wisconsin, Center for Demography and Ecology.Google Scholar
  7. Bumpass, L. L., Castro Martin, T., & Sweet, J. A. (1991). The impact of family background and early marital factors on marital disruption. Journal of Family Issues, 12, 22–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bumpass, L. L., Sweet, J. A., & Castro Martin, T. (1990). Changing patterns of remarriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 747–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cancian, M., & Reed, D. (1999). The impact of wives’ earnings on income inequality: Issues and estimates. Demography, 36, 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caspi, A., & Herbener, E. S. (1993). Marital assortment and phenotypical convergence: Longitudinal evidence. Social Biology, 40(1–2), 48–60.Google Scholar
  11. Clarkwest, A. (2007). Spousal dissimilarity, race, and marital dissolution. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 639–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dean, G., & Gurak, D. T. (1978). Marital homogamy the second time around. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 40, 559–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Fernández, R., Guner, N., & Knowles, J. (2005). Love and money: A theoretical and empirical analysis of household sorting and inequality. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 273–344.Google Scholar
  15. Fernández, R., & Rogerson, R. (2001). Sorting and long-run inequality. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 1305–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goldstein, J. R. (1999). The leveling of divorce in the United States. Demography, 36, 409–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jacobs, J. A., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (1986). Changing places: Conjugal careers and women’s marital mobility. Social Forces, 64, 714–732.Google Scholar
  18. Kalmijn, M. (1991a). Status homogamy in the United States. The American Journal of Sociology, 97, 496–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kalmijn, M. (1991b). Shifting boundaries: Trends in religious and educational homogamy. American Sociological Review, 56, 786–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kalmijn, M. (1994). Assortative mating by cultural and economic status. The American Journal of Sociology, 100, 422–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kalmijn, M. (1998). Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 395–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kalmijn, M. (2003). Union disruption in the Netherlands. International Journal of Sociology, 33, 36–64.Google Scholar
  23. Karoly, L. A., & Burtless, G. (1995). Demographic change, rising earnings inequality, and the distribution of personal well-being, 1959–1989. Demography, 32, 379–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lewis, S. K., & Oppenheimer, V. K. (2000). Educational assortative mating across marriage markets: Non-Hispanic whites in the United States. Demography, 37, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lichter, D. T. (1990). Delayed marriage, marital homogamy, and the mate selection process among white women. Social Science Quarterly, 71, 802–811.Google Scholar
  26. Mare, R. D. (1991). Five decades of educational assortative mating. American Sociological Review, 56, 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Martin, S. P. (2006). Trends in marital dissolution by women’s education in the United States. Demographic Research, 15, article 20, 537–560. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2006.15.20
  28. Mortensen, D. (1988). Matching: Finding a partner for life or otherwise. The American Journal of Sociology, 94, S215–S240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. OECD. (2008). SF8 marriage and divorce rates. OECD Family Database. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/els/social/family/database
  30. Oppenheimer, V. K. (1988). A theory of marriage timing: Assortative mating under varying degrees of uncertainty. The American Journal of Sociology, 96, 405–432.Google Scholar
  31. Preston, S. H., Heuveline, P., & Guillot, M. (2001). Demography: Measuring and modeling population processes. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Qian, Z. (1997). Breaking the racial barriers: Variations in interracial marriage between 1980 and 1990. Demography, 34, 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Qian, Z. (1998). Changes in assortative mating: The impact of age and education, 1970–1990. Demography, 35, 279–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Qian, Z., & Lichter, D. T. (2007). Social boundaries and marital assimilation: Interpreting trends in racial and ethnic intermarriage. American Sociological Review, 72, 68–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Qian, Z., & Preston, S. H. (1993). Changes in American marriage, 1972 to 1987: Availability and forces of attraction by age and education. American Sociological Review, 58, 482–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Raymo, J. M., & Xie, Y. (2000). Temporal and regional variation in the strength of educational homogamy. American Sociological Review, 65, 773–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rosenfeld, M. (2008). Racial, educational, and religious endogamy in comparative historical perspective. Social Forces, 87, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schoen, R., & Standish, N. (2001). The retrenchment of marriage: Results from marital status life tables for the United States, 1995. Population and Development Review, 27, 553–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schwartz, C. R. (2010a). Pathways to educational homogamy in marital and cohabiting unions. Demography, 47, 735–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schwartz, C. R. (2010b). Earnings inequality and the changing association between spouses’ earnings. The American Journal of Sociology, 115, 1524–1557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schwartz, C. R., & Mare, R. D. (2005). Trends in educational assortative marriage from 1940 to 2003. Demography, 42, 621–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shafer, K., & Qian, Z. (2010). Marriage timing and educational assortative mating. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 41, 661–691.Google Scholar
  43. Smits, J., & Park, H. (2009). Five decades of educational assortative mating in 10 East Asian societies. Social Forces, 88, 227–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smits, J., Ultee, W. C., & Lammers, J. (1998). Educational homogamy in 65 countries: An explanation of differences in openness using country-level explanatory variables. American Sociological Review, 63, 264–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Torche, F. (2010). Educational assortative mating and economic inequality: A comparative analysis of three Latin American countries. Demography, 47, 481–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tzeng, J. M., & Mare, R. D. (1995). Labor market and socioeconomic effects on marital stability. Social Science Research, 24, 329–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ultee, W. C., & Luijkx, R. (1990). Educational heterogamy and father-to-son occupational mobility in 23 industrial nations. European Sociological Review, 6, 125–149.Google Scholar
  48. U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). Table MS-2. Estimated median age at first marriage, by sex: 1890 to the present. Washington, DC: Fertility and Family Statistics Branch. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/hh-fam/ms2.pdf
  49. Weiss, Y., & Willis, R. J. (1997). Match quality, new information, and marital dissolution. Journal of Labor Economics, 15, S293–S329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadisonUSA
  2. 2.Department of SociologyUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations