We use a multigenerational perspective to investigate how families reproduce and pass their educational advantages to succeeding generations. Unlike traditional mobility studies that have typically focused on one-sex influences from fathers to sons, we rely on a two-sex approach that accounts for interactions between males and females—the process in which males and females mate and have children with those of similar educational statuses and jointly determine the educational status attainment of their offspring. Using data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, we approach this issue from both a short-term and a long-term perspective. For the short term, grandparents’ educational attainments have a direct association with grandchildren’s education as well as an indirect association that is mediated by parents’ education and demographic behaviors. For the long term, initial educational advantages of families may benefit as many as three subsequent generations, but such advantages are later offset by the lower fertility of highly educated persons. Yet, all families eventually achieve the same educational distribution of descendants because of intermarriages between families of high- and low-education origin.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
We use terms “family” and “family line” to refer broadly to social organization consisting of not only parents and offspring but also all descendants from a common ancestor.
We take a prospective approach in which we examine the transmission of educational status from the perspective of the grandparent generation. This approach is different from the more common retrospective approach that asks respondents about the characteristics of their parents and grandparents. For further discussions on the distinction between the two approaches and methods that reconcile the two approaches, see Song and Mare (2015).
Our model assumes independence of education and age. A refinement of the two-sex model may include age structure of the population, duration of marriages, polygamous mating rules, and differential demographic outcomes by age groups (Keyfitz 1972). A model with age structure incorporates the effects of marriage and fertility timing effects, fertility levels by age groups, and marriage squeezes caused by period fertility fluctuations and sex-ratio imbalance at older ages.
Family Identification Mapping System is a tool developed by the PSID to create intergenerational linked samples (http://simba.isr.umich.edu/FIMS/).
This linking method yields a larger sample from a prospective method that links PSID respondents from the first generation to the second and third generations because only a subset of the parents and grandparents of the third generation are themselves PSID respondents.
By focusing on families with four grandparents, we are excluding those with some grandparents omitted, which tend to be single-parent families. In other research, we examine the implications of single parenthood for the potential effect of grandparents on grandchildren (Song 2016). In that research, the results show that the net association between grandparent and grandchild educational attainment is weaker in single-parent families.
To check the robustness of our analyses on assortative mating, we also examined a sample restricted to the most recent marriage of individuals. Results are similar to those presented in this article.
Tabulations of the characteristics of our PSID samples by selected characteristics are available from the authors upon request.
We do not control for race in our analyses because we are unable to examine racial and educational assortative mating jointly, given the sample size.
Whereas Hertel and Groh-Samberg also used the PSID, they relied on patrilineal lineages. We provide a more complete two-sex model that includes all four grandparents, both parents, and sons and daughters.
In analyses not shown here, we also found heterogeneity in assortative mating within the same education groups of husbands and wives by their fathers’ and mothers’ education. In particular, educational matching is most likely to occur between males and females who themselves, as well as their parents, are in the same or adjacent education groups. Tables for these analyses are available from the authors on request.
Model specifications and test results are available from the authors on request.
This result is documented in tables for two-generation assortative mating not shown here but available from the authors on request.
The number of generations that it takes for the two-sex model to converge to its equilibrium depends on population size. When the population size is large, it takes longer for all families to be connected to each other through marriages.
Bartholomew, D. J. (1982). Stochastic models for social processes (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
Behrman, J., & Taubman, P. (1985). Intergenerational earning mobility in the United States: Some estimates and a test of Becker’s intergenerational endowments model. Review of Economics and Statistics, 67, 144–151.
Beller, E. (2009). Bringing intergenerational social mobility research into the twenty-first century. American Sociological Review, 74, 507–528.
Bengtson, V. L. (2001). Beyond the nuclear family: The increasing importance of multigenerational bonds. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1–16.
Bernheim, D. B., & Bagwell, K. (1988). Is everything neutral? Journal of Political Economy, 96, 308–338.
Bessa-Gomes, C., Legendre, S., & Clobert, J. (2010). Discrete two-sex models of population dynamics: On modelling the mating function. Acta Oecologica, 36, 439–445.
Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. New York, NY: Free Press.
Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York, NY: Wiley.
Bloome, D. (2014). Racial inequality trends and the intergenerational persistence of income and family structure. American Sociological Review, 79, 1196–1225.
Bol, T., & Kalmijn, M. (2015). Grandparents’ resources and grandchildren’s schooling: Does grandparental involvement moderate the grandparent effect? Social Science Research, 55, 155–170.
Caswell, H. (2001). Matrix population models: Construction, analysis, and interpretatio (2nd ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Caswell, H., & Weeks, D. E. (1986). Two-sex models: chaos, extinction, and other dynamic consequences of sex. American Naturalist, 128, 707–735.
Chan, T. W., & Boliver, V. (2013). The grandparent’s effect in social mobility: Evidence from British birth cohort studies. American Sociological Review, 78, 662–678.
Cherlin, A. J., & Furstenberg, F. F. (1986). The new American grandparent: A place in the family, a life apart. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Clark, G. (2014). The son also rises: Surnames and the history of social mobility. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Coall, D. A., & Hertwig, R. (2010). Grandparental investment: Past, present, and future. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 1–59.
DeLeire, T., & Kalil, A. (2002). Good things come in threes: Single-parent multigenerational family structure and adolescent adjustment. Demography, 39, 393–413.
Duncan, O. D. (1966). Methodological issues in the analysis of social mobility. In N. J. Smelser & S. M. Lipset (Eds.), Social structure and mobility in economic development (pp. 51–97). Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Erikson, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1992). The constant flux: A study of class mobility in industrial societies. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Erola, J., & Moisio, P. (2007). Social mobility over three generations in Finland, 1950–2000. European Sociological Review, 23, 169–183.
Featherman, D. L., & Hauser, R. M. (1978). Opportunity and change. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Fernández, R., & Rogerson, R. (2001). Sorting and long-run inequality. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 1305–1341.
Goldstein, D. B. (2008). Jacob’s legacy: A genetic view of Jewish history. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Goodman, L. A. (1953). Population growth of the sexes. Biometrics, 9, 212–225.
Hertel, F. R., & Groh-Samberg, O. (2014). Class mobility across three generations in the U.S and Germany. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 35, 35–52.
Hodge, R. W. (1966). Occupational mobility as a probability process. Demography, 3, 19–34.
Hout, M. (1983). Mobility tables. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Hout, M. (1988). More universalism, less structural mobility: The American occupational structure in the 1980s. American Journal of Sociology, 93, 1358–1400.
Jæger, M. M. (2012). The extended family and children’s educational success. American Sociological Review, 77, 903–922.
Kalmijn, M. (1991a). Status homogamy in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 496–523.
Kalmijn, M. (1991b). Shifting boundaries: Trends in religious and educational homogamy. American Sociological Review, 56, 786–800.
Keyfitz, N. (1968). Introduction to the mathematics of population. London, UK: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Keyfitz, N. (1972). The mathematics of sex and marriage. Proceedings of the Sixth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 4, 89–108.
Lam, D. (1986). The dynamics of population growth, differential fertility, and inequality. American Economic Review, 76, 1103–1116.
Lee, J. Z., & Campbell, C. D. (1997). Fate and fortune in rural China: Social organization and population behavior in Liaoning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, J. Z., & Wang, F. (1999). One quarter of humanity: Malthusian mythology and Chinese realities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Maralani, V. (2013). The demography of social mobility: Black-white differences in educational reproduction. American Journal of Sociology, 118, 1509–1558.
Mare, R. D. (1991). Five decades of educational assortative mating. American Sociological Review, 56, 15–32.
Mare, R. D. (1997). Differential fertility, intergenerational educational mobility, and racial inequality. Social Science Research, 26, 263–291.
Mare, R. D. (2000). Assortative mating, intergenerational mobility, and educational inequality (Working Paper CCPR-004-00). Los Angeles: California Center for Population Research.
Mare, R. D. (2011). A multigenerational view of inequality. Demography, 48, 1–23.
Mare, R. D., & Maralani, V. (2006). The intergenerational effects of changes in women’s educational attainments. American Sociological Review, 71, 542–564.
Mare, R. D., & Schwartz, C. R. (2006). Educational assortative mating and the family background of the next generation: A formal analysis. Riron to Hoho (Sociological Theory and Methods), 21, 253–277.
Mare, R. D., & Song, X. (2014). Social mobility in multiple generations (Working Paper PWP-CCPR-2014-014). Los Angeles: California Center for Population Research.
Matras, J. (1961). Differential fertility, intergenerational occupational mobility and change in the occupational distribution: Some elementary interrelationships. Population Studies, 15, 187–197.
Matras, J. (1967). Social mobility and social structure: Some insights from the linear model. American Sociological Review, 32, 608–614.
Møllegaard, S., & Jæger, M. M. (2015). The effect of grandparents’ economic, cultural, and social capital on grandchildren’s educational success. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 42, 11–19.
Musick, K., & Mare, R. D. (2004). Family structure, intergenerational mobility, and the reproduction of poverty: Evidence for increasing polarization? Demography, 41, 629–648.
Pfeffer, F. (2014). Multigenerational approaches to social mobility: A multifaceted research agenda. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 35, 1–12.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pollak, R. A. (1986). A reformulation of the two-sex problem. Demography, 23, 247–259.
Pollak, R. A. (1987). The two-sex problem with persistent unions: A generalization of the birth matrix-mating rule model. Theoretical Population Biology, 32, 176–187.
Pollak, R. A. (1990). Two-sex demographic models. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 399–420.
Preston, S. H. (1974). Differential fertility, unwanted fertility, and racial trends in occupational achievement. American Sociological Review, 39, 492–506.
Preston, S. H., & Campbell, C. D. (1993). Differential fertility and the distribution of traits: The case of IQ. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 997–1019.
PSID Main Interview User Manual: Release 2013. (2013). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
Qian, Z. (1997). Breaking the racial barriers: Variations in interracial marriage between 1980 and 1990. Demography, 34, 263–276.
Qian, Z. (1998). Changes in assortative mating: The impact of age and education, 1970–1990. Demography, 35, 279–292.
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.
Ruggles, S. (2007). The decline of intergenerational coresidence in the United States, 1850 to 2000. American Sociological Review, 72, 964–989.
Schnore, L. F. (1961). Social mobility in demographic perspective. American Sociological Review, 26, 407–423.
Schoen, R. (1981). The harmonic mean as the basis of a realistic two-sex marriage model. Demography, 18, 201–216.
Schoen, R. (1988). Modeling multigroup populations. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Schwartz, C. R. (2010). Earnings inequality and the changing association between spouses’ earnings. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 1524–1557.
Schwartz, C. R. (2013). Trends and variation in assortative mating: Causes and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 451–470.
Schwartz, C. R., & Mare, R. D. (2005). Trends in educational assortative marriage from 1940 to 2003. Demography, 42, 621–646.
Sewell, W. H., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). Education, occupation, and earnings: Achievement in the early career. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Silverstein, M., & Marenco, A. (2001). How Americans enact the grandparent role across the family life. Journal of Family Issues, 22, 493–522.
Song, X. (2016). Diverging mobility trajectories: Grandparent effects on educational attainment in one- and two-parent families. Demography, 53, 1905–1932.
Song, X., & Mare, R. D. (2015). Retrospective versus prospective approaches to the study of intergenerational social mobility. Sociological Methods and Research, 44, 555–584.
Uhlenberg, P. (1996). Mortality decline in the twentieth century and supply of kin over the life course. Gerontologist, 36, 681–685.
Warren, J. R., & Hauser, R. M. (1997). Social stratification across three generations: New evidence from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. American Sociological Review, 62, 561–572.
Wightman, P., & Danziger, S. (2014). Multigenerational income disadvantage and the educational attainment of young adults. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 35, 53–69.
Zeng, Z., & Xie, Y. (2014). The effects of grandparents on children’s schooling: Evidence from rural China. Demography, 51, 599–617.
We are grateful to Cameron Campbell, Hal Caswell, Thomas DiPrete, Mark Handcock, Benjamin Jarvis, Sung Park, Judith Seltzer, Florencia Torche, Shripad Tuljapurkar, and the Demography reviewers and editors for their valuable suggestions. Earlier versions of this article were presented at the Biodemography Workshop at Stanford University, May 6–8, 2013; the spring meeting of ISA Research Committee on Social Stratification (RC28), Trento, Italy, May 16–18, 2013; and the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, August 10–13, 2013, New York City. The authors received support from the National Science Foundation (SES-1260456) and benefited from facilities and resources provided by the California Center for Population Research at UCLA (CCPR), which receives core support (R24-HD041022) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
About this article
Cite this article
Song, X., Mare, R.D. Short-Term and Long-Term Educational Mobility of Families: A Two-Sex Approach. Demography 54, 145–173 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-016-0540-4
- Educational mobility
- Two-sex model
- Assortative mating