Advertisement

Demography

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 29–40 | Cite as

Educational assortative mating across marriage markets: Nonhispanic whites in the United States

  • Susan K. LewisEmail author
  • Valerie K. Oppenheimer
Article

Abstract

Whether local marriage market conditions shape marriage behavior is a central social demographic question. Most work on this subject, however, focuses on one type of market condition—sex ratios— and on a single outcome—marital timing or sorting. We examine the impact of local marriage markets’ educational composition on educational assortative mating and on how sorting varies with age. We estimate a discrete-time competing-risks model of educational sorting outcomes, using individual data from the NLSY and community descriptors aggregated from census microdata. Results show that residents of educationally less favorable marriage markets are more likely to marry down on education, and that (for women) their chance of doing so increases with age more than for residents of more favorable markets.

Keywords

Potential Mate Marriage Market Concentrate Market Marriage Timing Marriage Squeeze 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akers, D.S. 1967. “On Measuring the Marriage Squeeze.” Demography 4:907–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allison, P.D. 1982. “Discrete-Time Methods for the Analysis of Event Histories.” Pp. 61–98 in Sociological Methodology 1982, edited by K. Keinhardt. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. — 1984. Event History Analysis. Beverly Hill: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Blackwell, D.L. 1998. “Marital Homogamy in the United States: The Influence of Individual and Paternal Education.” Social Science Research 27:159–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blau, P.M. 1977. Inequality and Heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  6. Blau, P.M., T.C. Blum, and J.E. Schwartz. 1982. “Heterogeneity and Intermarriage.” American Sociological Review 47:45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blau, P.M. and J.E. Schwartz. 1984. Crosscutting Social Circles. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Buss, D.M. and M. Barnes. 1986. “Preferences in Human Mate Selection.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50:559–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. England, P. and G. Farkas. 1986. Households, Employment, and Gender. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
  10. Fossett, M.A. and K.J. Kiecolt. 1991. “A Methodological Review of the Sex Ratio: Alternatives for Comparative Research.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53:941–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. —— 1993. “Mate Availability and Family Structure Among African Americans in U.S. Metropolitan Areas.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 55:288–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goldman, N., C.F. Westoff, and C. Hammerslough. 1984. “Demography of the Marriage Market in the United States.” Population Index 50:5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldscheider, F.K. and J. DaVanzo. 1989. “Pathways to Independent Living in Early Adulthood: Marriage, Semiautonomy, and Premarital Residential Independence.” Demography 26:597–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hachen, D.S., Jr. 1988. “The Competing Risks Model: A Method for Analyzing Processes With Multiple Types of Events.” Sociological Methods and Research 17:21–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Howard, J.A., P.A. Blumenstein, and P. Schwartz. 1987. “Social or Evolutionary Theories? Some Observations on Preferences in Human Mate Selection.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53:194–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kalmijn, M. 1991a. “Status Homogamy in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 97:496–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. — 1991b. “Shifting Boundaries: Trends in Religious and Educational Homogamy.” American Sociological Review 56:786–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. — 1993. “Trends in Black/White Intermarriage.” Social Forces 72:119–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. — 1998. “Intermarriage and Homogamy: Causes, Patterns, Trends.” Annual Review of Sociology 24:395–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kennedy, R.J.R. 1943. “Premarital Residential Propinquity and Ethnic Endogamy.” American Journal of Sociology 48:580–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Landis, P.H. and K.H. Day. 1945. “Education as a Factor in Mate Selection.” American Sociological Review 10:558–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lichter, D.T. 1990. “Delayed Marriage, Marital Homogamy, and the Mate Selection Process Among White Women.” Social Science Quarterly 71:802–11.Google Scholar
  23. Lichter, D.T., R.N. Anderson, and M.D. Hayward. 1995. “Marriage Markets and Marital Choice.” Journal of Family Issues 16:412–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lichter, D.T., F.B. LeClere, and D.K. McLaughlin. 1991. “Local Marriage Markets and the Marital Behavior of Black and White Women.” American Journal of Sociology 96:843–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lichter, D.T., D.K. McLaughlin, G. Kephart, and D.J. Landry. 1992. “Race and the Retreat From Marriage: A Shortage of Marriageable Men?“ American Sociological Review 57:781–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lloyd, K.M. and S.J. South. 1996. “Contextual Influences on Young Men’s Transition to First Marriage.” Social Forces 74:1097–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mare, R.D. 1991. “Five Decades of Educational Assortative Mating.” American Sociological Review 56:15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marini, M.M. 1985. “Determinants of the Timing of Adult Role Entry.” Social Science Research 14:309–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Michael, R.T. and N.B. Tuma. 1985. “Entry Into Marriage and Parenthood by Young Men and Women: The Influence of Family Background.” Demography 22:515–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Muhsam, H.V. 1974. “The Marriage Squeeze.” Demography 11:291–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Oppenheimer, V.K. 1988. “A Theory of Marriage Timing.” American Journal of Sociology 94:563–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pullum, T.W. and A. Peri. 1997. “The Multivariate Analysis of Homogamy.” Presented at the annual meetings of the Population Association of America, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  33. Qian, Z. and S.H. Preston. 1993. “Changes in American Marriage, 1972 to 1987: Availability and Forces of Attraction by Age and Education.” American Sociological Review 58:482–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schoen, R. 1983. “Measuring the Tightness of the Marriage Squeeze.” Demography 20:62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. — 1986. “A Methodological Analysis of Intergroup Marriage.” Sociological Methodology 15:49–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schoen, R. and J.R. Kluegel. 1988. “The Widening Gap in Black and White Marriage Rates: The Impact of Population Composition and Differential Marriage Propensities.” American Sociological Review 53:895–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schoen, R. and J. Wooldredge. 1989. “Marriage Choices in North Carolina and Virginia, 1969–71 and 1979–81.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 51:465–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schoen, R., J. Wooldredge, and B. Thomas. 1989. “Ethnic and Educational Effects on Marriage Choice.” Social Sciences Quarterly 70:617–30.Google Scholar
  39. South, S.J. 1991. “Sociodemographic Differentials in Mate Selection Preferences.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53:928–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. South, S.J. and K.M. Lloyd. 1992. “Marriage Opportunities and Family Formation: Further Implications of Imbalanced Sex Ratios.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 54:440–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilson, W.J. and K.M. Neckerman. 1986. “Poverty and Family Structure: The Widening Gap Between Evidences and Public Policy Issues.” Pp. 232–59 in Fighting Poverty: What Works and What Doesn’t, edited by S.H. Danziger and D.H. Weinberg. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Yamaguchi, K. 1991. Event History Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Ohio State UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Department of SociologyUniversity of CaliforniaLos Angeles

Personalised recommendations