Family size in successive generations: The effects of birth order, intergenerational change in lifestyle, and familial satisfaction

Abstract

Studies of family size in successive generations have found a small but persistently positive effect of size of family of orientation. Recent work has suggested that this relationship may be influenced by birth order, intergenerational change in lifestyle, and familial satisfaction. Data from a 24-year longitudinal study of women in Pennsylvania indicate that number of siblings does influence size of family of procreation. More important, this relationship is stronger among women who were first-born than later-born, stronger for those not experiencing intergenerational change than for those who changed, and stronger among those who at age 16 were satisfied with their parental family than for those who were dissatisfied.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Althauser, R. P. 1971. Multicollinearity and Non Additive Regression Models. Pp. 453–472 in Hubert M. Blalock, Jr. (ed.), Causal Models in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Altus, W. D. 1966. Birth Order and Its Sequelae. Science 151:44–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Berent, J. 1953. The Relationship Between Family Sizes of Two Successive Generations. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 31:39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bogue, Donald J. 1969. Principles of Demography. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bumpass, Larry L., and C. F. Westoff. 1970. The Later Years of Childbearing. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Crider, Donald M., and F. K. Willits. 1973. Respondent Retrieval Bias in a Longitudinal Study. Sociology and Social Research 58:56–65.

    Google Scholar 

  7. —, F. K. Willits, and R. C. Bealer. 1971. Tracking Respondents in Longitudinal Surveys. The Public Opinion Quarterly 35:613–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. —, F. K. Willits, and R. C. Bealer. 1972. Locating People in Longitudinal Studies. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin 778.

    Google Scholar 

  9. —, F. K. Willits, and R. C. Bealer. 1973. Panel Studies: Some Practical Problems. Sociological Methods and Research 2:3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Duncan, O. D., R. Freedman, J. M. Coble, and D. P. Siesinger. 1965. Marital Fertility and Size of Family of Orientation. Demography 2:508–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Freedman, D. S. 1963. The Relation of Economic Status to Fertility. American Economic Review 53:414–426.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hendershot, G. E. 1969. Familial Satisfaction, Birth Order, and Fertility Values. Journal of Marriage and the Family 31:27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kammeyer, K. 1966. Hirth Order and the Feminine Sex Role Among College Women. American Sociological Review 31:508–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kantner, J. F., and R. G. Potter, Jr. 1954. Social and Psychological Factors Affecting Fertility: XXIV. The Relationship of Family Size in Two Successive Generations. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 32:294–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McAllister, P., C. S. Stokes, and M. Knapp. 1974. Size of Family of Orientation, Birth Order, and Fertility Values: A Reexamination. Journal of Marriage and the Family 36:337–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Neal, A. G., and H. T. Groat. 1975. Alienation Predictors of Differential Fertility: A Longitudinal Study. American Journal of Sociology 80:1220–1226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pearson, K., and A. Lee. 1899. On the Inheritance of Fertility in Mankind. Royal Society of London Philosophical Transactions. Series A, Volume 192.

  18. Rossi, A. S. 1965. Naming Children in Middle-Class Families. American Sociological Review 30:499–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ryder, Norman B., and C. F. Westoff. 1971. Reproduction in the United States, 1965. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Schachter, Stanley. 1959. The Psychology of Affiliation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. —. 1964. Birth Order and Sociometric Choice. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 28:453–456.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stokes, C. S. 1973. Family Structure and Socioeconomic Differentials in Fertility. Population Studies 27:295–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Westoff, Charles F., R. G. Potter, Jr., P. C. Sagi, and E. G. Mishler. 1961. Family Growth in Metropolitan America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. —, and R. H. Potvin. 1967. CollegeWomen and Fertility Values. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Whelpton, Pascal K., A. A. Campbell, and J. E. Patterson. 1966. Fertility and Family Planning in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson, N.E., Stokes, C.S. Family size in successive generations: The effects of birth order, intergenerational change in lifestyle, and familial satisfaction. Demography 13, 175–187 (1976). https://doi.org/10.2307/2060799

Download citation

Keywords

  • Family Size
  • Successive Generation
  • Birth Order
  • Current Population Survey
  • Marital Fertility