Expectations about Fertility and Field of Study among Adolescents: A Case of Self-selection?

IF 1.5 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Micha G. Keijer,Aart C. Liefbroer,Ineke Nagel
{"title":"Expectations about Fertility and Field of Study among Adolescents: A Case of Self-selection?","authors":"Micha G. Keijer,Aart C. Liefbroer,Ineke Nagel","doi":"10.12765/cpos-2019-11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent studies on the association between education and fertility, increased attention has been paid to the field of study. Women who studied in traditionally more “feminine” fields, like care, teaching, and health, were found to have their children earlier and to have more children than other women. A point of debate in this literature is on the causal direction of this relationship. Does the field of study change the attitudes towards family formation, or do young adults with stronger family-life attitudes self-select into educational fields that emphasize care, teaching, and health? Or do both field of study preferences and family-life attitudes arise before actual choices in these domains are made?We contribute to this debate by examining the relationship between fertility expectations and expected fields of study and occupation among 14-17 year-old adolescents. We use data collected in 2005 from 1500 Dutch adolescents and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to examine the associations between expected field of study and occupation and fertility expectations. Our results show that expectations concerning fertility and field of study are already interrelated during secondary education. Both female and male adolescents who expect to pursue studies in fields that focus on care and social interaction (like health care, teaching etc.) are less likely to expect to remain childless. This holds equally for girls and boys. In addition, girls who more strongly aspire to an occupation in which communication skills are important also expect to have more children. We did not find any relationship between expectations of pursuing a communicative field of study and occupation and expectations of earlier parenthood.In addition, among boys, we find that the greater their expectation of opting for an economics, a technical, or a communicative field of study, the less likely they were to expect to remain childless. Boys who expected to study in the economic field also expect to have their first child earlier, but boys expecting to pursue a technical course of studies expect to enter parenthood later. We also found that those who expect to pursue cultural studies are more likely to have a preference for no children, or if they do want children, to have them later in life.Overall, our findings suggest that the processes of elective affinity between the communicative fields of study and work on the one hand and fertility on the other hand are more or less comparable for boys and girls. With respect to the other domains, we find, apart from the gender differences in the relation between fields of study and childlessness, hardly or no gender differences in the expected timing of parenthood and the number of children. The genders do differ in their level of preference for communicative and economics-related fields of study and occupation, but if they do have the same preference, the association with fertility expectations is more or less similar.","PeriodicalId":44592,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Population Studies","volume":"193 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Population Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12765/cpos-2019-11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent studies on the association between education and fertility, increased attention has been paid to the field of study. Women who studied in traditionally more “feminine” fields, like care, teaching, and health, were found to have their children earlier and to have more children than other women. A point of debate in this literature is on the causal direction of this relationship. Does the field of study change the attitudes towards family formation, or do young adults with stronger family-life attitudes self-select into educational fields that emphasize care, teaching, and health? Or do both field of study preferences and family-life attitudes arise before actual choices in these domains are made?We contribute to this debate by examining the relationship between fertility expectations and expected fields of study and occupation among 14-17 year-old adolescents. We use data collected in 2005 from 1500 Dutch adolescents and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to examine the associations between expected field of study and occupation and fertility expectations. Our results show that expectations concerning fertility and field of study are already interrelated during secondary education. Both female and male adolescents who expect to pursue studies in fields that focus on care and social interaction (like health care, teaching etc.) are less likely to expect to remain childless. This holds equally for girls and boys. In addition, girls who more strongly aspire to an occupation in which communication skills are important also expect to have more children. We did not find any relationship between expectations of pursuing a communicative field of study and occupation and expectations of earlier parenthood.In addition, among boys, we find that the greater their expectation of opting for an economics, a technical, or a communicative field of study, the less likely they were to expect to remain childless. Boys who expected to study in the economic field also expect to have their first child earlier, but boys expecting to pursue a technical course of studies expect to enter parenthood later. We also found that those who expect to pursue cultural studies are more likely to have a preference for no children, or if they do want children, to have them later in life.Overall, our findings suggest that the processes of elective affinity between the communicative fields of study and work on the one hand and fertility on the other hand are more or less comparable for boys and girls. With respect to the other domains, we find, apart from the gender differences in the relation between fields of study and childlessness, hardly or no gender differences in the expected timing of parenthood and the number of children. The genders do differ in their level of preference for communicative and economics-related fields of study and occupation, but if they do have the same preference, the association with fertility expectations is more or less similar.
青少年生育期望与学习领域:一个自我选择的案例?
在最近关于教育与生育之间关系的研究中,人们越来越重视这一研究领域。研究发现,在护理、教学和卫生等传统上更“女性化”的领域学习的妇女比其他妇女更早生孩子,生的孩子也更多。在这篇文献中争论的一点是这种关系的因果方向。是学习的领域改变了人们对组建家庭的态度,还是有着更强烈的家庭生活态度的年轻人自己选择了强调照顾、教学和健康的教育领域?或者,在这些领域做出实际选择之前,对学习领域的偏好和对家庭生活的态度就已经出现了?我们通过研究14-17岁青少年的生育预期与预期的学习和职业领域之间的关系来促进这一辩论。我们使用2005年从1500名荷兰青少年收集的数据和结构方程模型(SEM)来检查预期学习领域和职业和生育预期之间的关联。我们的研究结果表明,在中学教育期间,对生育能力和学习领域的期望已经相互关联。希望在护理和社会互动领域(如保健、教学等)学习的男女青少年不太可能期望保持无子女状态。这对女孩和男孩都是一样的。此外,那些更渴望从事一份重要沟通技巧的职业的女孩也希望有更多的孩子。我们没有发现追求交际领域的学习和职业的期望与早期为人父母的期望之间有任何关系。此外,在男孩中,我们发现,他们对选择经济学、技术或交流领域的学习的期望越高,他们就越不可能希望没有孩子。希望在经济领域学习的男孩也希望更早生第一个孩子,但希望在技术课程学习的男孩希望更晚成为父母。我们还发现,那些希望从事文化研究的人更倾向于不要孩子,或者如果他们想要孩子,也会在以后的生活中生孩子。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,男孩和女孩在学习和工作交流领域之间的选择性亲和力过程和生育能力之间的选择性亲和力过程或多或少具有可比性。关于其他领域,我们发现,除了学习领域和无子女之间的关系存在性别差异外,在预期生育时间和子女数量方面几乎没有或没有性别差异。性别对交际和经济相关领域的学习和职业的偏好水平确实有所不同,但如果他们确实有相同的偏好,那么与生育预期的关联或多或少是相似的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信