Gender Asymmetry in the Fertility of Racially and Ethnically Exogamous U.S. Couples.

IF 3.6 1区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
Margaret M Weden, Michael S Rendall, Joey Brown
{"title":"Gender Asymmetry in the Fertility of Racially and Ethnically Exogamous U.S. Couples.","authors":"Margaret M Weden, Michael S Rendall, Joey Brown","doi":"10.1215/00703370-11968125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Hypotheses explaining fertility levels in unions of women and men with different racial and ethnic origins (exogamous union fertility)-including stigma, in-between, pronatal, and assimilative fertility-apply equally when the minority group partner is the woman or the man. As an alternative, we propose a gendered theorizing of exogamous union fertility in which the fertility preferences of either the woman's or the man's racial and ethnic group might dominate. Our analyses reveal strong support for male-predominant patterns: the couple's fertility is nearer to that in an endogamous union of the man's racial and ethnic group than to that of an endogamous union of the woman's racial and ethnic group. We conjecture that women selecting into exogamous unions to realize their own individual fertility preferences might partially explain this finding. We find no cases of female predominance, in which the couple's fertility is nearer to that in an endogamous union of the woman's racial and ethnic group than that of an endogamous union of the man's racial and ethnic group. In addition, using a simple fertility model in which both the woman's and the man's racial and ethnic groups are included as predictors, we find that only the man's coefficients are statistically and substantively significant. A critical implication of our findings is that the standard demographic practice of using the woman's racial and ethnic group will increasingly downwardly bias estimates of fertility differences by race and ethnicity in the United States as exogamy becomes increasingly common.</p>","PeriodicalId":48394,"journal":{"name":"Demography","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Demography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00703370-11968125","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hypotheses explaining fertility levels in unions of women and men with different racial and ethnic origins (exogamous union fertility)-including stigma, in-between, pronatal, and assimilative fertility-apply equally when the minority group partner is the woman or the man. As an alternative, we propose a gendered theorizing of exogamous union fertility in which the fertility preferences of either the woman's or the man's racial and ethnic group might dominate. Our analyses reveal strong support for male-predominant patterns: the couple's fertility is nearer to that in an endogamous union of the man's racial and ethnic group than to that of an endogamous union of the woman's racial and ethnic group. We conjecture that women selecting into exogamous unions to realize their own individual fertility preferences might partially explain this finding. We find no cases of female predominance, in which the couple's fertility is nearer to that in an endogamous union of the woman's racial and ethnic group than that of an endogamous union of the man's racial and ethnic group. In addition, using a simple fertility model in which both the woman's and the man's racial and ethnic groups are included as predictors, we find that only the man's coefficients are statistically and substantively significant. A critical implication of our findings is that the standard demographic practice of using the woman's racial and ethnic group will increasingly downwardly bias estimates of fertility differences by race and ethnicity in the United States as exogamy becomes increasingly common.

美国种族和民族异族通婚夫妇生育能力中的性别不对称。
解释不同种族和民族出身的女性和男性结合的生育水平(异族通婚生育)的假设——包括污名化、中间生育、产前生育和同化生育——同样适用于少数群体伴侣是女性或男性的情况。作为一种选择,我们提出了一种异族通婚结合生育的性别理论,在这种理论中,女性或男性的种族和民族群体的生育偏好可能占主导地位。我们的分析有力地支持了男性占主导地位的模式:这对夫妇的生育能力更接近于男性种族和民族的内婚制结合,而不是女性种族和民族的内婚制结合。我们推测,女性选择异族通婚是为了实现她们自己的生育偏好,这可能部分解释了这一发现。我们没有发现女性占优势的情况,在这种情况下,夫妇的生育能力比男性的种族和民族的生育能力更接近于女性种族和民族的内婚结合。此外,使用一个简单的生育模型,其中包括女性和男性的种族和民族群体作为预测因素,我们发现只有男性的系数具有统计和实质性显著性。我们的研究结果的一个重要含义是,在美国,随着异族通婚变得越来越普遍,使用女性种族和民族的标准人口统计学实践将越来越倾向于按种族和民族估计生育率差异。
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
Demography
Demography DEMOGRAPHY-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
2.90%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Since its founding in 1964, the journal Demography has mirrored the vitality, diversity, high intellectual standard and wide impact of the field on which it reports. Demography presents the highest quality original research of scholars in a broad range of disciplines, including anthropology, biology, economics, geography, history, psychology, public health, sociology, and statistics. The journal encompasses a wide variety of methodological approaches to population research. Its geographic focus is global, with articles addressing demographic matters from around the planet. Its temporal scope is broad, as represented by research that explores demographic phenomena spanning the ages from the past to the present, and reaching toward the future. Authors whose work is published in Demography benefit from the wide audience of population scientists their research will reach. Also in 2011 Demography remains the most cited journal among population studies and demographic periodicals. Published bimonthly, Demography is the flagship journal of the Population Association of America, reaching the membership of one of the largest professional demographic associations in the world.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信