非婚姻实验的经验教训

4区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences
Daniel Schneider
{"title":"非婚姻实验的经验教训","authors":"Daniel Schneider","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2015.0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary:In the contemporary United States, marriage is closely related to money. Men and (perhaps to a lesser extent) women with more education, higher incomes, larger stocks of wealth, and more stable employment are more likely to marry than are people in more precarious economic positions. But is this relationship truly causal? That is, does economic insufficiency cause people to marry later and less often?Daniel Schneider reviews evidence from social experiments in areas such as early childhood education, human capital development, workforce training, and income support to assess whether programs that successfully increased the economic wellbeing of disadvantaged men and women also increased the likelihood that they would marry. These programs were not designed to affect marriage. But to the extent that they increased participants’ economic resources, they could have had such an effect.Examining these programs offers three key benefits. First, their experimental designs provide important insight into the causal role of economic resources for marriage. Second, they give us within-group comparisons of disadvantaged men and women, some of whom received economic “treatments” and some who did not. Third, they by and large assess interventions that are feasible and realistic within the constraints of U.S. policy making.Schneider describes each intervention in detail, discussing its target population, experimental treatment, evaluation design, economic effects, and, finally, any effects on marriage or cohabitation. Overall, he finds little evidence that manipulating men’s economic resources increased the likelihood that they would marry, though there are exceptions. For women, on the other hand, there is more evidence of positive effects.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"25 1","pages":"155 - 178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2015.0017","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lessons Learned from Non-Marriage Experiments\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Schneider\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/FOC.2015.0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary:In the contemporary United States, marriage is closely related to money. Men and (perhaps to a lesser extent) women with more education, higher incomes, larger stocks of wealth, and more stable employment are more likely to marry than are people in more precarious economic positions. But is this relationship truly causal? That is, does economic insufficiency cause people to marry later and less often?Daniel Schneider reviews evidence from social experiments in areas such as early childhood education, human capital development, workforce training, and income support to assess whether programs that successfully increased the economic wellbeing of disadvantaged men and women also increased the likelihood that they would marry. These programs were not designed to affect marriage. But to the extent that they increased participants’ economic resources, they could have had such an effect.Examining these programs offers three key benefits. First, their experimental designs provide important insight into the causal role of economic resources for marriage. Second, they give us within-group comparisons of disadvantaged men and women, some of whom received economic “treatments” and some who did not. Third, they by and large assess interventions that are feasible and realistic within the constraints of U.S. policy making.Schneider describes each intervention in detail, discussing its target population, experimental treatment, evaluation design, economic effects, and, finally, any effects on marriage or cohabitation. Overall, he finds little evidence that manipulating men’s economic resources increased the likelihood that they would marry, though there are exceptions. For women, on the other hand, there is more evidence of positive effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Future of Children\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"155 - 178\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2015.0017\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Future of Children\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2015.0017\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"法学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future of Children","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2015.0017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

在当代美国,婚姻与金钱密切相关。与经济状况不稳定的人相比,受教育程度更高、收入更高、财富更多、工作更稳定的男性和女性(可能程度较小)更有可能结婚。但这种关系真的是因果关系吗?也就是说,经济上的不足会导致人们晚婚和晚婚吗?Daniel Schneider回顾了早期儿童教育、人力资本开发、劳动力培训和收入支持等领域的社会实验证据,以评估成功提高弱势男女经济福利的项目是否也增加了他们结婚的可能性。这些项目并不是为了影响婚姻而设计的。但从增加参与者的经济资源的角度来看,它们本可以产生这样的效果。检查这些程序有三个关键的好处。首先,他们的实验设计为经济资源对婚姻的因果作用提供了重要的见解。其次,它们为我们提供了弱势男性和女性的组内比较,其中一些人接受了经济“治疗”,而另一些人没有。第三,他们总体上评估在美国政策制定的约束下可行和现实的干预措施。施耐德详细描述了每种干预措施,讨论了其目标人群、实验治疗、评估设计、经济效果,以及最后对婚姻或同居的任何影响。总的来说,他发现几乎没有证据表明操纵男性的经济资源会增加他们结婚的可能性,尽管也有例外。另一方面,对女性来说,积极影响的证据更多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lessons Learned from Non-Marriage Experiments
Summary:In the contemporary United States, marriage is closely related to money. Men and (perhaps to a lesser extent) women with more education, higher incomes, larger stocks of wealth, and more stable employment are more likely to marry than are people in more precarious economic positions. But is this relationship truly causal? That is, does economic insufficiency cause people to marry later and less often?Daniel Schneider reviews evidence from social experiments in areas such as early childhood education, human capital development, workforce training, and income support to assess whether programs that successfully increased the economic wellbeing of disadvantaged men and women also increased the likelihood that they would marry. These programs were not designed to affect marriage. But to the extent that they increased participants’ economic resources, they could have had such an effect.Examining these programs offers three key benefits. First, their experimental designs provide important insight into the causal role of economic resources for marriage. Second, they give us within-group comparisons of disadvantaged men and women, some of whom received economic “treatments” and some who did not. Third, they by and large assess interventions that are feasible and realistic within the constraints of U.S. policy making.Schneider describes each intervention in detail, discussing its target population, experimental treatment, evaluation design, economic effects, and, finally, any effects on marriage or cohabitation. Overall, he finds little evidence that manipulating men’s economic resources increased the likelihood that they would marry, though there are exceptions. For women, on the other hand, there is more evidence of positive effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Future of Children
Future of Children Multiple-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Future of Children is a collaboration of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and the Brookings Institution. The mission of The Future of Children is to translate the best social science research about children and youth into information that is useful to policymakers, practitioners, grant-makers, advocates, the media, and students of public policy. The project publishes two journals and policy briefs each year, and provides various short summaries of our work. Topics range widely -- from income policy to family issues to education and health – with children’s policy as the unifying element. The senior editorial team is diverse, representing two institutions and multiple disciplines.
×
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