Abstract
AbstractSex ratios have widely been recognized as an important link between demographic contexts and behavior because changes in the ratio shift sex-specific bargaining power in the partner market. Implicitly, the literature considers individual partner market experiences to be a function of local sex ratios. However, empirical evidence on the correspondence between subjective partner availability and local sex ratios is lacking so far. In this paper, we analyzed how closely a set of different local sex ratio measures correlates with subjective partner market experiences. Linking a longitudinal German survey to population data for different entities (states, counties, municipalities), we used multilevel logistic regression models to explore associations between singles’ subjective partner market experiences and various operationalizations of local sex ratios. Results suggest that local sex ratios correlated only weakly with subjective partner market experiences. Adult sex ratios based on broad age brackets, including those for lower-level entities, did not significantly predict whether individuals predominantly met individuals of their own sex. More fine-grained, age-specific sex ratios prove to be better predictors of subjective partner market experiences, in particular when age hypergamy patterns were incorporated. Nevertheless, the respective associations were only significant for selected measures. In a complementary analysis, we illustrate the validity of the subjective indicator as a predictor of relationship formation. In sum, our results suggest that subjective partner availability is not adequately represented by the broad adult sex ratio measures that are frequently used in the literature. Future research should be careful not to equate local sex ratios and conscious partner market experiences.
Funder
Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Anthropology,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference97 articles.
1. Åberg, Y. (2009). The contagiousness of divorce. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology (pp. 342–364). Oxford University Press.
2. Alt, N. P., Goodale, B., Lick, D. J., & Johnson, K. L. (2017). Threat in the company of men: Ensemble perception and threat evaluations of groups varying in sex ratio. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10, 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617731498.
3. Amato, P. R., & Previti, D. (2003). People’s reasons for divorcing: Gender, social class, the life course, and adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 602–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X03254507.
4. Ancona, S., Dénes, F. V., Krüger, O., Székely, T., & Beissinger, S. R. (2017). Estimating adult sex ratios in nature. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 372(1729). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0313.
5. Bailey, M., Cao, R., Kuchler, T., Stroebel, J., & Wong, A. (2018). Social connectedness: Measurement, determinants, and effects. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32, 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.3.259.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献