Marriage, cohabitation, and institutional context: Household specialization among same-sex and different-sex couples

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES Journal of Marriage and Family Pub Date : 2024-05-14 DOI:10.1111/jomf.13002
Chih-lan Winnie Yang
{"title":"Marriage, cohabitation, and institutional context: Household specialization among same-sex and different-sex couples","authors":"Chih-lan Winnie Yang","doi":"10.1111/jomf.13002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This study examines how marriage-cohabitation gaps in household specialization (labor supply and earnings) vary across institutional contexts for same-sex couples (SSCs) and different-sex couples (DSCs) in Canada.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Prior research suggests that marriage-cohabitation gaps are smaller in contexts where cohabitation is more prevalent, but it has overlooked how legal protections (at the contextual level) and gender composition (at the couple level) moderate this association. As a result, little is known about whether differences in household specialization stem from heightened gendered expectations attached to marriage or stronger legal protections for married couples. This study posits that marriage-cohabitation gaps will be larger in contexts where legal protections for cohabitors are less marriage-like.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Using the 2006 and 2016 Canadian Census and the 2011 National Household Survey, I estimate ordinal and fractional logit models to examine marriage-cohabitation gaps in specialization among all couples (<i>N</i> = 2,788,055) and couples with young children (<i>N</i> = 826,305).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Among DSCs, marriage-cohabitation gaps were larger in Québec than in English Canada vis-à-vis earnings but not labor supply. Patterns among SSCs were more heterogeneous: gaps in labor supply were larger in English Canada for female couples but larger in Québec for male couples. Gaps in earnings were generally larger in Québec, with few exceptions. However, DSCs consistently specialized more than SSCs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>While existing research suggests marriage-cohabitation gaps in household specialization are largely explained by the prevalence of cohabitation, my results indicate that legal protections (at the contextual level) and gender composition (at the couple level) play a more decisive role.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48440,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marriage and Family","volume":"87 1","pages":"300-321"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jomf.13002","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Marriage and Family","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.13002","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study examines how marriage-cohabitation gaps in household specialization (labor supply and earnings) vary across institutional contexts for same-sex couples (SSCs) and different-sex couples (DSCs) in Canada.

Background

Prior research suggests that marriage-cohabitation gaps are smaller in contexts where cohabitation is more prevalent, but it has overlooked how legal protections (at the contextual level) and gender composition (at the couple level) moderate this association. As a result, little is known about whether differences in household specialization stem from heightened gendered expectations attached to marriage or stronger legal protections for married couples. This study posits that marriage-cohabitation gaps will be larger in contexts where legal protections for cohabitors are less marriage-like.

Methods

Using the 2006 and 2016 Canadian Census and the 2011 National Household Survey, I estimate ordinal and fractional logit models to examine marriage-cohabitation gaps in specialization among all couples (N = 2,788,055) and couples with young children (N = 826,305).

Results

Among DSCs, marriage-cohabitation gaps were larger in Québec than in English Canada vis-à-vis earnings but not labor supply. Patterns among SSCs were more heterogeneous: gaps in labor supply were larger in English Canada for female couples but larger in Québec for male couples. Gaps in earnings were generally larger in Québec, with few exceptions. However, DSCs consistently specialized more than SSCs.

Conclusion

While existing research suggests marriage-cohabitation gaps in household specialization are largely explained by the prevalence of cohabitation, my results indicate that legal protections (at the contextual level) and gender composition (at the couple level) play a more decisive role.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
婚姻、同居和制度环境:同性和异性夫妇的家庭专业化
本研究探讨了加拿大同性伴侣(SSCs)和异性伴侣(DSCs)在不同制度背景下,婚姻-同居在家庭专业化(劳动力供给和收入)方面的差距是如何变化的。先前的研究表明,在同居较为普遍的背景下,婚姻-同居差距较小,但研究忽视了法律保护(背景层面)和性别构成(伴侣层面)如何调节这种关联。因此,人们对家庭专业化的差异是源于对婚姻的更高性别期望,还是源于对已婚夫妇更有力的法律保护知之甚少。本研究假设,在对同居者的法律保护不那么像婚姻的情况下,婚姻-同居差距会更大。利用2006年和2016年加拿大人口普查以及2011年全国住户调查,我估计了序数和分数Logit模型,研究了所有夫妇(N = 2,788,055)和有年幼子女的夫妇(N = 826,305)在专业化方面的婚姻-同居差距。SSCs 之间的模式差异更大:英裔加拿大女性夫妇的劳动力供应差距更大,而魁北克男性夫妇的劳动力供应差距更大。除少数例外情况,魁北克省的收入差距普遍较大。现有研究表明,婚姻与同居在家庭专业化方面的差距主要是由同居的普遍性造成的,而我的研究结果表明,法律保护(在背景层面)和性别构成(在夫妻层面)发挥了更大的决定性作用。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years, Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) has been a leading research journal in the family field. JMF features original research and theory, research interpretation and reviews, and critical discussion concerning all aspects of marriage, other forms of close relationships, and families.In 2009, an institutional subscription to Journal of Marriage and Family includes a subscription to Family Relations and Journal of Family Theory & Review.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information From the Editor Issue Information Introduction to mid-decade Special Issue on Theory and Methods COVID-19 experiences and family resilience: A latent class analysis
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1