澳大利亚婚姻法邮政调查结果的地理位置

T. Wilson, Fiona Shalley, Francisco Perales
{"title":"澳大利亚婚姻法邮政调查结果的地理位置","authors":"T. Wilson, Fiona Shalley, Francisco Perales","doi":"10.1111/AREA.12558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After years of public debate about same-sex marriage, the Australian Government put the issue to the electorate in the “Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey” in late 2017. The survey asked voters whether the law should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry. Nationally, 61.6% of voters responded “Yes.” But there were marked variations by electoral division, with the proportion of “Yes” votes varying from 26.1% to 83.7%. The aim of this paper is to explore the geographical pattern of the percentage of voters responding “Yes” by federal electoral division and identify its correlates. Results of the survey by federal electoral division were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS); other variables for electoral divisions were obtained from the ABS and the Australian Electoral Commission. Multiple linear regression and geographically weighted regression were employed to establish the relationship between the percentage of “Yes” responses at the electoral division level and the characteristics of electoral divisions’ populations. In 133 of 150 electoral divisions there was a majority of “Yes” responses. Strong predictor variables of the percentage “Yes” vote included the proportions of: the population describing themselves as having no religion, those with post-school educational qualifications, those with a birthplace in Oceania, Europe, or the Americas, and those who did not vote for conservative parties in the 2016 federal election. A marginally better fit was obtained with geographically weighted regression. In conclusion, the geographical pattern of responses in the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey is closely associated with a small number of characteristics of an electoral division's population.","PeriodicalId":72297,"journal":{"name":"Area (Oxford, England)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The geography of Australia's Marriage Law Postal Survey outcome\",\"authors\":\"T. Wilson, Fiona Shalley, Francisco Perales\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/AREA.12558\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After years of public debate about same-sex marriage, the Australian Government put the issue to the electorate in the “Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey” in late 2017. The survey asked voters whether the law should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry. Nationally, 61.6% of voters responded “Yes.” But there were marked variations by electoral division, with the proportion of “Yes” votes varying from 26.1% to 83.7%. The aim of this paper is to explore the geographical pattern of the percentage of voters responding “Yes” by federal electoral division and identify its correlates. Results of the survey by federal electoral division were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS); other variables for electoral divisions were obtained from the ABS and the Australian Electoral Commission. Multiple linear regression and geographically weighted regression were employed to establish the relationship between the percentage of “Yes” responses at the electoral division level and the characteristics of electoral divisions’ populations. In 133 of 150 electoral divisions there was a majority of “Yes” responses. Strong predictor variables of the percentage “Yes” vote included the proportions of: the population describing themselves as having no religion, those with post-school educational qualifications, those with a birthplace in Oceania, Europe, or the Americas, and those who did not vote for conservative parties in the 2016 federal election. A marginally better fit was obtained with geographically weighted regression. In conclusion, the geographical pattern of responses in the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey is closely associated with a small number of characteristics of an electoral division's population.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Area (Oxford, England)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Area (Oxford, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/AREA.12558\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Area (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/AREA.12558","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

经过多年对同性婚姻的公开辩论,澳大利亚政府于2017年底在“澳大利亚婚姻法邮政调查”中将这一问题提交给选民。该调查询问选民是否应该修改法律,允许同性伴侣结婚。在全国范围内,61.6%的选民回答“是”。但不同选区的投票结果存在显著差异,投赞成票的比例从26.1%到83.7%不等。本文的目的是探讨联邦选区选民回答“是”百分比的地理格局,并确定其相关性。联邦选举部门的调查结果来自澳大利亚统计局(ABS);选区的其他变量来自澳大利亚统计局和澳大利亚选举委员会。采用多元线性回归和地理加权回归建立选区层面的“是”回答百分比与选区人口特征之间的关系。在150个选区中,有133个选区的多数人表示赞成。“赞成”投票比例的有力预测变量包括:自称无宗教信仰的人口比例、拥有高等教育学历的人口比例、出生在大洋洲、欧洲或美洲的人口比例,以及在2016年联邦选举中没有投票给保守派政党的人口比例。地理加权回归获得了稍微更好的拟合。总之,澳大利亚婚姻法邮政调查中回应的地理格局与一个选区人口的少数特征密切相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The geography of Australia's Marriage Law Postal Survey outcome
After years of public debate about same-sex marriage, the Australian Government put the issue to the electorate in the “Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey” in late 2017. The survey asked voters whether the law should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry. Nationally, 61.6% of voters responded “Yes.” But there were marked variations by electoral division, with the proportion of “Yes” votes varying from 26.1% to 83.7%. The aim of this paper is to explore the geographical pattern of the percentage of voters responding “Yes” by federal electoral division and identify its correlates. Results of the survey by federal electoral division were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS); other variables for electoral divisions were obtained from the ABS and the Australian Electoral Commission. Multiple linear regression and geographically weighted regression were employed to establish the relationship between the percentage of “Yes” responses at the electoral division level and the characteristics of electoral divisions’ populations. In 133 of 150 electoral divisions there was a majority of “Yes” responses. Strong predictor variables of the percentage “Yes” vote included the proportions of: the population describing themselves as having no religion, those with post-school educational qualifications, those with a birthplace in Oceania, Europe, or the Americas, and those who did not vote for conservative parties in the 2016 federal election. A marginally better fit was obtained with geographically weighted regression. In conclusion, the geographical pattern of responses in the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey is closely associated with a small number of characteristics of an electoral division's population.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Value Capture by Companies of Different Ownership, Tier, Size, and Distance to Market: A Cross‐Sectoral Analysis “A canary is supposed to sit in a cage and look at someone else’s happiness”: Domestic rewilding in fin‐de‐siècle st. petersburg Rewilding: An emotional nature Towards a critical geopolitics of China‐US rivalry: Pericentricity, Regional Conflicts and Transnational Connections Cities of neurodiversity: New directions for an urban geography of neurodiversity
×
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