Crossing Boundaries: “Some College,” Schools, and Educational Assortative Mating

McClendon, David

doi:10.1111/jomf.12482

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When we used counterfactual approaches that compared high school and college graduates who were similar in backgrounds and early life health and skills, the college advantage remained evident for mental and global health, although not for physical domains. This finding corroborates the threshold effect: BA completion was repeatedly found to be associated with better outcomes than sub-BA levels across diverse life domains (Hout 2012; McClendon 2018), including health (J. B. Kane et al 2018; Lawrence et al 2018).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Postsecondary Educational Attainment and Health among Younger U.S. Adults in the “College-for-All” Era

Zajacova

Lawrence

2021

Socius

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population-health research has neglected differentiation within postsecondary educational attainments. This gap is critical to understanding health inequality because college experience with no degree, vocational/technical certificates, and associate degrees may affect health differently. We examine health across detailed postsecondary attainment levels. We analyze data on 14,750 respondents in Waves I and IV of the nationally representative Add Health panel spanning adolescence to ages 26 to 34. Multivariate regression and counterfactual approaches to minimize the impact of confounders estimate multiple health outcomes across postsecondary attainment levels. Compared to high school diplomas, we find significant returns to bachelor’s degrees for most health outcomes and smaller but largely significant returns to associate degrees. In contrast, adults with some college but no degree or with vocational/technical certificates do not have better physical health than high school graduates. Our findings highlight the stark differentiation within higher education as reflected by the disparate health outcomes in early adulthood.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Postsecondary Educational Attainment and Health among Younger U.S. Adults in the “College-for-All” Era

Zajacova

Lawrence

2021

Socius

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another finding is that partners who met through dating apps were more educationally exogamous than those who met elsewhere, particularly those who met through local networks of friends or associations, at school or at work. Especially for highly educated women marrying later in life and investing in professional careers (selectivity results show that app users are significantly more likely to experience work-life conflict, see S5.4 Table in S1 File), dating apps may effectively replace local dating pools and schools as key marriage markets [78]. It was also found that partnerships initiated on dating apps are not more exogamous on origin.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 95%

The demography of swiping right. An overview of couples who met through dating apps in Switzerland

Potârcă

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the span of almost ten years, phone dating apps have transformed the dating scene by normalizing and, according to some voices, gamifying the digital quest for a partner. Despite amplified discussion on how swipe-based apps damage the fabric of intimate ties, scientific accounts on whether they have led to different relationship patterns are missing. Using 2018 survey data from Switzerland, this study provides a rich overview of couples who met through dating apps by addressing three main themes: 1) family formation intentions, 2) relationship satisfaction and individual well-being, and 3) assortative mating. The data indicate that in Switzerland, dating apps have recently taken over as main online dating context. Results further show that couples formed through mobile dating have stronger cohabiting intentions than those formed in non-digital settings. Women who found their partner through a dating app also have stronger fertility desires and intentions than those who found their partner offline. Generally, there are no differences between couples initiated through dating apps and those initiated elsewhere regarding relationship and life satisfaction. Though more data are needed to capture the full range of users’ romantic and sexual experiences, current results mitigate some of the concerns regarding the short-term orientation or the poor quality of relationships formed through mobile dating. Findings finally suggest that dating apps play an important role in altering couple composition by allowing for more educationally diverse and geographically distant couples.

show abstract

“…As a result, new sites have emerged that provide older singles with the opportunity to meet potential partners outside of more traditional meeting spots like the workplace or the neighbourhood, such as singles-only holidays and after-work parties. The expanded age range of the partnering market has also boosted the rise of online dating (McClendon 2018;Rosenfeld et al 2019).…”

Section: Needs Preferences Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partner choice and partner markets

Bavel¹

2021

Research Handbook on the Sociology of the Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Partner choice represents a crucial stage in the process of family formation, and plays a key role in the reproduction of socio-economic and cultural inequality, in the development of kinship bonds, and in the enactment of gender. Given its intricate links with broader societal shifts, partner choice represents a particularly exciting area of study, not just for family sociology and demography, but for sociology in general. The term 'partner choice' is used interchangeably with the terms 'mate choice' and choice of a 'romantic partner' (Lewis 2016;Schwartz 2013). The adjective 'romantic' connotes that the partner is chosen based on passionate mutual affection. While cross-cultural studies have suggested that passionate or romantic love is likely to be a human universal (Fisher et al. 2006;Jankowiak and Fischer 1992), it appears that romantic love did not become a normatively expected basis for marriage until the nineteenth century, particularly in Western societies (Coontz 2005;De Munck et al. 2016). This review, like most work in sociology and family demography, focuses on long-term partnerships that may lead to household formation and, potentially, to joint childrearing, rather than on short-term sexual relationships without any commitment. Partner choice encompasses situations in which partners are still living apart, living in unmarried cohabitation, or living together as married spouses. While the main focus of this chapter is on heterosexual relationships, same-sex partner choice is an emerging issue that is discussed in the final part of this chapter (see also Evertsson et al. in this volume). Moreover, the analysis focuses on partnerships that are expected to be monogamous at a given point in time. Polygamy (the practice of having multiple spouses at the same time), either in the form of polygyny (a man having more than one wife) or polyandry (a woman having more than one husband), is not discussed.There is considerable evidence that assortative mating is pervasive (Lichter and Qian 2019; Schwartz 2013). This concept denotes the fact that matches do not occur at random, as partners are sorted based on sharing a number of traits. The concept of endogamy refers to the tendency of people to select a partner within their own social group, while exogamy refers to choosing a partner outside of one's own group (also called intermarriage; e.g., between religious groups). The distinction between endogamous and exogamous unions is used to indicate differences or similarities in qualitative group characteristics such as geographic origin, religious denomination, or ethnic background. Alternatively, the concept of homogamy refers to the tendency of people to choose a partner who has status characteristics close to their own that can be ordered or quantified, such as income, educational attainment, or socio-economic status. The unions of partners who are far apart in terms of such characteristics are called heterogamous. When an individual has a partner with higher status ('partnering up'), the concept of hypergamy is...

show abstract

Crossing Boundaries: “Some College,” Schools, and Educational Assortative Mating

Cited by 9 publications

References 44 publications

Postsecondary Educational Attainment and Health among Younger U.S. Adults in the “College-for-All” Era

Postsecondary Educational Attainment and Health among Younger U.S. Adults in the “College-for-All” Era

The demography of swiping right. An overview of couples who met through dating apps in Switzerland

Partner choice and partner markets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About