IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v46y2022i17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accuracy of wives' proxy reports of husbands' fertility preferences in sub-Saharan Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Dana Sarnak

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Stan Becker

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

Abstract

Background: Demographic researchers have recognized the importance of male partners in reproductive behavior and decision-making. Yet much of the existing literature still relies on female respondents reporting on behalf of their spouses. Objective: The objective of this study is to estimate the accuracy of wives’ reports of husbands’ fertility preferences in 32 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: We used couple-level data from Demographic and Health Surveys to evaluate the accuracy of wives’ reports of their husbands’ fertility preferences in 32 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. We created a measure of accuracy based on each partner’s response to a set of fertility preference questions. We examined the overall percentages of wives who were accurate, inaccurate, or uncertain across countries. Results: Despite the fact that most couples were concordant in wanting more children, we found variation in the percentages of wives who were accurate in their proxy reports, ranging from 26% in Chad to 58% in Rwanda. By contrast, percentages of wives who were inaccurate were similar; approximately one-third of wives across all countries gave proxy responses that were at odds with their husbands’ responses. Large percentages of wives were uncertain of their husbands’ fertility preferences, reaching 50% in Comoros. Conclusions: These findings indicate low levels of spousal discussion of fertility preferences. We encourage survey organizations to invest in collecting data from males directly. Contribution: By demonstrating that majorities of wives across countries either inaccurately perceive or are uncertain of their husband’s fertility preferences, the current study justifies collecting data from male partners directly.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana Sarnak & Stan Becker, 2022. "Accuracy of wives' proxy reports of husbands' fertility preferences in sub-Saharan Africa," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 46(17), pages 503-546.
  • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:46:y:2022:i:17
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2022.46.17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol46/17/46-17.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2022.46.17?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margaret E. Greene & Ann E. Biddlecom, 2000. "Absent and Problematic Men: Demographic Accounts of Male Reproductive Roles," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 26(1), pages 81-115, March.
    2. Quamrul H. Ashraf & David N. Weil & Joshua Wilde, 2013. "The Effect of Fertility Reduction on Economic Growth," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 39(1), pages 97-130, March.
    3. Terefe, A. & Larson, C.P., 1993. "Modern contraception use in Ethiopia: Does involving husbands make a difference?," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 83(11), pages 1567-1571.
    4. Jenny Trinitapoli & Sara Yeatman, 2018. "The Flexibility of Fertility Preferences in a Context of Uncertainty," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 44(1), pages 87-116, March.
    5. Margaret Frye & Lauren Bachan, 2017. "The demography of words: The global decline in non-numeric fertility preferences, 1993–2011," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 71(2), pages 187-209, May.
    6. Amy Ratcliffe & Allan Hill & David Harrington & Gijs Walraven, 2002. "Reporting of fertility events by men and women in rural Gambia," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 39(3), pages 573-586, August.
    7. Stan Becker & Amanda Kalamar, 2018. "Sampling Weights for Analyses of Couple Data: Example of the Demographic and Health Surveys," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(4), pages 1447-1473, August.
    8. Ilene Speizer, 1995. "A marriage trichotomy and its applications," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 32(4), pages 533-542, November.
    9. Daphne H. Liu & Adrian E. Raftery, 2020. "How Do Education and Family Planning Accelerate Fertility Decline?," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 46(3), pages 409-441, September.
    10. Maria Rita Testa & Laura Cavalli & Alessandro Rosina, 2014. "The Effect of Couple Disagreement about Child-Timing Intentions: A Parity-Specific Approach," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 40(1), pages 31-53, March.
    11. Elizabeth Thomson & Jan Hoem, 1998. "Couple childbearing plans and births in Sweden," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 35(3), pages 315-322, August.
    12. Julie DaVanzo & Christine E. Peterson & Nathan Jones, 2003. "How Well Do Desired Fertility Measures for Wives and Husbands Predict Subsequent Fertility? Evidence From Malaysia," Working Papers DRU-3013-NICHD, RAND Corporation.
    13. Julie DaVanzo & Christine E. Peterson & Nathan R. Jones, 2003. "How Well Do Desired Fertility Measures for Wives and Husbands Predict Subsequent Fertility?," Working Papers 03-16, RAND Corporation.
    14. John Casterline & Laila El-Zeini, 2007. "The estimation of Unwanted Fertility," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 44(4), pages 729-745, November.
    15. Raisul Akram & Abdur Razzaque Sarker & Nurnabi Sheikh & Nausad Ali & MGN Mozumder & Marufa Sultana, 2020. "Factors associated with unmet fertility desire and perceptions of ideal family size among women in Bangladesh: Insights from a nationwide Demographic and Health Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Konstantin Kazenin, 2025. "Preference for Sons and Daughters in Developing Countries: When Does (Dis)agreement Between Spouses Come into Play?," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 44(1), pages 1-35, February.
    2. Melanie Dawn Channon & Sarah Harper, 2019. "Educational differentials in the realisation of fertility intentions: Is sub-Saharan Africa different?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    3. David E. Bloom & Michael Kuhn & Klaus Prettner, 2024. "Fertility in High-Income Countries: Trends, Patterns, Determinants, and Consequences," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 16(1), pages 159-184, August.
    4. Matthias Doepke & Anne Hannusch & Fabian Kindermann & Michèle Tertilt, 2022. "The Economics of Fertility: A New Era," NBER Working Papers 29948, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Natalie Nitsche & Anna Matysiak & Jan Bavel & Daniele Vignoli, 2018. "Partners’ Educational Pairings and Fertility Across Europe," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(4), pages 1195-1232, August.
    6. Angelika Tölke, 2004. "Die Bedeutung von Herkunftsfamilie, Berufsbiografie und Partnerschaften für den Übergang zur Ehe und Vaterschaft," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2004-007, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    7. Erica FIELD & Vera MOLITOR & Alice SCHOONBROODT & Michèle TERTILT, 2016. "Gender Gaps in Completed Fertility," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(2), pages 167-206, June.
    8. Kaat Van Hoyweghen & Janne Bemelmans & Hendrik Feyaerts & Goedele Van den Broeck & Miet Maertens, 2023. "Small Family, Happy Family? Fertility Preferences and the Quantity–Quality Trade-Off in Sub-Saharan Africa," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 42(6), pages 1-35, December.
    9. Allan Puur & Livia Sz. Oláh & Mariam Irene Tazi-Preve & Jürgen Dorbritz, 2008. "Men's childbearing desires and views of the male role in Europe at the dawn of the 21st century," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(56), pages 1883-1912.
    10. Kravdal, Øystein & Rindfuss, Ronald R., 2007. "Changing relationships between education and fertility – a study of women and men born 1940-64," Memorandum 11/2007, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    11. Ankita Mishra & Jaai Parasnis, 2017. "Peers and Fertility Preferences: An Empirical Investigation of the Role of Neighbours, Religion and Education," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 339-357, October.
    12. John Casterline & Laila El-Zeini, 2007. "The estimation of Unwanted Fertility," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 44(4), pages 729-745, November.
    13. Ivy Kodzi & David Johnson & John Casterline, 2010. "Examining the predictive value of fertility preferences among Ghanaian women," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 22(30), pages 965-984.
    14. Sarah R. Hayford & Victor Agadjanian, 2012. "From desires to behavior," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 26(20), pages 511-542.
    15. Beatrice Chromková Manuea & Petr Fučík, 2011. "Couple disagreement about fertility preferences and family-friendly policy measures in the Czech Republic," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 335-344.
    16. Katherine M. Johnson & Arthur L. Greil & Karina M. Shreffler & Julia McQuillan, 2018. "Fertility and Infertility: Toward an Integrative Research Agenda," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 37(5), pages 641-666, October.
    17. Kerry MacQuarrie & Jeffrey Edmeades, 2015. "Whose Fertility Preferences Matter? Women, Husbands, In-laws, and Abortion in Madhya Pradesh, India," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 34(4), pages 615-639, August.
    18. David Voas, 2003. "Conflicting Preferences: A Reason Fertility Tends to Be Too High or Too Low," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 627-646, December.
    19. Maria Rita Testa & Danilo Bolano, 2021. "When partners’ disagreement prevents childbearing: A couple-level analysis in Australia," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(33), pages 811-838.
    20. Brian C. Thiede & Matthew Hancock & Ahmed Kodouda & James Piazza, 2020. "Exposure to Armed Conflict and Fertility in Sub-Saharan Africa," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(6), pages 2113-2141, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    couples; spousal relationships; fertility; family planning; fertility desires; Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS); sub-Saharan Africa;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:46:y:2022:i:17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.