IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Subfecundity and anxiety in a nationally representative sample

Listed author(s):
  • King, Rosalind Berkowitz
Registered author(s):

    Research thus far on the psychological consequences of impaired fecundity in developed countries has relied heavily on clinic-based samples. This study uses a nationally representative sample of American women regardless of fecundity status or treatment status. I analyze reports of fecundity status and anxiety from a 1995 sample of almost 11,000 respondents. The results show consistent positive effects of subfecundity on the odds of fulfilling the diagnostic criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder and the incidence rate of symptoms among those who would be so diagnosed, even when controlling for potential confounding factors. Whether a subfecund respondent currently desires to have a child does not moderate the likelihood of being anxious, but does moderate the number of symptoms reported. The lack of a moderating effect of seeking treatment suggests that past research on clinic-based samples is generalizable to all subfecund women.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 56 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 4 (February)
    Pages: 739-751

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:4:p:739-751
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:4:p:739-751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.