IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/ecdecc/doi10.1086-703082.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

He Says, She Says: Spousal Disagreement in Survey Measures of Bargaining Power

Author

Listed:
  • Kate Ambler
  • Cheryl Doss
  • Caitlin Kieran
  • Simone Passarelli

Abstract

Measures of control over assets and participation in household decisions are often used as indicators of bargaining power. Yet spouses do not necessarily provide the same responses to questions about these topics. Using household survey data from Bangladesh, we examine differences in spouses’ answers to questions regarding women’s involvement as asset owners and decision makers and develop a model to understand what these differences tell us about household behavior. Disagreement is substantial and systematic; women are more likely than men to say that women own assets and are involved in decision-making. These patterns suggest the presence of asymmetric information in the household in the form of hidden assets or decisions. Finally, correlational analysis shows that when women claim their involvement but men do not include them, there is positive association with good outcomes for women but to a lesser extent than when husbands agree that their wives are involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Kate Ambler & Cheryl Doss & Caitlin Kieran & Simone Passarelli, 2021. "He Says, She Says: Spousal Disagreement in Survey Measures of Bargaining Power," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(2), pages 765-788.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:ecdecc:doi:10.1086/703082
    DOI: 10.1086/703082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/703082
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/703082
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/703082?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:ecdecc:doi:10.1086/703082. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/EDCC .

    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.