IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vid/yearbk/v20y2022i1oid0x003d5a92.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cognitive schemas and fertility motivations in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Wendy D. Manning
  • Karen Benjamin Guzzo
  • Monica A. Longmore
  • Peggy C. Giordano

Abstract

While current evidence indicates that the United States did not experience a baby boom during the pandemic, few empirical studies have considered the underlying rationale for the American baby bust. Relying on data collected during the pandemic (n = 574), we find that pandemic-related subjective assessments (e.g., self-reported stress, fear of COVID-19 and relationship struggles) and not economic indicators (e.g., employment status, income level) were related to levels of fertility motivations among individuals in relationships. Analysis of within-person changes in fertility motivations shows that shifts in the number of children, increases in mental health issues and increases in relationship uncertainty, rather than changes in economic circumstances, were associated with short-term assessments of the importance of avoiding a pregnancy. We argue for broadening conceptual frameworks of fertility motivations by moving beyond a focus on economic factors to include a cognitive schema that takes subjective concerns into account.

Suggested Citation

  • Wendy D. Manning & Karen Benjamin Guzzo & Monica A. Longmore & Peggy C. Giordano, 2022. "Cognitive schemas and fertility motivations in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 20(1), pages 261-284.
    • Handle: RePEc:vid:yearbk:v:20:y:2022:i:1:oid:0x003d5a92
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://austriaca.at/0xc1aa5576_0x003d5a92.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caroline Sten Hartnett & Alison Gemmill, 2020. "Recent Trends in U.S. Childbearing Intentions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(6), pages 2035-2045, December.
    2. Eva Beaujouan & Caroline Berghammer, 2019. "The Gap Between Lifetime Fertility Intentions and Completed Fertility in Europe and the United States: A Cohort Approach," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(4), pages 507-535, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lazzari, Ester & Reimondos, Anna & Gray, Edith, 2022. "Childbearing desires before and after the Covid-19 outbreak in Australia: Who changed their attitudes toward having a first or additional child?," SocArXiv qbgmp, Center for Open Science.

    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. Katie Genadek & Joshua Sanders & Amanda Stevenson, 2022. "Measuring US fertility using administrative data from the Census Bureau," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(2), pages 37-58.
    2. Zuzanna Brzozowska & Eva Beaujouan & Kryštof Zeman, 2022. "Is Two Still Best? Change in Parity-Specific Fertility Across Education in Low-Fertility Countries," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(5), pages 2085-2114, October.
    3. Allan Puur & Sanan Abdullayev & Martin Klesment & Mark Gortfelder, 2023. "Parental Leave and Fertility: Individual-Level Responses in the Tempo and Quantum of Second and Third Births," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 39(1), pages 1-28, December.
    4. Linus Andersson, 2023. "The Role of Gender Differences in Partnering and Re-partnering for Gender Differences in Completed Fertility," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 42(2), pages 1-28, April.
    5. Zafer Büyükkeçeci & Mine Kühn & Siri E. Håberg & Cecilia H. Ramlau-Hansen & Mikko Myrskylä, 2024. "Subjective biology: how perceived fecundity influences relationship satisfaction and stability," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2024-012, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    6. Clara E. Piano, 2022. "The family and the state: a public choice perspective," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 383-405, September.
    7. Mikaela Brough & Paula Sheppard, 2022. "Fertility Decision-Making in the UK: Insights from a Qualitative Study among British Men and Women," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Jia Cao & Minghao Li, 2022. "Hyperbolic discounting in an intergenerational model with altruistic parents," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 989-1005, July.
    9. Lawrence L. Wu & Nicholas D. E. Mark, 2023. "Is US Fertility now Below Replacement? Evidence from Period vs. Cohort Trends," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 42(5), pages 1-22, October.
    10. Michael S. Rendall & Eowna Young Harrison & Mónica L. Caudillo, 2020. "Intentionally or Ambivalently Risking a Short Interpregnancy Interval: Reproductive-Readiness Factors in Women’s Postpartum Non-Use of Contraception," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(3), pages 821-841, June.
    11. Mikko Myrskylä & Julia Hellstrand & Sampo Lappo & Angelo Lorenti & Jessica Nisén & Ziwei Rao & Heikki Tikanmäki, 2024. "Declining fertility, human capital investment, and economic sustainability," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2024-002, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    12. Vincenzo Galasso, 2024. "The Role of Salience and Memory in Fertility Decisions: Experimental Evidence," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 43(4), pages 1-18, August.
    13. Wei Wang & Luyao Liang & Jing Luo & Hui Li & Jing Tang, 2022. "Early Childhood Teachers’ Fertility Willingness under China’s ‘Third-Child’ Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Stulp, Gert, 2020. "Certainty of fertility preferences among Dutch women," OSF Preprints gacz5, Center for Open Science.
    15. Raffaele Guetto & Giammarco Alderotti & Daniele Vignoli, 2023. "Can Policy Reforms Enhance Fertility? An Ex-Ante Evaluation through Factorial Survey Experiments," Econometrics Working Papers Archive 2023_08, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti".
    16. Karen Benjamin Guzzo, 2022. "The Formation and Realization of Fertility Goals Among a US Cohort in the Post‐Recession Years," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 48(4), pages 991-1026, December.
    17. Elizaveta Sivak & Paulina Pankowska & Adriënne Mendrik & Tom Emery & Javier Garcia-Bernardo & Seyit Höcük & Kasia Karpinska & Angelica Maineri & Joris Mulder & Malvina Nissim & Gert Stulp, 2024. "Combining the strengths of Dutch survey and register data in a data challenge to predict fertility (PreFer)," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 1403-1431, October.
    18. Jac Thomas & Francisco Rowe & Paul Williamson & Eric S. Lin, 2022. "The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Maria De Paola & Roberto Nisticò & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2020. "Fertility Decisions And Employment Protection: The Unintended Consequences Of The Italian Jobs Act," Working Papers 202003, Università della Calabria, Dipartimento di Economia, Statistica e Finanza "Giovanni Anania" - DESF.
    20. Anne Goujon, 2020. "Dimensions in Global Projections: An Overview," Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (INSEE), issue 520-521, pages 87-101.

    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:vid:yearbk:v:20:y:2022:i:1:oid:0x003d5a92. 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: Bernhard Rengs (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.oeaw.ac.at/vid/ .

    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.