IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pit/wpaper/6052.html

Educational Homogamy and Assortative Mating Have Not Increased

Author

Listed:
  • Rania Gihleb

Abstract

Some economists have argued that assortative mating between men and womenhas increased over the last several decades, thereby contributing to increased familyincome inequality. Sociologists have argued that educational homogamy has increased.We clarify the relation between the two and, using both the Current Population Surveys and the decennial Censuses/American Community Survey, show that neither is correct. The former is based on the use of inappropriate statistical techniques. Both are sensitive to how educational categories are chosen. We also find no evidence thatthe correlation between spouses' potential earnings has changed dramatically.

Suggested Citation

  • Rania Gihleb, 2014. "Educational Homogamy and Assortative Mating Have Not Increased," Working Paper 6052, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    • Handle: RePEc:pit:wpaper:6052
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/working_papers/WP%2017-001.upload.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bernt Bratsberg & Simen Markussen & Oddbjørn Raaum & Knut Røed & Ole Røgeberg, 2023. "Trends in Assortative Mating and Offspring Outcomes," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(651), pages 928-950.
    2. Schwartz, Jacob & Song, Kyungchul, 2024. "The law of large numbers for large stable matchings," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 241(1).
    3. Prarthna Agarwal Goel, "undated". "Female Education, Marital Assortative Mating and Dowry: Theory and Evidence from India," Centre for International Trade and Development, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi Discussion Papers 19-05, Centre for International Trade and Development, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.
    4. Foerster, Hanno & Obermeier, Tim & Schulz, Bastian, 2024. "Job Displacement, Remarriage, and Marital Sorting," IZA Discussion Papers 17335, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. , Stone Center & Yonzan, Nishant, 2020. "Assortative Mating and Labor Income Inequality: Evidence from Fifty Years of Coupling in the U.S," SocArXiv 4whvs, Center for Open Science.
    6. Paserman, Daniele & Olivetti, Claudia & Salisbury, Laura & Weber, E. Anna, 2020. "Who Married, (to) Whom, and Where? Trends in Marriage in the United States, 1850-1940," CEPR Discussion Papers 15484, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. George-Levi Gayle & Prasanthi Ramakrishnan & Mariana Odio-Zúñiga, 2021. "Work, Leisure, and Family: From the Silent Generation to Millennials," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 103(4), pages 385-424, October.
    8. Huang, Bin & Tani, Massimiliano & Xu, Lei & Zhu, Yu, 2025. "Does college education make women less likely to marry? evidence from the Chinese higher education expansion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Shao-Hsun Keng & Peter F. Orazem, 2019. "Performance pay, the marriage market and rising income inequality in Taiwan," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 969-992, September.
    10. Brian Goesling & Hande Inanc & Angela Rachidi, "undated". "Success Sequence: A Synthesis of the Literature," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 726444f0055c41fca02d9cf39, Mathematica Policy Research.
    11. Alimi, Omoniyi B. & Mare, David C. & Poot, Jacques, 2018. "Who partners up? Educational assortative matching and the distribution of income in New Zealand," Motu Working Papers 290498, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    12. Sonia Jaffe & Simon Weber, 2019. "The effect of meeting rates on matching outcomes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(2), pages 363-378, March.
    13. N. Meltem Daysal & Todd E. Elder & Judith K. Hellerstein & Scott A. Imberman & Chiara Orsini, 2024. "Parental Skills, Assortative Mating, and the Incidence of Autism Spectrum Disorder," American Journal of Health Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(3), pages 322-356.
    14. Helena Holmlund, 2022. "How Much Does Marital Sorting Contribute to Intergenerational Socioeconomic Persistence?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(2), pages 372-399.
    15. Barban, Nicola & De Cao, Elisabetta & Oreffice, Sonia & Quintana-Domeque, Climent, 2021. "The effect of education on spousal education: A genetic approach," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    16. Lennon, Conor, 2023. "Women’s educational attainment, marriage, and fertility: Evidence from the 1944 G.I. Bill," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    17. Shuaizhang Feng & Gaojie Tang, 2019. "Accounting For Urban China'S Rising Income Inequality: The Roles Of Labor Market, Human Capital, And Marriage Market Factors," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(2), pages 997-1015, April.
    18. Hoehn-Velasco, Lauren & Penglase, Jacob, 2023. "Changes in assortative matching and educational inequality: evidence from marriage and birth records in Mexico," Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 587-607, December.
    19. Jonathan Davis & Bhashkar Mazumder, 2017. "The Decline in Intergenerational Mobility After 1980," Working Paper Series WP-2017-5, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, revised 14 Jan 2022.
    20. Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir, 2021. "The Measuring of Assortativeness in Marriage," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2316, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    21. Gutierrez, Federico H., 2019. "A Simple Solution to the Problem of Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives in Choo and Siow Marriage Market Model," GLO Discussion Paper Series 387, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    22. repec:osf:socarx:4whvs_v1 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure

    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:pit:wpaper:6052. 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: Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/depghus.html .

    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.