Fertility preferences: What measuring second choices teaches us

Vienna Yearbook of Population Research

Volumn , Issue 1, 2011, Pages 131-156

  Hin, Saskia ^a   Gauthier, Anne ^b   Goldstein, Joshua ^a   Bühler, Christoph ^c  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH   (Germany)

^b NETHERLANDS INTERDISCIPLINARY DEMOGRAPHIC INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

^c LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865855751     PISSN: 17284414     EISSN: 17285305     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1553/populationyearbook2011s131     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ahmed, N.R. 1981. Family size and sex preferences among women in rural Bangladesh. Studies in Family Planning 12.3, 100-109.
2. Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 50, 179-211.
3. Axinn, W.G., M.E. Clarkberg and A. Thornton 1994. Family influences on family size preferences. Demography 31(1): 65-79.
4. Bongaarts, J. 2001. Fertility and reproductive preferences in post-transitional societies. Population and Development Review Supplement 27: 260-281.
5. Bühler, C. 2010. Measuring preferred family size. Unpublished manuscript. Rostock and Hannover: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research and Leibniz University.
6. Coombs, L. 1974. The measurement of family size preference and subsequential fertility. Demography 11(4): 587-611.
7. Coombs, L. 1979. Reproductive goals and achieved fertility: a fifteen-year perspective. Demography 16(4): 523-534.
8. Coward, J. 1981. Ideal family size in Northern Ireland. Journal of Biosocial Science 13(4): 443-454.
9. Dey, I. and Wasoff, F. 2010. Another child? Fertility ideals, resources and opportunities. Population Research and Policy Review 29: 921-940.
10. Engelhardt, H. 2004. Fertility intentions and preferences: effects of structural and financial incentives and constraints in Austria. Working Paper 2004(02), Vienna: Vienna Institute of Demography. http://www.oeaw.at/vid/download/WP2004_2.pdf
11. European Commission 2005. Confronting demographic change: a new solidarity between the generations. Green Paper COM 2005(94), Brussels: Communication from the Commission of the European Communities.
12. Gallup, G. and C. Robinson 1938. American Institute of Public Opinion surveys, 1935-1938. Public Opinion Quarterly 2(3): 373-398.
13. Goldberg, D. and C.H. Coombs 1963. Some applications of unfolding theory to fertility analysis. In Emerging Techniques in Population Research, Milbank Memorial Fund, 105-129. New York: Milbank Memorial Fund.
14. Goldstein, J., W. Lutz and M.R. Testa 2003. The emergence of sub-replacement family size ideals in Europe. Population Research and Policy Review 22: 479-496.
15. Hakim, C. 2003. A new approach to explaining fertility patterns: preference theory. Population and Development Review 29(3): 349-374.
16. Hakim, C. 2004. Childlessness in Europe: summary of research results for the Economic and Social Research Council. Swindon: Economic and Social Research Council.
17. Hakim, C. 2011. Women's lifestyle preferences in the 21st century: implications for family policy. In The future of motherhood in Western societies, ed. G. Beets, J. Schippers and E. R. te Velde, 177-195. The Netherlands: Springer.
18. Heiland, F., A. Prskawetz and W.C. Sanderson 2008. Are individuals' desired family sizes stable? Evidence from West German panel data. European Journal of Population 24: 129-156.
19. Knodel, J. and V. Prachuabmoh 1973. Desired family size in Thailand: are the responses meaningful? Demography 10(4): 619-637.
20. Lee, R.D. 1980. Aiming at a moving target: period fertility and changing reproductive goals. Population Studies 34(2): 205-226.
21. Liefbroer, A. 2008. Kinderwens wordt in de loop van het leven bijgesteld. Demos 24(3): 4-6.
22. Liefbroer, A. 2009. Changes in family size intentions across young adulthood: a life- course perspective. European Journal of Population 25(4): 363-386.
23. Lightbourne, R.E. and A.L. MacDonald 1982. Family size preferences. World Fertility Survey Comparative Studies Cross National Surveys 14. United Kingdom: Charlesworth Ltd.
24. Merz, E.-M. and A.C. Liefbroer 2010. Attitudes about voluntary childlessness across Europe: the role of individual and cultural factors. Paper presented at the European Population Conference 2010, Vienna, 1-4 September 2010. http://epc2010.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=100717
25. Miller, W.B. 1994. Childbearing motivations, desires, and intentions: a theoretical framework. Genetic, Social and Psychology Monographs 102(2): 225-258.
26. Morgan, S.P. 2001. Should fertility intentions inform fertility forecasts? In Proceedings of U.S. Census Bureau Conference: The Direction of Fertility in the United States, ed. U.S. Census Bureau, 151-184. Washington D.C., USA. http://www.copafs.org/UserFiles/file/reports/The%20Direction%20of%20Fert ility%20in%20the%20United%20States.pdf#page=165
27. Perugini, M. and R.D. Bagozzi 2001. The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal- directed behaviours: broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology 40: 79-98.
28. Philipov, D. and L. Bernardi. Forthcoming. Reproductive decisions: concepts and measurement in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Comparative Population Studies.
29. Pullum, T.W. 1983. Correlates of family size desires. In Determinants of fertility in developing countries: a summary of knowledge, ed. R.A. Bulatao, R.D. Lee, P.E. Hollerback and J. Bongaarts, 278-298. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press
30. Rasul, A. 1993. Fertility preference: a study of some basic concepts and considerations. The Journal of Family Welfare 39(1): 24-32.
31. Schaeffer, N.C. and E. Thomson (1992) The discovery of grounded uncertainty: developing standardized questions about strength of fertility motivation. In Sociological Methodology 22, ed. Marsden, P.V, 37-82. Oxford: Blackwell.
32. Sobotka, T. and M.R. Testa 2008. Attitudes and intentions toward childlessness in Europe. In People, population change and policies. Lessons from the Population Policy Acceptance Study, Vol. 1: Family change, ed. C. Höhn, D. Avramov and I.E. Kotowska, 177-211. The Netherlands: Springer.
33. Stoezel, J. 1954. Les attitudes et la conjoncture démographique: la dimension idéale de la famille. In Proceedings of the World Population Conference 1954 (Rome), Vol. 6, ed. United Nations, 1019-1035. New York: United Nations.
34. Terhune, K.W. and S. Kaufman 1973. The family size utility function. Demography 10(4): 599-618.
35. Testa, M.R. 2006. Childbearing preferences and family issues in Europe. Special Eurobarometer 253/Wave 65.1, TNS Opinion & Social. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_253_en.pdf
36. Testa, M.R. and L. Grilli 2006. The influence of childbearing regional contexts on ideal family size in Europe. Population 61(1-2):109-138.
37. Trent, R.B. 1980. Evidence bearing on the construct validity of "ideal family size". Population and Environment 3(3-4): 309-324.
38. Van de Kaa, D. 2001. Postmodern fertility preferences: from changing value orientation to new behaviour. Population and Development Review 27: 290-331.
39. Voas, D. 2003. Conflicting preferences: a reason why fertility tends to be too high or too low. Population and Development Review 29(4): 627-646.
40. Westoff, C.F. 1981. The validity of birth intentions: evidence from U.S. longitudinal studies. In Predicting fertility: demographic studies of birth expectations, ed. G.E. Hendershot and P.J. Placek, 51-59. Lexington: Lexington Books.
41. Zeelenberg, M. and Pieters, R. 2007. A theory of regret regulation. Journal of Consumer Psychology 17(1): 3-18.