This study aims to determine to what extent the opportunities and restrictions of the partner market influence educational assortative mating. It also analyzes the interplay between the opportunity structure and preferences. Matching district-based partner market indicators to heterosexual couples when they move in together based on the German Socio-Economic Panel, we find strong effects of the opportunity structure on educational homogamy. The results further imply that the density of the supply of potential partners is more important for educational assortative mating than imbalanced supply and competition. While the impact of partner market imbalances on assortative mating is a mere effect of the opportunity structure, the effects of the partner market density of relevant and available partners in space weakly imply that homophile and maximization preferences are simultaneously at work.
AkersD. S. (1967). On measuring the marriage squeeze. Demography, 4(2), 907–924.
2.
AlbaR. D.GoldenR. M. (1986). Patterns of ethnic marriage in the United States. Social Forces, 65(1), 202–223.
3.
AlbrechtC. M.FossettM. A.CreadyC. M.KiecoltK. J. (1997). Mate Availability, Women’s Marriage Prevalence, and Husbands’ Education. Journal of Family Issues, 18(4), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251397018004004
4.
AppeltE.ReitererA. F. (2009). Wer heiratet wen? Bildungshomogamie und soziale Mobilität in Österreich. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 34(1), 45–64.
5.
BavelJ. van. (2012). The reversal of gender inequality in education, union formation and fertility in Europe. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 10, 127–154.
6.
BeckerG. (1973). A theory of marriage: Part I. The Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 813–846.
7.
BeckerG. (1974). A theory of marriage. In SchultzT. W. (Ed.), Economics of the family: Marriage, children, and human capital (pp. 299–351). University of Chicago Press.
8.
BeckerG. (1981). A treatise on the family. Harvard University Press.
9.
BeckerG. S.LandesE. M.MichaelR. T. (1977). An economic analysis of marital instability. Journal of Political Economy, 85, 1141–1187.
10.
BestH.WolfC. (2012). Modellvergleich und Ergebnisinterpretation in logit- und probit-regressionen. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 64(2), 377–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-012-0167-4
11.
BlauP. M. (1977a). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. Free Press
12.
BlauP. M. (1977b). A macrosociological theory of social structure. American Journal of Sociology, 83(1), 26–54.
13.
BlauP. M.BlumT. C.SchwartzJ. E. (1982). Heterogeneity and intermarriage. American Sociological Review, 47(1), 45–62.
14.
BlossfeldH.-P. (2009). Educational assortative marriage in comparative perspective. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 513–530.
15.
BlossfeldH.-P.TimmA. (2003). Who marries whom in West Germany? In BlossfeldH.-P.TimmA. (Eds.), Who marries whom? Educational systems as marriage markets in modern societies (Vol. 12, pp. 19–36). Springer Science & Business Media.
16.
BuunkB. P.DijkstraP.KenrickD. T.WarntjesA. (2001). Age preferences for mates as related to gender, own age, and involvement level. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(4), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00065-4
17.
ByrneD. (1971). The attraction paradigm. Academic Press.
18.
ÇelikaksoyA.NekbyL.RashidS. (2010). Assortative mating by ethnic background and education among individuals with an immigrant background in Sweden. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 22(1), 65–88.
19.
ChengY.-h. A. (2014). Changing partner choice and marriage propensities by education in post-industrial Taiwan, 2000–2010. Demographic Research, 31, 1007–1042.
20.
ColemanJ. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Belknap Press.
21.
CorijnM.KlijzingE. (2001). Transitions to adulthood in Europe. Springer Science and Business Media.
22.
CrowderK. D.TolnayS. E. (2000). A new marriage squeeze for Black women: The role of racial intermarriage by Black men. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 792–807.
23.
De HauwY.GrowA.BavelJ. van. (2017). The reversed gender gap in education and assortative mating in Europe. European Journal of Population, 33(4), 445–474.
24.
EckhardJ.StauderJ. (2018). Migration and the partner market: How gender-selective relocations affect regional mating chances in Germany. European Journal of Population, 34(1), 59–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-017-9422-8
25.
EckhardJ.StauderJ. (2019). Partner market opportunities and union formation over the life course—A comparison of different measures. Population, Space, and Place, 25(4). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2178
26.
EckhardJ.KossowT.SariE.StauderJ.WieseD.WiesenM. (2019). The macrostructural framework of the partner market in a longitudinal perspective - Documentation on conception, preliminary methodological studies and the development of partner market indicators. Heidelberg: Max Weber-Institut für Soziologie. https://www.soz.uni-heidelberg.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Methodology-Report.pdf
27.
EckhardJ.StauderJ.WieseD. (2015). Die Entwicklung des Partnermarkts im Längsschnitt–Alters-und Kohortenunterschiede. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 67(1), 81–109.
28.
EikaL.MogstadM.ZafarB. (2014). Educational assortative mating and household income inequality (Vol. 682). National Bureau of Economic Research.
29.
EsteveA.SchwartzC. R.BavelJ. van.PermanyerI.KlesmentM.García-RománJ. (2016). The end of hypergamy: Global trends and implications. Population and Development Review, 42(4), 615–625. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12012
30.
FeldS. L. (1981). The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86(5), 1015–1035.
31.
FossettM. A.KiecoltK. J. (1991). A Methodological Review of the Sex Ratio: Alternatives for Comparative Research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53(4), 941–957. https://doi.org/10.2307/352999
32.
GanguliI.HausmannR.ViarengoM. (2014). Marriage, education and assortative mating in Latin America. Applied Economics Letters, 21(12), 806–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2013.849375
33.
GoldmanN.WestoffC. F.HammersloughC. (1984). Demography of the marriage market in the United States. Population Index, 50(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/2736903
34.
HalpinB.ChanT. W. (2003). Educational homogamy in Ireland and Britain: Trends and patterns. The British Journal of Sociology, 54(4), 473–495.
35.
HäringA.KleinT.StauderJ. (2014). Der Partnermarkt und die Gelegenheiten des Kennenlernens: Der Partnermarktsurvey (KleinT.HäringA.StauderJ.HäringA.StoyeK.KleinT.StauderJ.KleinT.StoyeK.StauderJ.HäringA. Eds., 1st ed.). Springer VS.
36.
HeiderF. (1977). Psychologie der interpersonalen Beziehungen. Ernst Klett Verlag.
37.
HelbigM. (2012). Die Umkehrung—Geschlechterungleichgheiten beim Erwerb des Abiturs im Wandel. In BeckerR.SolgaH. (Eds.), Soziologische Bildungsforschung. Sonderheft 52 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (pp. 374–392). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
38.
HollingsheadA. B. (1950). Cultural factors in the selection of marriage mates. American Sociological Review, 15(5), 619–627. https://doi.org/10.2307/2086915
39.
HouF.MylesJ. (2008). The changing role of education in the marriage market: Assortative marriage in Canada and the United States since the 1970s. The Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 33(2), 337–366.
40.
HuA.QianZ. (2016). Does higher education expansion promote educational homogamy? Evidence from married couples of the post-80s generation in Shanghai, China. Social Science Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.05.001
41.
KalmijnM. (1991a). Shifting boundaries: Trends in religious and educational homogamy. American Sociological Review, 56(6), 786–800. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096256
42.
KalmijnM. (1991b). Status homogamy in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 97(2), 496–523.
43.
KalmijnM.FlapH. (2001). Assortative meeting and mating: Unintended consequences of organized settings for partner choices. Social Forces, 79(4), 1289–1312.
44.
KarlsonK. B.HolmA.BreenR. (2012). Comparing regression coefficients between sample-sample nested models using logit and probit: A new method. Sociological Methodology, 42, 286–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175012444861
45.
Katz-GerroT. (1999). Cultural consumption and social stratification: Leisure activities, musical tastes, and social location. Sociological Perspectives, 42(4), 627–646.
46.
KenrickD. T.KeefeR. C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15(1), 75–91.
KleinT. (2016). Sozialstrukturanalyse: Eine Einführung (2., überarbeitete Auflage ed.). Beltz Juventa.
49.
KleinT.RappI. (2014). Die altersbezogene Partnerwahl im Lebenslauf und ihr Einfluss auf die Beziehungsstabilität Familie im Fokus der Wissenschaft (pp. 203–223). Springer.
50.
KleinT.RüfferW. (1999). Bildungshomogamie im internationalen Vergleich: Empirische Untersuchungen für die USA, Österreich, Ungarn und Deutschland. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 11(2), 28–58.
51.
KleinT.RüfferW. (2001). Partnerwahl und Rauchgewohnheiten: Analysen zum einflusssozialstrukturunabhängiger Mechanismen der Partnerwahl. In KleinT. (Ed.), Partnerwahl und Heiratsmuster (pp. 19 S.).
52.
LewisS. K.OppenheimerV. K. (2000). Educational assortative mating across marriage markets: Nonhispanic whites in the United States. Demography, 37(1), 29–40.
53.
LichterD. T.AndersonR. N.HaywardM. D. (1995). Marriage markets and marital choice. Journal of Family Issues, 16(4), 412–431.
54.
LichterD. T.QianZ. (2019). The study of assortative mating: Theory, data, and analysis. In SchoenR. (Ed.), Analytical family demography (pp. 303–337). Springer.
55.
LloydK. M.SouthS. J. (1996). Contextual influences on young men’s transition to first marriage. Social Forces, 74(3), 1097–1119. https://doi.org/10.2307/2580394
56.
MareR. D. (1991). Five decades of educational assortative mating. American Sociological Review, 56(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095670
57.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
58.
OECD. (2013). Education at a Glance 2013: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.
59.
OppenheimerV. K. (1988). A theory of marriage timing. American Journal of Sociology, 94(3), 563–591.
60.
OropesaR. S.LichterD. T.AndersonR. N. (1994). Marriage markets and the paradox of Mexican American nuptiality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 889–907.
61.
QianZ.PrestonS. H. (1993). Changes in American marriage, 1972 to 1987: Availability and forces of attraction by age and education. American Sociological Review, 58(4), 482–495. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096072
62.
RockwellR. C. (1976). Historical trends and variations in educational homogamy. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/350552
63.
RosenfeldM. J. (2008). Racial, educational and religious endogamy in the United States: A comparative historical perspective. Social Forces, 87(1), 1–31.
64.
SchwartzC. R.MareR. D. (2005). Trends in educational assortative marriage from 1940 to 2003. Demography, 42(4), 621–646.
65.
SiegersR.BelchevaV.SilbermannT. (2019). SOEP-Core v34—Documentation of Sample Sizes and Panel Attrition in the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) (1984 until 2017). Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.
66.
SimonH. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of environments. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.
67.
SimonH. A. (1999). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1–19.
68.
SkopekJ.SchulzF.BlossfeldH.-P. (2010). Who contacts whom? Educational homophily in online mate selection. European Sociological Review, 1–16.
69.
SmitsJ.UlteeW.LammersJ. (1998). Educational homogamy in 65 countries: An explanation of differences in openness using country-level explanatory variables. American Sociological Review, 63(2), 264–285.
70.
SouthS. J. (1995). Do you need to shop around? Age at marriage, spousal alternatives, and marital dissolution. Journal of Family Issues, 16(4), 432–449.
71.
SouthS.LloydK. (1992). Marriage opportunities and family formation: Further implications of imbalanced sex ratios. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54(2), 440–451.
72.
SouthS.LloydK. (1995). Spousal alternatives and marital dissolution. American Sociological Review, 60, 21–35.
73.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2014). Bevölkerung und Erwerbstätigkeit. Haushalte und Familien. Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2013. Fachserie 1 Reihe 3. Statistisches Bundesamt.
74.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2018). Bildungsstand der Bevölkerung—Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2017. Statistisches Bundesamt.
75.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2019). Mikrozensus—Haushalte und Familien. Haushalte nach RegioStar-Gebietsgliederung. Mikrozensus 2017. Statistisches Bundesamt.
76.
StauderJ. (2006). Die Verfügbarkeit partnerschaftlich gebundener Akteure für den Partnermarkt. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 58(4), 617–637.
77.
StauderJ. (2008). Opportunitäten und Restriktionen des Kennenlernens. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 60(2), 266–286.
78.
StauderJ. (2011). Regionale Ungleichheit auf dem Partnermarkt? Die makrostrukturellen Rahmenbedingungen der Partnerwahl in regionaler Perspektive. Soziale Welt, 62(1), 45–73.
79.
StauderJ. (2014). The Social Structure of Opportunities for Contact and Interaction and Strategies for Analysing Friendship Networks. In HäringA.KleinT.StauderJ.StoyeK. (Eds.), Der Partnermarkt und die Gelegenheiten des Kennenlernens: Der Partnermarktsurvey (pp. 221–241). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
80.
StauderJ. (2015). Durchdringende Sozialstruktur? Der Einfluss makrostruktureller Rahmenbedingungen auf den Partnermarkt. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 67(3), 401–432.
81.
VeeversJ. E. (1988). The “real” marriage squeeze. Mate selection, Mortality, and the mating gradient. Sociological Perspectives, 31(2), 169–189.
82.
WagnerU.ZickA. (1995). The relation of formal education to ethnic prejudice: Its reliability, validity and explanation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 41–56.
83.
WeberM. (1972). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der verstehenden Soziologie. Fünfte, revidierte Auflage. Mohr Siebeck.
84.
WirthH. (1996). Wer heiratet wen? Die Entwicklung der bildungsspezifischen Heiratsmuster in Westdeutschland. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 25(5), 371–394.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
