L’analyse statistique des tables de contingence carrées - L’homogamie socioprofessionnelle en France II. L’apport des modèles d’association

Abstract

French

Statistical Analysis of Square Contingency Tables - Social-professional Homogamy in France II. The Contribution of Association Models: Contrary to correspondence analysis (CA), log-multiplicative association models are only known by a restricted audience in France. This second article uses the latter technique to analyze a socioeconomic homogamy table (based on the two-digit catégories socioprofessionnelles of the spouses) from the INSEE Labour Force Surveys conducted between 2003 and 2010. It illustrates the strong resemblance between the two approaches, and highlights the advantages brought by the greater flexibility of association models. They provide a view of the social space both more accurate and easier to interpret than CA, in particular by giving special status to endogamous couples (in which the spouses belong exactly to the same group). They also allow us to analyze specifically men-women asymmetries which emerge from the choice of a spouse (hypergamy), an essential issue poorly apprehended by classical methods.

Keywords

Association Models Log-multiplicative Models Correspondence Analysis Square Contingency Tables Homogamy Hypergamy Social Space Modèles d’association Modèles log-multiplicatifs Analyse des correspondances Table de contingence carrée Homogamie Hypergamie Espace social

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agresti

(2002) Categorical Data Analysis. New York: Wiley.

Bouchet-Valat

(2014) logmult - Log-multiplicative models, including association models. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=logmult

Burnod

Chenu

(2001) Employés qualifiés et non qualifiés - Une proposition d’aménagement de la nomenclature des catégories socioprofessionnelles. Travail et emploi 86: 87–105.

Caussinus

(1986) Discussion of Paper by L. A. Goodman. International Statistical Review, 54(3): 274–78.

Constantine

Gower

(1978) Graphical Representation of Asymmetric Matrices. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), 27(3), 297–304.

De Falguerolles

van der Heijden

PGM

(2002) Reduced Rank Quasi-symmetry and Quasi-skew Symmetry - A Generalized Bi-linear Model Approach. Annales de la faculté des sciences de Toulouse - Mathématiques 11(4): 507–24.

Gelman

Rubin

(1995) Avoiding Model Selection in Bayesian Social Research. Sociological Methodology 25: 165–74.

Gelman

Rubin

(1999) Evaluating and Using Statistical Methods in the Social Sciences. Sociological Methods and Research 27(3): 403–10.

Gilula

Haberman

(1986) Canonical Analysis of Contingency Tables by Maximum Likelihood. Journal of the American Statistical Association 81(395): 780–88.

10.

Gollac

(1989) Les dimensions de l’organisation du travail. Économie et statistique 224(1): 27–44.

11.

Goodman

(1979) Simple Models for the Analysis of Association in Cross-Classifications having Ordered Categories. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74(367): 537–52.

12.

Goodman

(1985) The Analysis of Cross-Classified Data Having Ordered and/or Unordered Categories - Association Models, Correlation Models, and Asymmetry Models for Contingency Tables with or without Missing Entries. Annals of Statistics 13(1): 10–69.

13.

Goodman

(1986) Some Useful Extensions of the Usual Correspondence Analysis Approach and the Usual Log-Linear Models Approach in the Analysis of Contingency Tables. International Statistical Review 54(3):, 243–70.

14.

Greenacre

(2000) Correspondence Analysis of Square Asymmetric Matrices. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics) 49(3): 297–310.

15.

Guichard-Claudic

Testenoire

Trancart

(2009) Distances et proximités conjugales en situation d’homogamie et d’hétérogamie. In: Pailhé

Solaz

(eds) Entre famille et travail - Des arrangements de couple aux pratiques des employeurs. Paris: La Découverte, 187–207.

16.

Haberman

(1981) Tests for Independence in Two-way Contingency Tables Based on Canonical Correlation and on Linear-by-Linear Interaction. Annals of Statistics 9(6): 1178–86.

17.

Raftery

(1995) Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research. Sociological Methodology 25: 111–196.

18.

Raftery

(1998) Bayes factors and BIC: Comment on Weakliem. Seattle: University of Washington, Technical Report of the Department of Statistics.

19.

R Core Team (2013) R - A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria, http://www.R-project.org/.

20.

Van der Heijden

PGM

Mooijaart

Takane

(1994) Correspondence Analysis and Contingency Table Models. In: Greenacre

Blasius

(eds), Correspondence Analysis in the Social Sciences. Recent Developments and Applications, London-San Diego (CA): Academic Press, 79–111.

21.

Van der Heijden

PGM

Mooijaart

(1995) Some New Log-bilinear Models for the Analysis of Asymmetry in a Square Contingency Table. Sociological Methods and Research 24: 7–29.

22.

Weakliem

(1999) A Critique of the Bayesian Information Criterion for Model Selection. Sociological Methods and Research 27(3): 359–97.

23.

Wong

RS-K

(2010) Association Models. Thousand Oaks: Sage, Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences.

24.

Yamaguchi

(1990) Some Models for the Analysis of Asymmetric Association in Square Contingency Tables with Ordered Categories. Sociological Methodology 20 : 181–212.