Associations between early family environment and ideal number of children.
Early family environment
Family of origin
Family planning
Ideal number of children
Survey study
Journal
International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie
ISSN: 1464-066X
Titre abrégé: Int J Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0107305
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
21
12
2022
accepted:
04
07
2023
medline:
14
11
2023
pubmed:
1
8
2023
entrez:
1
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Childhood family is vital for the formation of fertility preferences and attitudes towards family life. Yet previous studies mainly focused on structural aspects of the family, whereas the role of perceptions of one's family in relation to fertility preferences remained largely understudied. This study examined how different aspects of the early family environment (i.e. relationships with parents, happiness in childhood, parental conflicts, family resources, as well as family structure) are related to the ideal number of children reported in adulthood. Using representative cross-sectional survey data from the Finnish Family Barometer 2015, the sample comprised men and women aged 20-45 with and without children. Poisson regression models indicated that a higher number of siblings was associated with a higher ideal number of children, whereas living in a single-parent household and overall negative perceptions of parents were related to a lower ideal number of children independent of various socio-demographic characteristics. Further analyses showed that these family characteristics were associated with the ideal number of children mainly among childless people but not among parents. The findings suggest that the early family environment is related to the formation of the ideal number of children, especially for childless people.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
574-583Subventions
Organisme : Academy of Finland
ID : 345186
Organisme : Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies
Organisme : Suomen Kulttuurirahasto
ID : 00200993
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Union of Psychological Science.
Références
Axinn, W. G., Clarkberg, M. E., & Thornton, A. (1994). Family influences on family size preferences. Demography, 31(1), 65-79. https://doi.org/10.2307/2061908
Bachrach, C. A., & Morgan, S. P. (2013). A cognitive-social model of fertility intentions. Population and Development Review, 39(3), 459-485. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00612.x
Balbo, N., Billari, F. C., & Mills, M. (2013). Fertility in advanced societies: A review of research. European Journal of Population/Revue Européenne de Démographie, 29(1), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-012-9277-y
Beaujouan, E., & Berghammer, C. (2019). The gap between lifetime fertility intentions and completed fertility in Europe and the United States: A cohort approach. Population Research and Policy Review, 38(4), 507-535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-019-09516-3
Berrington, A., & Pattaro, S. (2014). Educational differences in fertility desires, intentions and behaviour: A life course perspective. Advances in Life Course Research, 21, 10-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2013.12.003
Bongaarts, J. (2001). Fertility and reproductive preferences in post-transitional societies. Population and Development Review, 27, 260-281. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3115260
Brinton, M. C., Bueno, X., Oláh, L., & Hellum, M. (2018). Postindustrial fertility ideals, intentions, and gender inequality: A comparative qualitative analysis. Population and Development Review, 44(2), 281-309. https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12128
Buhr, P., Lutz, K., & Peter, T. (2018). The influence of the number of siblings on expected family size in a cohort of young adults in Germany. Demographic Research, 39, 315-336. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2018.39.10
Buuren, S. v., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011). mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1-67. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03
Chipman, A., & Morrison, E. (2015). Family planning: Fertility and parenting ideals in urban adolescents. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(3), 695-703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0254-2
Dey, I., & Wasoff, F. (2010). Another child? Fertility ideals, resources and opportunities. Population Research and Policy Review, 29(6), 921-940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-009-9174-1
Eschelbach, M. (2015). Family culture and fertility outcomes-Evidence from American siblings. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 235(3), 246-267. https://doi.org/10.1515/jbnst-2015-0302
Golovina, K., Nitsche, N., Berg, V., Miettinen, A., Rotkirch, A., & Jokela, M. (2021). Birth cohort changes in fertility ideals: Evidence from repeated cross-sectional surveys in Finland. SocArXiv, 1 May, 1-42. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/7vtqm
Heiland, F., Prskawetz, A., & Sanderson, W. C. (2008). Are individuals' desired family sizes stable? Evidence from West German panel data. European Journal of Population/Revue Européenne de Démographie, 24(2), 129-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-008-9162-x
Hellstrand, J., Nisén, J., & Myrskylä, M. (2020). All-time low period fertility in Finland: Demographic drivers, tempo effects, and cohort implications. Population Studies, 1-15, 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2020.1750677
Kotte, M., & Ludwig, V. (2012). Intergenerational transmission of fertility intentions and behaviour in Germany: The role of contagion. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 207-226. https://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2011s207
Kuhnt, A.-K., Kreyenfeld, M., & Trappe, H. (2017). Fertility ideals of women and men across the life course. In M. Kreyenfeld & D. Konietzka (Eds.), Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, causes, and consequences (pp. 235-251). Demographic Research Monographs. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44667-7_11
Malia, J. A. (2006). Basic concepts and models of family stress. Stress, Trauma, and Crisis, 9(3-4), 141-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434610600853717
Miettinen, A. (2015a). Family Barometer 2015 [dataset]. Version 1.0 (2020-01-22). Finnish Social Science Data Archive [distributor]. http://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:fsd:T-FSD3396
Miettinen, A. (2015b). Miksi syntyvyys laskee. Suomalaisten lastensaantiin liittyviä toiveita ja odotuksia [Why the birth rate is falling. Finns' hopes and expectations for childbearing]. Perhebarometri 2015. Väestöntutkimuslaitos, Katsauksia E49. Helsinki: Väestöliitto.
Miller, W. B. (2011). Differences between fertility desires and intentions: Implications for theory, research and policy. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 75-98. https://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2011s75
Mönkediek, B., & Bras, H. (2018). Family systems and fertility intentions: Exploring the pathways of influence. European Journal of Population, 34(1), 33-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-017-9418-4
Morgan, S. P., & Rackin, H. (2010). The correspondence between fertility intentions and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, 36(1), 91-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00319.x
Official Statistics of Finland (OSF): Births [online publication]. (2023). Reference period: 2022. ISSN=1798-2413. Helsinki: Statistics Finland [Referenced: 29.4.2023]. https://stat.fi/en/publication/cl8mya8io1v2u0dutwqqanzqx
Philipov, D., & Bernardi, L. (2012). Concepts and operationalisation of reproductive decisions implementation in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Comparative Population Studies, 36(2-3), 495-530. https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2011-14
Rackin, H. M., & Bachrach, C. A. (2016). Assessing the predictive value of fertility expectations through a cognitive-social model. Population Research and Policy Review, 35(4), 527-551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-016-9395-z
R Core Team (4.0.3) (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.r-project.org/
Ray, C., Harcey, S., Greil, A., Tiemeyer, S., & McQuillan, J. (2018). Stability and change in personal fertility ideals among U.S. women in heterosexual relationships. Demographic Research, 39, 459-486. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2018.39.16
Rijken, A. J., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2009). Influences of the family of origin on the timing and quantum of fertility in The Netherlands. Population Studies, 63(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324720802621575
Savelieva, K., Jokela, M., & Rotkirch, A. (2022). Reasons to postpone childbearing during fertility decline in Finland. Marriage & Family Review, 1-24, 253-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2022.2083283
Sobotka, T., & Beaujouan, É. (2014). Two is best? The persistence of a two-child family ideal in Europe. Population and Development Review, 40(3), 391-419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2014.00691.x
Tahk, A. (2019). bucky: Buckys's archive for data analysis in the social sciences (R package version 1.0.6.).
Tanskanen, A., & Rotkirch, A. (2014). The impact of grandparental investment on mothers' fertility intentions in four European countries. Demographic Research, 31, 26. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.1
Testa, M. R., & Stephany, F. (2018). The educational gradient of fertility intentions: A meta-analysis of European studies. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 1, 293-330. https://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2017s293
Thomson, E. (2015). Family size preferences. In International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 805-808). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.31064-9
Yeatman, S., Trinitapoli, J., & Garver, S. (2020). The enduring case for fertility desires. Demography, 57(6), 2047-2056. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-020-00921-4