English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Research comparing heterosexuals with bisexuals and homosexuals in economics and the social sciences typically relies on two strategies to identify sexual orientation in existing survey data of general populations. Probing respondents to self-report their sexual orientation is generally considered the preferred option. Since self-reports are unavailable in most large multidisciplinary surveys, often researchers infer sexual orientation from the gender-constellation of a respondent’s partnership instead. Based on German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) data, this article reviews both strategies empirically in the context of a household panel survey. The analysis shows that self-reported and partnership-inferred sexual orientation are not mutual substitutes, instead leading to substantively different conclusions about differences between heterosexuals and LGBs (Lesbian, Gays, and Bisexuals). The article discusses problems of non-coverage in partnership-inferred sexual orientation and also investigates measurement error in self-reported sexual orientation, finding notable mode and interviewer effects.

Comparing Self-Reported and Partnership-Inferred Sexual Orientation in Household Surveys