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 Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We apply a pseudo panel analysis of survey data from the years 2010 and 2017about Americans' self-reported marital preferences and perform some formaltests on the sign and magnitude of the change in educational homophily from thegeneration of the early Boomers to the late Boomers, as well as from the earlyGenerationX to the late GenerationX. In the analysis, we control for changes inpreferences over the course of the survey respondents' lives. We use the testresults to decide whether the popular iterative proportional fitting (IPF)algorithm, or its alternative, the NM-method is more suitable for analyzingrevealed marital preferences. These two methods construct different tablesrepresenting counterfactual joint educational distributions of couples.Thereby, they disagree on the trend of revealed preferences identified from theprevalence of homogamy by counterfactual decompositions. By findingself-reported homophily to display a U-shaped pattern, our tests reject thehypothesis that the IPF is suitable for constructing counterfactuals ingeneral, while we cannot reject the applicability of the NM. The significanceof our survey-based method-selection is due to the fact that the choice betweenthe IPF and the NM makes a difference not only to the identified historicaltrend of revealed homophily, but also to what future paths of social inequalityare believed to be possible.

What do surveys say about the historical trend of inequality and the applicability of two table-transformation methods?