View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Radboud Repository PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/62933 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2017-12-06 and may be subject to change. Do Opposites Attract Divorce? Dimensions of Mixed Marriage and the Risk of Divorce in the Netherlands Do Opposites Attract Divorce? Dimensions of Mixed Marriage and the Risk of Divorce in the Netherlands Trekken tegenpolen echtscheiding aan? Dimensies van gemengd huwen en de kans op echtscheiding in Nederland Een wetenschappelijke proeve op het gebied van de Sociale Wetenschappen Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, volgens besluit van het College van Decanen in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 31 januari 2002 des namiddags om 3.30 uur precies door Jacobus Petrus Gerardus Janssen geboren op 22 augustus 1972 te Zeist Promotores: Prof. Dr. W.C. Ultee Prof. Dr. M. Kalmijn - Katholieke Universiteit Brabant (Tilburg University) Co-promotor: Dr. P.M. de Graaf Manuscriptcommissie: Prof. Dr. N.D. de Graaf Prof. Dr. M. Wagner - Universität zu Köln, Cologne, Germany Prof. Dr. J. Dronkers - European University Institute, San Domenico di Fiesole, Firenze, Italy © J.P.G. Janssen 2001 ISBN: 90 5170 576 X The research reported in this book was supported by the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, project number 510-05-0603. Voor mijn vader en moeder Voor Suziana En voor Maryam Acknowledgements ith this book, I complete my PhD research project on mixed marriage and divorce, carried out in the Sociology section/ICS at the University of Nijmegen. Finishing the Wlast part of a dissertation besides a full-time job elsewhere is not the most enviable combination. And I realize that this combination deprives one's family of the attention it deserves. It is recommendable to finish a dissertation as soon as possible. Therefore, I was somehow relieved when half a year before the end of my contract’s extension – possible by NWO funding of this project – the final version of the Divorce in the Netherlands (SIN) data set finally became available within the research group. After all, three out of five of my empirical chapters (4, 5 and 6) are based upon analyses of these data. Besides, two empirical chapters (2 and 3) are based upon my traineeship at Statistics Netherlands (CBS) in 1997. As a PhD candidate, one gains many valuable experiences. The opportunity of working on my own research project, following courses and summer schools, visiting (inter)national conferences and presenting and sharing experiences and research findings with others from all over the world are highly interesting. I would like to thank Paul de Graaf and Matthijs Kalmijn for their supervision, advices and involvement in the research and its proposal. Special thanks to Wout Ultee for his contribution, personal attention and for introducing me to conferences and writing articles. I would also like to thank the manuscript committee, Nan Dirk de Graaf, Jaap Dronkers and Michael Wagner. For my fellow members of academic groups: SIN (Divorce in the Netherlands); ICS, especially the instructors and participants of courses and participants and discussants on the 'forum days'; the SISWO working group on social inequality and the life course; several people at conferences and summer schools: thank you all. I express my gratitude to several people at the Demographic Sector of CBS Voorburg in 1997, among them Hans Sanders, Jan Latten, Arie de Graaf, Kees Prins. I also thank CBS as my present employer in Heerlen for the support I received for finishing my thesis. One’s working environment is very important. Therefore, I thank all members through the years of the Sociology Section, not only for help and useful comments, but also for their collegiality. I could list many, but mention a few: Maarten Wolbers, Marcel Coenders, Christiaan Monden, John Hendrickx with his methodological advice; and to Elly van Wijk: thank you for your scrupulous secretarial work. Thanks to Elizabeth Cross and Rita Gircour for correcting my English. Life is definitely more than work. Most importantly, I think of what my family means to me. I am indebted to my parents who raised me with endless love and support, and who gave me such a wonderful home. I will never forget your warmth and kindness. You have always stimulated me in everything I do. I would also like to thank my brothers Geert and Peter. I am grateful that you want to be my ‘paranymphs’. I conclude by thanking Suziana. Not only did she help me with typing and checking the manuscript and by designing the book cover, she also took the load of being married to someone finishing his PhD dissertation besides having an unrelated full-time job. Thanks for being there for me, for helping me through the hard times of the last bits; endless thanks for your love and support. And for our little Maryam: you make me so happy and I am proud of you. Never stop making me realize the most important things in life. Jacques Janssen, Geleen, November 2001. vii Table of contents Table of Contents Acknowledgements vii Table of Contents ix 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Mixed marriage 1 1.1.1 Mixed marriage and its relevance to society 1 1.1.2 Mixed marriage, mobility research and the openness of society 3 1.2 Divorce 5 1.2.1 Divorce: some implications for society 5 1.2.2 Dutch research into divorce 7 1.3 Mixed marriage and divorce 7 1.3.1 Societal relevance and scientific relevance related 7 1.3.2 Heterogamy and divorce, mobility research and the openness of society 8 1.4 Research questions 10 1.5 Theory 13 1.5.1 Heterogamy and divorce: main considerations 13 1.5.2 Heterogamy and divorce: additional considerations 15 1.5.2.1 Division of labour and the direction of differences 15 1.5.2.2 Macro trends: secularization, individualization, meritocratization 16 1.5.2.3 Life course developments: growing acceptance, accumulated irritations 17 1.5.3 Search behaviour 18 1.6 Data sources 19 1.6.1 Marriage and divorce registrations 19 1.6.2 Divorce in the Netherlands: SIN 1998 20 1.7 Organization of this book 21 Notes 22 2 Heterogamy and divorce within ten years. A descriptive analysis of Dutch register data 1974-1994. 25 2.1 Introduction 25 2.2 The influence of heterogamy on divorce: hypotheses 28 2.3 Registration data 31 2.3.1 Official marriage and divorce registrations 31 2.3.2 Operationalization 33 2.4 Analyses 34 2.4.1 Regression model 34 ix Table of contents 2.4.2 Age heterogamy 36 2.4.3 Religious heterogamy 39 2.4.4 Heterogamy of nationality 42 2.4.5 Marital status heterogamy 45 2.4.6 Expected occurrence and heterogamy effects 46 2.5 Conclusions 49 Notes 50 3 Heterogamy and divorce within five, ten and fifteen years in two marriage cohorts. A dynamic analysis of Dutch register data 1974-1994. 51 3.1 Introduction 51 3.2 Theory and hypotheses 55 3.2.1 Hypotheses on duration effects 55 3.2.2 Hypotheses on differences between cohorts 57 3.3 Data and operationalization 59 3.3.1 Registration data and method 59 3.3.2 Operationalization 60 3.4 Analyses and results 62 3.4.1 Frequency of heterogamy 62 3.4.2 Testing the hypotheses: logistic regression models 63 3.4.3 Age differences 66 3.4.4 Religious differences 66 3.4.4.1 Religious differences: pattern in the first five years in the 1974-1979 cohort 66 3.4.4.2 Religious differences: trends over cohorts 68 3.4.4.3 Religious differences: changing influence over the course of marriage 69 3.4.4.4 Marriage ceremony in church 69 3.4.5 Differences in nationality 72 3.4.5.1 Differences in nationality: pattern in the first five years in the 1974-1979 cohort 72 3.4.5.2 Differences in nationality: trends over cohorts, changes over the marriage course 72 3.4.6 Social acceptance as an explanation 74 3.5 Conclusions and discussion 75 Notes 77 Appendices to Chapter 3 79 4 Does heterogamy increase the risk of divorce and, if so, why? A descriptive and explanatory analysis of SIN98. 85 4.1 Introduction 85 4.1.1 Previous research 86 4.1.2 This chapter 87 4.2 Theory and hypotheses 88 4.2.1 Homogamy and heterogamy 88 4.2.2 Heterogamy and divorce 89 x Table of contents 4.2.3 Explaining heterogamy effects on divorce 91 4.3 Data and operationalization 92 4.3.1 Organization of the data set 92 4.3.2 Operationalization 93 4.3.3 Description of the data 99 4.4 Method 100 4.5 Results: effects of heterogamy 103 4.5.1 Separate models for heterogamy effects on divorce 103 4.5.2 Multivariate models of heterogamy effects on divorce 111 4.5.3 The presence of children 113 4.6 Results: explaining heterogamy effects 115 4.6.1 Effects of heterogamy on the explanatory variables 115 4.6.2 Heterogamy effects explained? 117 4.7 Conclusion and discussion 121 Notes 123 Appendix to Chapter 4 125 5 Changing effects of heterogamy on the risk of divorce? A dynamic analysis of SIN98 over the life course and over cohorts.