Model-based estimates and unadjusted prevalences appear in Table 2. Further, selection processes are operating, with disadvantaged couples less often having sufficient economic resources to marry. Small sample sizes raise questions about statistical power, limiting our ability to detect significant differences.
Each row displays results for a separate multivariate regression for one of the seven dependent variables. Couples living in a state with a ban against marriage to same-sex couples experience higher odds of dissolution.
Relationship outcomes and their predictors: Longitudinal evidence from heterosexual married, gay cohabiting, and lesbian cohabiting couples. Badgett and Herman used aggregate-level U. Further, this indicator focuses on negative policy climate factors and ignores potentially positive climate elements, such as offering domestic partnerships, anti-bullying legislation, or protections against employment discrimination.
Multivariate models included an indicator denoting same-sex and different sex cohabiting couples, age, race, education, household income, and the presence of minor children. As same-sex legal partnerships same sex marriage articles pdf files in Cary marriage emerged in California and CHIS quickly implemented corresponding questions before most other United States, we thought an immediate examination of available CHIS data could refine current knowledge and facilitate future representative U.
Archived from the original on 25 June Info Print Print. Article Media. Article Media. Retrieved 5 July
The time of observation is relatively short: 55 months, or about 4. The demographics of same-sex marriages in Norway and Sweden. CHIS is an ongoing, independent, cross-sectional telephone survey that monitors the health status of California residents.
In addition to testing these competing hypotheses, we also consider the role of social context gauged by residence in a state with a policy declaring marriage to be between one man and one woman.