Individualization of Mate Selection The Japanese Test Case

Fumiya Uchikoshi Department of Sociology

University of Tokyo

1

Table of Contents

2

Background

Previous Research and RQ

Methods and Data

Results

Discussion

Background

How do we form a Union and what is its social mechanism?

How does the Union influence on social change?

3

Purpose of Research

To describe the individualization of marriage which was an institution

embedded in a community

To discuss the idea of “Family of Choice” in family sociology

4

Table of Contents

5

Background

Previous Research and RQ

Methods and Data

Results

Discussion

Framework of Research

6

Japanese context

1. Being Liberated from community or Ie’s control

2. Forming a modern family

3. Recurring process leads to individualization of family

7

A typical example

8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Love marriage

Arranged marriage

This data is from IPSS (Institute for Population and Social Security)

Dichotomy matters?

The difference between miai and love marriage is whether it has a parent’s influence or not. 　　　　　　　　　　　　

(Watanabe & Kondo 1990)

But this dichotomy is really appropriate?

9

Dichotomy matters?

Some findings that make this suspicious

1910s: Parents arranged the marriage with respecting for child’s individual will.

(Sakai 2013) 1960s: Children dated their mate with considering parent’s wishes.

(Edwards 1990)

10

Dichotomy matters?

“Unions that began through a miai introduction but later blossomed into

passionate love did not seem to the couples to be accurately described as

miai marriages” (ibid. 57)

11

Framework Revisited

12

Confusion between opportunity and third party?

Research Design

13

To distinguish opportunity structure from third party effect

To describe the change in third party effect in Japanese mate selection

To analyze the determinants of effect

Table of Contents

14

Background

Previous Research and RQ

Methods and Data

Results

Discussion

Data

15

EASS 2006 Family Module

Population: Men and women 20-89 years old living in Japan

Sampling method: Two-stage stratified random sampling, Face-to-face interview and placement method

Sample Size: 2,130 (59.8%)

　 N Mean SD Min Max

Age of marriage 1688 26.07 4.71 16 60

Age 2130 52.73 16.71 20 89

Parent's Authority 2116 3.69 1.15 0 6

SP's logged income 587 5.82 1.18 0 7.74

　 R's education (%) Sp's education (%) F's education (%)

Lower secondary 402 18.87 272 18.07 796 49.84

Upper secondary 1049 49.25 761 50.56 480 30.06

Some colleges 249 11.69 165 10.96 22 1.38

BA or more 419 19.67 307 20.4 299 18.72

Total 2130 　 1505

　 1597 　

Descriptive Stats

Gender (%) Opportunity (%) Marriage Pattern (%)

Male 964 45.26 Arrangemet 443 20.8 Lower homogamy 190 12.63

Female 1166 54.74 Introduction 448 21.03 Middle homogamy 543 36.1

Total 2130 By myself 789 37.04 Higher homogamy 316 21.01

Parent's influence (%) DK/NA 29 1.36

Hypergamy 232 15.43

No 1,060 65.31

Not Applicable 421 19.77 Hypogamy 223 14.83

Yes 563 34.69

Total 2130 Total 1,504

Descriptive Stats

Dependent Variable

Parent’s Influence: “To what extent do you think your own parent(s) influenced your

decision of the current marriage partner?” (Recoded 1-4 into 0 (no) and 1

(yes))

18

Table of Contents

19

Background

Previous Research and RQ

Methods and Data

Results

Discussion

20

57.4%

36.1%

27.6%

14.2% 15.7% 16.2%

28.6%

60.3%

54.0% 52.4%

34.8%

25.2%

21.0% 27.3%

1920-29 1930-39 1940-49 1950-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-

Men

Women

Trends of parent’s influence

Hypothesis: Autonomy and mate selection

Rosenfeld, Micheal. (2009) The Age of Independence.

Higher education leads to increasing his or her autonomy and values which

respect for other people’s decision

21

Parent’s influence & autonomy

Rosenfeld, Micheal. (2009) The Age of Independence.

Emergence of independent life stage between adolescent and adults has contributed to increasing

autonomy in America.

22

23

Predicted Probability

31

0"

0.1"

0.2"

0.3"

0.4"

0.5"

0.6"

0.7"

0.8"

20" 21" 22" 23" 24" 25" 26" 27" 28" 29"

20�������� 30�������� 40��������

50�������� 60�������� 70��������

0"

0.1"

0.2"

0.3"

0.4"

0.5"

0.6"

0.7"

20" 21" 22" 23" 24" 25" 26" 27" 28" 29"

20�������� 30�������� 40��������

50�������� 60�������� 70��������

Male

Female

Regression Analysis

Results from table 1-4

Relationship of education to parent’s influence among male is spurious if age of marriage is controlled

Age of marriage make a difference between men and women (regardless of societies)

Men’s highly educated spouses are related to parent’s influence

33

So marriage has really individualized?

Types of parent’s influence

Hypo. 1：intervention in marriage itself

Hypo. 2 ：intervention in selecting a partner

34

Status maintenance through marriage?

Specifying Hypo. 2: Two parent’s strategy

1.  To prefer marrying up (hypergamy) by finding a partner whose status is higher than their children.

2.  To avert marring down (hypogamy) by finding a partner whose status is not lower than their.

35

Parent’s influence & marriage pattern

36

Male** Female*

No Yes Total No Yes Total

Lower homogamy 70.33 29.67 91 43.42 56.58 76

Middle homogamy 69.3 30.7 228 61.94 38.06 289

Higher homogamy 78.01 21.99 141 66.07 33.93 168

Hypergamy 75.95 24.05 79 62.09 37.91 153

Hypogamy 81.3 18.7 123 57.83 42.17 83

Total 74.32 25.68 662 60.6 39.4 769

Results from table 5 & 6

Male: parent’s influence is positively related to marrying down aversion

Female：parent’s influence is negatively related to spouse’s lower income→ intervention in marriage itself?

37

Conclusion

Visible influence → decreased

Invisible influence → still remained Marriage is functioned as status maintenance for male? Parent’s influence on female marriage is related to avoiding a partner with lower income?

38

Table of Contents

39

Background

Previous Research and RQ

Methods and Data

Results

Discussion

Discussion

Validity of “Family of choice”, a theoretical perspective focusing on individualization

of family.

Possibility of “Family strategy” (Tabuchi 2012) perspective?

40

Remarks

Mechanism of why age of current marriage is related to parent’s

influence among men, not women.

41

Acknowledgement

East Asian Social Survey (EASS) is a collaborative work of Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS), Japanese General

Social Survey (JGSS), Korean General Social Survey (KGSS) and Taiwan Social Change Survey (TSCS) which was launched in 2006. Surveys in the CAFS project have incorporated EASS

2006 family module with slight modifications according to local contexts.

42

文献

阪井裕一郎，2013，『家族主義と個人主義の歴史社会学』，慶応義塾大学大学院社会学研究科博士論文．

田渕六郎，2012，「少子高齢化の中の家族と世代間関係—家族戦略論の視点から—」，『家族社会学研究』24(1), 37-49.

渡辺秀樹・近藤博之，1990，「結婚と階層結合」，岡本英雄・直井道子編著，『現代日本の階層構造4 女性と社会階層』，東京大学出版会，119-146．

Edwards, W. 1990. Modern Japan through its weddings: Gender, person, and society in ritual portrayal. Stanford University Press.

Rosenfeld, M. 2009. The Age of Independence. HUP.

43