The influence of partner relationship quality on fertility

This study examines whether partner relationship quality influences fertility, and if so, in which direction and which aspects of relationship quality are relevant. Competing hypotheses are tested. One hypothesis assumes that higher relationship quality leads to higher rates of childbearing, as a high-quality relationship offers the most favourable environment to raise children. An opposite hypothesis expects that lower relationship quality leads to higher rates of childbearing, as couples might have children in order to improve their relationship. Hazard analyses are performed using three waves of the Panel Study on Social Integration in the Netherlands. Findings indicate that positive as well as negative interaction between partners has a negative effect on first- and higher-order birth rates. This suggests that couples are most likely to have children if they do not have too much negative interaction, but neither interact in a very positive way. Value consensus negatively influences higher-order birth rates.Cette étude examine l’influence de la qualité de la relation avec le partenaire sur la fécondité, et cherche à identifier les aspects de la relation les plus pertinents par rapport à cette question. Différentes hypothèses sont explorées. La première postule que plus la qualité de la relation est bonne, plus la fécondité est élevée, car une relation de bonne qualité offre le contexte le plus favorable pour élever des enfants. A l’opposé, une deuxième hypothèse postule que plus la qualité de la relation est mauvaise, plus la fécondité est élevée, car les couples pourraient avoir des enfants pour améliorer leur relation. Des modèles de durée sont utilisés pour analyser les trois vagues du Panel d’Etude de l’Intégration Sociale aux Pays-Bas. Il apparaît que les interactions positives, de même que les interactions négatives entre partenaires ont une influence négative sur les naissances de rang 1 et sur les suivantes. Ce résultat suggère que les couples ont le plus de chances d’avoir des enfants s’ils ont des interactions qui ne sont ni trop bonnes, ni trop mauvaises. L’accord entre partenaires au niveau du système de valeurs influence de façon négative les naissances de rang supérieur

The Income Gap in Voting: Moderating Effects of Income Inequality and Clientelism

We investigated whether income gaps in voting turnout vary with country-level economic inequality, and whether this pattern differs between wealthier and less-wealthy countries. Moreover, we investigated whether the prevalence of clientelism was the underlying mechanism that accounts for the presumed negative interaction between relative income and economic inequality at lower levels of national wealth per capita. The harmonised PolPart dataset, combining cross-national surveys from 66 countries and 292 country-years, including 510,184 individuals, was analysed using multilevel logistic regression models. We found that the positive effect of relative income on voting was weaker at higher levels of economic inequality, independent of the level of national wealth. Although clientelism partially explains why economic inequality reduces the income gap in voter turnout, it does not do so in the way we expected. It seems to decrease turnout of higher income groups, rather than increase turnout of lower income groups. Importantly, that economic inequality reduces the income gap in voter turnout does not imply that economic inequality is positive for democratic representation, since economic inequality was found to depress the likelihood of voting for all income groups

A Survey Experiment on Citizens’ Preferences for ‘Vote–Centric’ vs. ‘Talk–Centric’ Democratic Innovations with Advisory vs. Binding Outcomes

Previous research on public support for participatory decision-making fails to distinguish between vote-centric (referendums and initiatives) and talk-centric (deliberative-style meetings) instruments, despite a deliberative turn in democratic theory suggesting that political discussion among ordinary citizens improves decision-making. In an online factorial survey experiment conducted among a sample of 960 Americans recruited on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, we compared support for the use of referendums and public meetings, arguing that attitudes towards these instruments depend on whether they are used to inform legislators or take binding decisions. Public meetings were rated considerably lower than referendums and initiatives, especially when the outcomes were binding. Contrary to expectations, we did not find a preference for binding (over advisory) referendums and individuals from referendum and initiative states, where these instruments are legally binding, expressed less support for binding participatory reforms than individuals from non-direct democratic states. Despite the many critiques of direct democracy, public debate in the US has not considered whether advisory outcomes might appease some of these concerns. The results also demonstrated that individuals expressing concerns about the inability of ordinary citizens to understand politics and about the welfare of minority groups were not as negative about participatory decision-making when legislators had the final say