Table 3.
Logit Regression Models of Marriage Dissolution Between MDICP2 and MDICP3 (odds ratios)
| Variable | Women |
Men |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| District (vs. south) | ||||
| Center | 0.64 (1.50) | 0.99 (0.03) | 0.28* (2.59) | 0.27* (2.16) |
| North | 0.29* (3.21) | 0.47 (1.52) | 0.55 (1.51) | 0.48 (1.26) |
| Marriage Cohort (vs. 1945–1979) | ||||
| 1980–1989 | 1.73 (0.95) | 1.72 (0.94) | 5.93† (1.64) | 6.95† (1.75) |
| 1990–2001 | 3.80* (2.70) | 4.95 (3.06) | 12.69* (2.44) | 16.32* (2.49) |
| ≥ Second Marriage (vs. first) | 1.92* (2.36) | 1.56 (1.13) | 1.33 (0.78) | 2.06† (1.70) |
| EMA | 2.15* (2.72) | 1.85† (1.95) | 2.06 (0.89) | 1.91 (0.81) |
| Control Variables | ||||
| Education | 0.83 (0.55) | 0.97 (0.08) | ||
| Age at marriage | 1.01 (0.51) | 0.97 (1.59) | ||
| Age difference between spouses | 1.20 (0.65) | 2.38* (2.20) | ||
| Husband had another wife/wives | 0.99 (0.01) | 0.64 (0.83) | ||
| Husband married an additional wife/wives | 1.95* (1.99) | 1.45 (0.60) | ||
| Ethnic homogamy | 1.54 (1.32) | 1.39 (0.73) | ||
| Virilocal residence | 0.49* (2.13) | 1.30 (0.48) | ||
| N (df) | 908(6) | 883(13) | 674(6) | 657(13) |
| Log-Likelihood | −210.46 | −193.80 | −117.87 | −113.74 |
| Pseudo-R2 | .09 | .12 | .08 | .11 |
| AIC | 432.92 | 413.60 | 247.73 | 253.48 |
Notes: z statistics are in parentheses; for male marriages, these are robust z statistics (adjusted for clustering on the individual). The sample is composed of current marriages in MDICP2 that either remained intact or ended in separation or divorce by MDICP3. Marriages that ended in widowhood were excluded from the analysis. For polygynous men, more than one marriage can be included in the sample. For monogamous men and all women, the sample consists of one marriage per person. Inconsistent marriage histories were omitted from the analysis (6.1% for women and 11.2% for men). About 6.6% of the women who were married in MDICP2 had divorced their spouse by MDICP3. This figure is a little lower for men (4.6%), in part because divorced and widowed men were not consistently followed between survey waves. See the notes to Table 2 for variable definitions. The inclusion of self-reported infidelity (positive and significant for men only) and coresidence (not significant) did not change the effect of EMA, and were omitted.
p ≤ .10;
p ≤ .05