Table 3.

Goodness of Fit Log-likelihood and BIC Statistics for Status Exchange Models

Model Type		U.S.			Australia
		d.f.	Log-likelihood	BIC	d.f.	Log-likelihood	BIC
A. Native Born Wife- FB Husb versus Both Native Born Spouses
1 Baseline	:	12	−328	177	30	−624	145
2 Marriage Market:	:	9	−184	−70	25	−482	−72
3 Unconstrained intra-couple resemblance	:	6	−171	−58	20	−426	−118
4 Constrained intra-couple resemblance	:	8	−175	−77	24	−451	−121
B. FB Wife- Native Born Husb versus Both FB Spouses
1 Baseline	:	12	−873	1347	30	−502	95
2 Marriage Market:	:	9	−160	−46	25	−414	−24
3 Unconstrained intra-couple resemblance	:	6	−148	−39	20	−363	−70
4 Constrained intra-couple resemblance	:	8	−160	−36	24	−375	−92
C. Native Born Husb-FB Wife versus Both Native Born Spouses
1 Baseline	:	12	−367	267	30	−663	250
2 Marriage Market:	:	9	−166	−96	25	−379	−253
3 Unconstrained intra-couple resemblance	:	6	−162	−67	20	−361	−222
4 Constrained intra-couple resemblance	:	8	−166	−83	24	−379	−240
D. FB Husb- Native Wife versus Both FB Spouses
1 Baseline	:	12	−341	271	30	−1020	1096
2 Marriage Market:	:	9	−169	−40	25	−528	168
3 Unconstrained intra-couple resemblance	:	6	−156	−35	20	−391	−46
4 Constrained intra-couple resemblance	:	8	−162	−43	24	−414	−47

Notes:

The abbreviations denote the following:

H: Husband’s Age at Migration; W: Wife’s Age at Migration; A: Husband’s Age at Migration; G: Wife’s Age at Migration

Most probable model for each subsample is highlighted in yellow. Overall, we select “constrained intra-couple educational resemblance” models.