Table 6.
Logistic regression results predicting marriage date inconsistencies among men and women, 2006 and 2010 MLSFH
| Start Date | End Date | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||||
| Men | Women | All | ||
|
|
||||
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |
| Marriage Characteristics | ||||
| Region | ||||
| Central (ref.) | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| South | 0.60** (0.21) | 0.64** (0.21) | 0.79*** (0.17) | 0.17 (0.23) |
| North | 0.36 (0.19) | 0.32 (0.19) | 0.00 (0.18) | −0.22 (0.25) |
| Marriage order | ||||
| First (ref.) | --- | --- | --- | |
| Second | 0.52** (0.19) | 0.39* (0.19) | −0.20 (0.23) | |
| Third or higher | 0.50 (0.28) | 0.36 (0.35) | −0.32 (0.38) | |
| Short duration marriage | 0.13 (0.21) | 0.14 (0.21) | 0.47* (0.19) | 1.49*** (0.23) |
| Time since marriage began | −0.02 (0.01) | −0.03* (0.01) | −0.01 (0.01) | 0.06*** (0.02) |
| Entered into polygamous marriage | 0.35 (0.21) | |||
| Status of marriage | ||||
| Still married (ref.a) | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Divorced (ref.b) | 0.26 (0.20) | 0.28 (0.19) | 0.37* (0.17) | |
| Widowed | 1.02* (0.43) | 0.96* (0.42) | 0.51* (0.25) | −0.51* (0.21) |
| Individual Characteristics | ||||
| Age | −0.04 (0.04) | −0.03 (0.03) | 0.03 (0.05) | 0.13*** (0.04) |
| Age squared | 0.00 (0.00) | 0.00 (0.00) | −0.00 (0.00) | −0.00*** (0.00) |
| Male | −0.12 (0.20) | |||
| Educational attainment | ||||
| None (ref.) | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Some primary | −0.98*** (0.27) | −1.02*** (0.28) | −0.66*** (0.18) | −0.29 (0.25) |
| Completed primary | −1.28*** (0.31) | −1.32*** (0.31) | −0.81** (0.28) | −0.62 (0.37) |
| Secondary | −1.00** (0.34) | −1.06** (0.34) | −0.74* (0.32) | −1.16* (0.46) |
| Inconsistency score | −0.11 (0.12) | −0.11 (0.12) | 0.26* (0.11) | 0.18 (0.13) |
| Survey Characteristics | ||||
| Length of survey time, 2010 | ||||
| Middle (ref.) | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Short | 0.51** (0.19) | 0.51** (0.19) | −0.16 (0.16) | −0.09 (0.22) |
| Long | 0.05 (0.17) | 0.07 (0.17) | −0.08 (0.16) | 0.03 (0.22) |
| Degree of cooperation, 2006 | ||||
| Good (ref.) | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Very good | 0.25 (0.16) | 0.24 (0.16) | 0.11 (0.14) | −0.02 (0.20) |
| Average or bad | 0.00 (0.24) | −0.00 (0.24) | 0.12 (0.19) | 0.02 (0.24) |
| Degree of cooperation, 2010 | ||||
| Good (ref.) | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Very good | −0.13 (0.17) | −0.14 (0.17) | −0.09 (0.17) | 0.06 (0.23) |
| Average or bad | 0.04 (0.18) | 0.05 (0.18) | 0.31* (0.15) | −0.09 (0.20) |
| Interviewer Characteristics, 2010 | ||||
| Female | −0.08 (0.17) | −0.09 (0.17) | −0.10 (0.14) | 0.19 (0.19) |
| Ever-married | 0.17 (0.16) | 0.17 (0.16) | −0.06 (0.14) | −0.33 (0.19) |
| Prior interviewing experience | −0.40* (0.18) | −0.42* (0.18) | −0.02 (0.16) | −0.23 (0.22) |
| Constant | 1.63 (0.90) | 1.49 (0.89) | −0.65 (0.93) | −3.65*** (0.88) |
| Number of marriages | 899 | 899 | 1,236 | 689 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.16 |
Note: Robust standard errors are in parentheses. Analysis is restricted to marriages that began before 2006.
a
Reference group for models of marriage start date inconsistencies.
b
Reference group for model of marriage end date inconsistencies.
*
p<0.05;
**
p<0.01;
***
p<0.001.