Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Marriage Fam. 2016 Dec 5;79(3):723–738. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12384

Table 3.

Multinomial Logistic Regression of Offspring Union Status on Parent Union Disruptions

No union vs. intact first union 1 union disruption vs. intact first union 2+ union disruptions vs. intact first union
Parent union disruptions −0.08 (0.09) 0.18** (0.06) 0.28*** (0.07)
Parent mother 0.05 (0.20) −0.003 (0.19) 0.12 (0.23)
Parent age 0.05*** (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.004 (0.01)
Parent education 0.13** (0.05) −0.12** (0.04) −0.08 (0.05)
Family income 0.0002 (0.001) −0.001 (0.001) −0.0005 (0.001)
Parent religion −0.05 (0.06) −0.19*** (0.05) −0.30*** (0.05)
Offspring female −0.64*** (0.12) −0.18* (0.09) −0.71*** (0.09)
Offspring age −0.19** (0.08) −0.09 (0.05) 0.05 (0.06)
Offspring Hispanic 0.36* (0.16) 0.18 (0.13) −0.46** (0.17)
Offspring Black 0.55** (0.18) 0.33** (0.12) 0.53*** (0.13)
Offspring Asian 0.56** (0.21) −0.18 (0.22) 0.04 (0.20)
Number of siblings 0.02 (0.04) −0.07* (0.03) −0.11** (0.04)
Constant −0.61 (1.36) 0.69 (0.85) −0.16** (1.17)

Note: Table values are multinomial logistic regression coefficients with robust standard errors in parentheses. Sample sizes are 981 (no unions), 3,672 (1 union intact), 1,913 (1 union disruption), and 1,199 (2+ union disruptions). Data are from Add Health and are weighted to be nationally representative.

*

p < .05.

**

p < .01.

***

p < .001 (two-tailed).