Models of matrimonial and reproductive behavior of Russian youth

Models of matrimonial and reproductive behavior of Russian youth

Автор: Rostovskaya Tamara K., Zolotareva Olga A., Vasilieva Ekaterina N.

Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en

Рубрика: Social and economic development

Статья в выпуске: 3 т.15, 2022 года.

Бесплатный доступ

Based on statistical indicators, the Federal State Statistics Service presented the demographic forecast of the Russian Federation until 2035. In all three forecast options (low, medium, high), natural population growth is negative, only its intensity changes. Population growth is presented only in a high forecast and is corrected by a decrease in the rate of natural decline and intensification of migration growth. It is possible to reverse the negative trends and implement the high version of the forecast if favorable conditions are created for the implementation of the marriage and reproductive behavior of young people as the main demographic resource. The aim of the study is the analytical modeling of the marriage and reproductive behavior of young people under the age of 35 based on the data of the author’s sociological research. The article is based on the methods of estimating average values according to the distributions of respondents’ answers, their ranking to determine the priority of factors. Statistical methods for measuring and analyzing social information are widely used: chi-square statistic for testing hypotheses, contingency tables (cross-tabulation), Pearson and Chuprov’s mutual contingency coefficients, as well as the concordance coefficient (multiple rank correlation). The results made it possible to implement analytical modeling of the matrimonial and reproductive behavior of young people under the age of 35, depending on the self-assessment of their standard of living, in particular, to reliably determine the impact of the standard of living of young people on their decision to start married life and have a child, to identify young people’s opinions about the significance of motives to postpone the birth of a child for different groups depending on the self-assessment of the standard of living.

Еще

Youth, prosperous family, matrimonial behavior, reproductive attitudes, behavior patterns, standard of living, mutual contingency coefficients

Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/147238048

IDR: 147238048   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2022.3.81.10

Список литературы Models of matrimonial and reproductive behavior of Russian youth

  • Antonov A.I., Karpova V.M., Lyalikova S.V. (2021). The gap between desired and actual level of families well-being according to the results of sociological and demographic married couples survey. Uroven’ zhizni naseleniya regionov Rossii= Living Standards of the Population in the Regions of Russia, 17(1), 121–131. DOI: 10.19181/lsprr.2021.17.1.9 (in Russian).
  • Artamonova A.V., Mitrofanova E.S. (2018). Matrimonial behavior of Russians in a European context. Demograficheskoe obozrenie=Demographic Review, 5(1), 106–137. DOI: 10.17323/demreview.v5i1.7711 (in Russian).
  • Arkhangel’skii V.N., Vasil’eva E.N., Vasil’eva A.E. (2021). Reproductive intentions of modern Russian youth and assessment of the possibilities of their realization. Logos et Praxis, 20(3), 93–111. DOI: 10.15688/lp.jvolsu.2021.3.10 (in Russian).
  • Bagirova A.P., Ilyshev A.M. (2009). Drivers of reproductive behavior of the population (analysis of inter-country and inter-regional differences). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya=Sociological Studies, 2(298), 37–45 (in Russian).
  • Bezrukova O.N. (2012). Practices of responsible fatherhood: “Father-school” and social capital. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta=Vestnik of Saint-Petersburg State University, 3, 266–275 (in Russian).
  • Vishnevskii A.G. (2014). The demographic revolution is changing the reproductive strategy of Homo sapiens. Demograficheskoe obozrenie=Demographic Review, 1(1), 6–33 (in Russian).
  • Zemlyanova E.V., Chumarina V.Zh. (2018). Births’ postponement by women in Russia within modern socio-economic context. Sotsial’nye aspekty zdorov’ya naseleniya=Social Aspects of Population Health, 64(6). DOI: 10.21045/2071-5021-2018-64-6-9 (in Russian).
  • Isupova O.G. (2020). Population and family policy in different countries: conceptual approaches and practices. Demograficheskoe obozrenie=Demographic Review, 7(3), 51–83. DOI: 10.17323/demreview.v7i3.11636 (in Russian).
  • Kalachikova O.N., Gruzdeva M.A. (2018). Changes in reproductive behavior and marriage patterns of the Russian population (based on analysis of Rosstat sample studies). Sotsial’noe prostranstvo=Social Area, 2(14). DOI: 10.15838/sa.2018.2.14.1 (in Russian).
  • Kalachikova O.N., Korolenko A.V. (2018). Patterns of reproductive behavior of population (on the materials of Vologda oblast). Narodonaselenie=Population, 21(4), 109–121. DOI: 10.26653/1561-7785-2018-21-4-10 (in Russian).
  • Rostovskaya T.K., Zolotareva O.A., Knyaz’kova E.A. (2021). The image of a prosperous family through the eyes of residents of Russian regions: Sociological analysis. Sotsial’noe prostranstvo=Social Area, 7(4). DOI: 10.15838/sa.2021.4.31.2 (in Russian).
  • Rostovskaya T.K., Kuchmaeva O.V., Zolotareva O.A. (2021). Assessment of the social well-being of families in Russian regions: A sociological analysis. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Sotsiologiya=RUDN Journal of Sociology, 21(4), 805–824. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2021-21-4-805-824 (in Russian).
  • Syrkasheva A.G., Il’ina E.O., Dolgushina N.V. (2016). Infertility in women of advanced age: Etiology, management, application of preimplantation genetic screening. Ginekologiya=Gynecology, 18(3), 40–43. (in Russian).
  • Beaujouan E., Berghammer C. (2019). The gap between lifetime fertility intentions and completed fertility in Europe and the United States: A cohort approach. Population Research and Policy Review, 38, 507–535. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-019-09516-3
  • Brown S.L., Manning W.D., Stykes J.B. (2015). Family structure and child well-being: Integrating family complexity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(1). DOI: 10.1111/jomf.12145
  • Duvander A.-Z., Lappegard T., Johansson M. (2020). Impact of a reform towards shared parental leave on continued fertility in Norway and Sweden. Population Research and Policy Review, 39, 1205–1229. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-020-09574-y
  • Lebano A., Jamieson L. (2020). Childbearing in Italy and Spain: Postponement narratives. Population and Development Review, 46(1), 121–144. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12313
  • Leridon H. (2004). Can assisted reproduction technology compensate for the natural decline in fertility with age? A model assessment. Human Reproduction, 19(7). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh304
  • Rehel E.M. (2014). When dad stays home too: Paternity leave, gender, and parenting. Gender & Society, 28(1), 110–132. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213503900
  • Wood J., Neels K. (2019). Does mothers’ parental leave uptake stimulate continued employment and family formation? Evidence for Belgium. Social Sciences, 8, 292. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8100292
Еще
Статья научная
SciUp 2023 © 2023 ©