@article{KreyenfeldHornungKubisch, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Hornung, Anne and Kubisch, Karolin}, title = {The German Generations and Gender Survey: Some Critical Reflections on the Validity of Fertility Histories}, series = {Comparative Population Studies}, volume = {38}, journal = {Comparative Population Studies}, number = {1}, publisher = {Bundesinstitut f{\"u}r Bev{\"o}lkerungsforschung}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {1869-8999}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-8508}, pages = {3 -- 28}, abstract = {This paper validates the fertility histories of the German Generations and Gender Survey (GGS). Focusing on the cohorts 1930-69 of West German women, the total number of children, the parity distribution and the parity progression ratios are compared to external sources. One major result from this validation is that the German GGS understates the fertility for the older cohorts and overstates it for the younger ones. We presume that two mechanisms are responsible for this pattern in the German GGS: On the one hand, children who have left parental home are underreported in the retrospective fertility histories. On the other hand, women with small children are easier to reach by the interviewer. These two mechanisms taken together produce too low numbers of children for the older and too high ones for the younger cohorts. Extending the validation to marital histories has revealed a similar bias. Our general conclusion from this investigation is that the German GGS may not be used for statistical analyses of cohort fertility and marriage trends. For subsequent surveys, we suggest integrating simple control questions in questionnaires with complex retrospective fertility and union histories.}, language = {en} } @article{KreyenfeldGoldsteinJasilionieneetal., author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Goldstein, Joshua and Jasilioniene, Aiva and Karaman {\"O}rsal, Deniz Dilan}, title = {Fertility reactions to the "Great Recession" in Europe : Recent evidence from oder-specific data}, series = {Demographic Research}, volume = {29}, journal = {Demographic Research}, publisher = {Max-Planck Institut f{\"u}r demografische Forschung}, address = {Rostock}, issn = {1435-9871}, doi = {10.4054/DemRes.2013.29.4}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-8511}, pages = {85 -- 104}, abstract = {Objective: This paper provides recent cross-national evidence of the impact of the great recession on fertility in Europe in the context of the recent decade. Methods: Using data from the Human Fertility Database (HFD), from Eurostat, and from the OECD database, we employ fixed-effects modeling to study how changes in unemployment rates have affected birth rates across Europe. Results: We find that countries that were hit hard by the recession show reduced fertility when compared with a continuation of recent trends, especially at younger ages. Conclusions: Our results indicate a strong relationship between economic conditions and fertility. However, there is variation by region, age, and parity suggesting the importance of life course and institutional factors.}, language = {en} } @incollection{KreyenfeldKrapf, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Krapf, Sandra}, title = {Demografischer Wandel : Geburtenentwicklung und Lebensformen}, series = {Datenreport 2013 : Ein Sozialbericht f{\"u}r die Bundesrepublik Deutschland}, booktitle = {Datenreport 2013 : Ein Sozialbericht f{\"u}r die Bundesrepublik Deutschland}, publisher = {Bundeszentrale f{\"u}r politische Bildung}, address = {Bonn}, isbn = {978-3-8389-7100-1}, pages = {34 -- 41}, abstract = {Der Datenreport, den die bpb zusammen mit dem Statistischen Bundesamt, dem Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin und dem Deutschen Institut f{\"u}r Wirtschaftsforschung 2013 in der 14. Auflage herausgibt, geh{\"o}rt zu den Standardwerken f{\"u}r all jene, die sich schnell und verl{\"a}sslich {\"u}ber statistische Daten und sozialwissenschaftliche Analysen zu den aktuellen gesellschaftlichen Entwicklungen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland informieren wollen. Journalisten, Studierende, aber auch Fachleute aus Wissenschaft, Politik, Wirtschaft und Verwaltung erhalten mit dem Datenreport ein {\"u}bersichtlich gestaltetes Handbuch, das sie mit den notwendigen Zahlen, Fakten und Argumenten versorgt, um an den {\"o}ffentlichen Debatten zu den wirtschaftlichen, sozialen und politischen Trends in unserem Lande teilzunehmen. (Angabe zum Buch)}, language = {de} } @incollection{KreyenfeldSpiessLohmann, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Spieß, C. Katharina and Lohmann, Henning}, title = {Potentiale des Sozio{\"o}konomischen Panels (SOEP) und des Mikrozensus zur Bestimmung kontextueller Faktoren ungleicher Bildungschancen}, series = {Bildungskontexte : Strukturelle Voraussetzungen und Ursachen ungleicher Bildungschancen.}, booktitle = {Bildungskontexte : Strukturelle Voraussetzungen und Ursachen ungleicher Bildungschancen.}, publisher = {VS-Verl.}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-531-18226-1}, pages = {145 -- 171}, abstract = {Der Beitrag gibt einen {\"U}berblick {\"u}ber die Potentiale des Sozio-oekonomischen Panels (SOEP) und des Mikrozensus f{\"u}r kontextuelle Analysen im Bereich der Bildungsforschung. Wir betrachten die M{\"o}glichkeiten und auch Grenzen, welche mit diesen beiden Datens{\"a}tzen verbunden sind. Sie heben sich dadurch hervor, dass eine Ber{\"u}cksichtigung des Familien- und Haushaltskontextes m{\"o}glich ist und die Datens{\"a}tze in unterschiedlichem Ausmaß die Abbildung von institutionellen und regionalen Kontexten zulassen. Die Datens{\"a}tze weisen unterschiedliche St{\"a}rken auf, die sich auch aus den hohen Fallzahlen des Mikrozensus oder der l{\"a}ngsschnittlichen Betrachtung von Haushalten im SOEP ergeben. Da die verf{\"u}gbaren Daten bis in die 1970er bzw. 1980er Jahre zur{\"u}ckreichen, bieten beide Datens{\"a}tze Potentiale zur Analyse des Bildungsverhaltens in sich wandelnden Kontexten. Im Beitrag werden Analysebeispiele aus dem Bereich der fr{\"u}hen Bildung vorgestellt. In einem Ausblick diskutieren wir kurz zuk{\"u}nftige Analysepotentiale der Datens{\"a}tze.}, language = {de} } @incollection{KreyenfeldKonietzka, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Konietzka, Dirk}, title = {Familie und Lebensformen}, series = {Handw{\"o}rterbuch zur Gesellschaft Deutschlands}, booktitle = {Handw{\"o}rterbuch zur Gesellschaft Deutschlands}, publisher = {VS-Verl.}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-531-18929-1}, pages = {257 -- 271}, abstract = {Familie ist ein » moving target «, d. h. ein Gegenstand, der sich mit dem sozialhistorischen und kulturellen Kontext wandelt. Die Leitbilder von Familie und Grenzziehungen zwischen Familie und Nichtfamilie waren und sind gesellschaftlich umstritten.}, language = {de} } @misc{KreyenfeldKonietzka, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Konietzka, Dirk}, title = {Ein Leben ohne Kinder: Ausmaß, Strukturen und Ursachen von Kinderlosigkeit}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Berlin [u.a.]}, isbn = {978-3-531-94149-3}, pages = {397}, abstract = {Trotz der offensichtlichen sozialpolitischen Relevanz und großen medialen Aufmerksamkeit des Ph{\"a}nomens Kinderlosigkeit sind das Ausmaß, die Ursachen und die Konsequenzen der Kinderlosigkeit in Deutschland bislang unzureichend untersucht worden, mit der Folge, dass in {\"o}ffentlichen Debatten eine unkritische Verwendung irref{\"u}hrender, wenn nicht falscher Angaben {\"u}ber Kinderlosigkeit vorherrscht. Das Ziel des Bandes besteht vor diesem Hintergrund darin, das Ph{\"a}nomen der Kinderlosigkeit in Deutschland analytisch differenziert zu durchdringen und belastbare Daten und Ergebnisse {\"u}ber das Ausmaß und die Struktur, die Ursachen und Folgen von Kinderlosigkeit zu pr{\"a}sentieren.}, language = {de} } @article{KreyenfeldKluesenerNeels, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Kl{\"u}sener, Sebastian and Neels, Karel}, title = {Family Policies and the Western European Fertility Divide: Insights from a Natural Experiment in Belgium}, series = {Population and Development Review}, volume = {39}, journal = {Population and Development Review}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {1728-4457}, doi = {10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00629.x}, pages = {587 -- 610}, abstract = {Countries in Northwestern Europe, including Belgium, report cohort fertility levels of close to two children per woman; whereas Central European countries, such as Germany, have levels of around 1.6 children. In seeking to explain these differences, some scholars have stressed the role of the social policy context, while others have pointed to variation in fertility-related social norms. But because these influences are interdependent, it is difficult to isolate their effects on fertility trends. This study attempts to disentangle these two factors by drawing on a quasi-natural experiment. After World War I Germany was compelled to cede the Eupen-Malmedy territory to Belgium. The population of this region has retained its German linguistic identity, but has been subject to Belgian social policies. We examine whether the fertility trends in this German-speaking region of Belgium follow the Belgian or the German pattern. Our findings indicate that they generally resemble the Belgian pattern. This suggests that institutional factors are important for understanding the current fertility differences in Western Europe.}, language = {en} } @techreport{KreyenfeldBastin, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Bastin, Sonja}, title = {Blurred memory, deliberate misreporting, or "true tales"? How different survey methods affect respondents' reports of partnership status at first birth}, pages = {34}, abstract = {This paper examines the reliability of biographical information gathered retrospectively. It draws on data from the German Family Panel (pairfam), which collected information on the partnership status at first birth using two different methods. The first method is based on data on partnership and fertility histories collected retrospectively. The second method uses data gathered through the use of a "landmark question" on the respondents' partnership status when their first children were born. We find that in almost 20 percent of the cases, the information collected using the first method did not correspond with the information collected using the second method. Partnership dissolution and "turbulence" in the partnership biography are strong predictors for discrepancies in the information gathered through the two different survey methods. We conclude by drawing attention to the limitations of the retrospective collection of partnership histories at a time when divorce and separation rates are increasing.}, language = {en} }