marriage arrangement & divorce powerpoint
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
1/14
3/22/2014 1
Marriage Arrangement
& Divorce
By Zeina Nehme
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
2/14
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
3/14
3/22/2014 3
Hypothesis (contd)
To test the hypothesis, I used Cross-
Tabulations with correlations and
statistical significance.I also researched authors who have
coded these variables and they are:
Goody, Rosenblatt, Schlegel,Coppinger, Eloul, etc
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
4/14
3/22/2014 4
TablesTable 1a
Cross-tab of Marriage Arrangement & Attitudes TowardsDivorce.
Crosstab
Count
1 1 2
3 2 2 5 12
1 1 2
2 4 2 8
1 2 2 1 6
1 2
3
7 11 7 7 1 33
1 Selects and courtspartner autonomously:approval not needed
2 Selects partnerparental, kin approv alneeded
3 Suggests partner toparents,is approvedarrangements proceed
4 Indiv idual choice &arranged marriages arealternatives
5 Parents choosepartner: individual canobject
6 Parents choosepartner: individualcannot easily object
V740
Total
1 Expected,accepted,
tolerated, notdisapproved
2 Mildlydisapprovedattempts by
other toreconcile
couple
3 Approved ifreasons areconsideredjusitif ied
4 Expected,accepted,
tolerated, notdisapprovedin 1st years
5 Stronglydisapproved,
stigmaattached to
divorce
V743
Total
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
5/14
3/22/2014 5
Tables (contd)
Table 1b Symmetric Measures for the results from Table 1a
Sym me tric Me asures
-.248 .139 -1.782 .075
33
Kendall's tau-bOrdinal by Ordinal
N of V alid Cases
ValueAsy mp.Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.
Not assuming the null hypothesis .a.
Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.b.
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
6/14
3/22/2014 6
Tables (contd)Table 2a
Cross-tab of Marriage Arrangement & Frequency of Divorce.Crosstab
Count
1 2 1 4
3 9 2 2 2 18
1 1
3 3 1 1 8
2 2 2 2 8
1 2 1
4
5 18 8 7 5 43
1 Selects and courtspartner autonomously:approval not needed
2 Selects partnerparental, kin approvalneeded
3 Suggests partner toparents,is approvedarrangements proceed
4 Individual choice &arranged marriages arealternatives
5 Parents choosepartner: individual canobject
6 Parents choosepartner: indiv idual
cannot easily object
V740
Total
1 Universal
or almostuniversal
2 Common,
frequent, notuncommon
3 Moderate:a small
minority of
couplesdivorce
4 Frequentin first yearsof marriage
and beforechildren
5 Rare,isolated
instances,never
V744
Total
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
7/143/22/2014 7
Tables (contd)
Table 2b
Symmetric Measures for the results from Table 2a
Sym me tric Measures
.170 .130 1.320 .187
43
Kendall's tau-bOrdinal by Ordinal
N of Valid Cases
ValueAsy mp.Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.
Not ass uming the null hypothes is .a.
Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.b.
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
8/143/22/2014 8
Results
I reject the null hypothesis when I test it
with the attitudes of divorce variable
Divorce attitudes are stricter in societieswhere individuals select their partner as we
can see in tables 1a & 1b. Therefore this
proves my hypothesis wrong
The correlation is a negative slope.
P value is significant at .075
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
9/143/22/2014 9
Results (contd)
However, I accept the null hypothesis
when I test it with the frequency of
divorce variable Frequency of Divorce is more in societies
where individuals select their partners and
less in arranged marriage societies. The correlation is positive in this case
P value is significant at .187
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
10/143/22/2014 10
Conclusion
The correlations of arranged marriage withattitudes towards divorce are opposite to
those with frequency of divorce (behavior).
With a larger sample size, the standard error will be
smaller, making the results more significantespecially in the second case where frequency of
divorce was tested and the p value is at .187, a larger
sample would have reduced that value making it
more significant. Whether a larger sample wouldproduce significance would require testing with a
larger sample.
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
11/143/22/2014 11
References
Bell, Robert R. Marriage and Family
Interaction. Illinois: The Dorsey Press,
1971.Blood, Robert O. Jr. and Donald M.
Wolfe. Husbands and Wives the
Dynamics of Married Living. Illinois:The Free Press of Glencoe, 1960.
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
12/14
3/22/2014 12
References (contd)
Goody, Jack. "Comparative Studies in
Kinship". Stanford: Stanford University Press,
1969.Coppinger, Robert M. and Paul C.
Rosenblatt. Romantic Love and Subsistence
dependence of Spouses. Southwestern
Journal of Anthropology: vol. 24, no.3, p.310-319. Albuquerque, 1968.
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
13/14
3/22/2014 13
References (contd)
Goody, Jack. ed. "The Character of Kinship".
London/New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1973.Goody, Jack. and S.J. Tambiah. eds.
"Bridewealth and Dowry". New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1973.
Rheinstein, Max. Marriage Stability, Divorce,
and the Law. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1972.
-
8/12/2019 Marriage Arrangement & Divorce Powerpoint
14/14
3/22/2014 14
References (contd)
Rosenblatt, Paul C. Marital Residence and
the Function of Romantic Love. Ethnology:
vol. VI, no.4, p.471-480. Pittsburgh, 1967.Schlegel, Alice and Rohn Eloul. Marriage
Transactions: Labor, Property, Status.
American Anthropologist: vol. 90, no.2, p.291-
309. Washington D.C., 1988.