Some results from the GSS on what people perceive the ideal number of children is based on social variables. Additionally, the realized number of children the respondent has. I limited the sample to whites who were 40 or older (there are people who have children past 40, but I assume that most of the discrepancy, or not, between ideal and realized will be evident by that age).
- Log in to post comments
More like this
One social science finding which I've wondered about over the past few years is the result that women care much more about the race of a potential mate than men do. The fact that individuals tend to want to mate assortatively with those who share their characteristics is no surprise. Rather,…
The scientific community is all too familiar with the dangers an influenza pandemic could bring. The politicians and general public are starting to become aware of the issue as well; indeed, one can hardly open a newspaper or turn on the television without hearing about "bird flu." So, what's…
There are two recent studies of gender disparities in science and technology (referred to by the faintly awful acronym "STEM") getting a lot of play over the last few days. As is often the case with social-science results, the data they have aren't quite the data you would really like to have, and…
Update on paper access: You can get it here already.
Note: I'm going to put a link roundup (updated) at this post. End Note
Recent acceleration of human adaptive evolution:
Genomic surveys in humans identify a large amount of recent positive selection. Using the 3.9-million HapMap SNP dataset, we…
That's great - thanks for this.
Seems like almost nobody _wants_ to have zero children - tho' about 25 percent of US women college grads end-up this way.
Also seems that two is the ideal family size - which makes sense from the perspective of parental happiness but does not replace the population.
Because nowadays (for smart and well organized people with access to fertility technologies) 'ideal' family size looks as if it means the the same as 'maximum' family size.
I know you love data density, but those images are a bit too small.
levi, i know. i guess i'll let them overflow over 500px limit and see if scienceblogs complains....
A visualization of statistics question: are the income graphs the right thing to display, or should they be smoothed (or bucketed) first?
I'm sure that a smoothed version would be more pleasant, but would it make extracting information easier? and would it be worth the data thrown out?
Interesting, thanks.
And for the image size, firefox users can press "ctrl and +" .