BASED on initial concerns expressed in this article over lack of information on assortive mating in later life, a theoretical model of structural and attitudinal variables is developed for utilization in the comparative study of endogamy and homogamy. Exploratory data are presented to compare mating parameters between the young and the old and between older men and older women. From this effort, it is concluded that information about young adults' courtship contexts and mate selection cannot necessarily be generalized to courtship and marriage in later life and that additional, more refined, investigation into the latter area would be fruitful conceptually and pragmatically.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarnettL.D.1962 “Research in interreligious dating and marriage.” Marriage and Family Living 24.
2.
BatesF.L.HarveyC.C.1975The Structure of Social Systems. New York: Gardner Press.
3.
BossardJ.H.1932 “Residential propinquity as a factor in mate selection.” Amer. J. of Sociology38: 219–224.
4.
BritonJ.J.BritonJ.O.1967 “The middle aged and older rural person and his family,” in YoumansE.G. (ed.) Older Rural Americans. Lexington, KY: Univ. of Kentucky Press.
5.
CentersR.1949 “Marital selection and occupational strata.” Amer. J. of Sociology54:530–535.
6.
ChristensenH.T.BarberK.E.1967 “Interfaith versus intrafaith marriage in Indiana.” J. of Marriage and the Family29: 461–469.
7.
ClarkeA.C.1952 “An examination of the operation of residential propinquity as a factor in mate selection.” Amer. Soc. Rev. 17: 17–22.
8.
DavieM.R.ReevesR.J.1939 “Propinquity of residence before marriage.” Amer. J. of Sociology44: 510–517.
9.
DresselP.L.AvantW.R.1978 “Aging and college family textbooks.” The Family Coordinator27 (October): 427–435.
10.
ElderG.H.Jr.1969 “Appearance and education in marriage mobility.” Amer. Soc. Rev. 34: 519–533.
GlickP.C.NortonA.J.1977 “Marrying, divorcing, and living together in the U.S. today.” Population Bulletin 32. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau, Inc.
13.
HollingsheadA.B.1950 “Cultural factors in the selection of marriage mates.” Amer. Soc. Rev. 15: 619–627.
14.
HuntT.C.1940 “Occupational status and marriage selection.” Amer. Soc. Rev. 5: 495–504.
15.
KatzA.M.HillR.1958 “Residential propinquity and marital selection: a review of theory, method and fact.” Marriage and Family Living20: 27–35.
16.
KennedyR.J.R.1942 “Premarital residential propinquity and ethnic endogamy.” Amer. J. of Sociology48: 580–584.
17.
LevingerG.1965 “Marital cohesiveness and dissolution: an integrative review.” J. of Marriage and the Family27: 19–28.
18.
LewisR.A.SpanierG.B.1979 “Theorizing about the quality and stability of marriage,” in BurrW. R. et al. (eds.) Contemporary Theories about the Family. Glencoe: Macmillan.
19.
McKainW.C.1972 “A new look at older marriages.” The Family Coordinator21 (January): 61–69.
20.
RamsoyN.R.1966 “Assortive mating and the structure of cities.” Amer. Soc. Rev.21:773–786.
21.
RockwellR.C.1976 “Historical trends and variations in educational homogamy.” J. of Marriage and the Family38: 83–95.
22.
SontagS.1972 “The double standard of aging.” Saturday Review23 (September): 29–38.
23.
SpanierG.B.GlickP.C.1980 “Mate selection differentials between whites and blacks in the United States.” Social Forces58 (March): 707–725.
24.
StaplesR.1978The Black Woman in America. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
25.
ThibautJ.W.KelleyH.H.1959The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: John Wiley.
26.
ThomasJ.L.1951 “The factor of religion in the selection of marriage mates.” Amer. Soc. Rev. 16: 487–491.
27.
TreasJ.Van HilstA.1976 “Marriage and remarriage rates among older Americans.” The Gerontologist16: 132–136.
28.
VinickB.H.1978 “Remarriage in old age.” The Family Coordinator27 (October): 359–363.
