Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that socioeconomic differentials in fertility are heavily influenced by couples with rural background. These studies show an inverse relationship between fertility and socioeconomic status for couples of rural background, but no relationship for urbanorigin couples. The effect of urban background on rural fertility differentials has not been examined. This study investigates the potential effect of urban-origin couples on socioeconomic differences in fertility in rural areas. Data from the 1967 Survey of Economic Opportunity are analyzed to show that rural socioeconomic fertility differences are not influenced by the presence of persons of urban background.

The text of this article is only available as a PDF.

References

Duncan, Otis Dudley (
1965
).
Farm background and differential fertility
.
Demography
,
2
,
240
249
. 10.2307/2060116
Freedman, Ronald, & Slesinger, Doris P. (
1961
).
Fertility differentials for the indigenous non-farm population of the United States
.
Population Studies
,
15
,
161
173
. 10.2307/2173313
Goldberg, David (
1959
).
The fertility of twogeneration urbanites
.
Population Studies
,
17
,
214
222
. 10.2307/2171971
Goldberg, David (
1960
).
Another look at the Indianapolis fertility data
.
Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly
,
28
,
23
36
. 10.2307/3348618
Office of Economic Opportunity. 1970. 1966 and 1967 survey of economic opportunity sample design and weighting. Unpublished paper.
Powers, Mary G. (
1965
).
Socioeconomic status and the fertility of married women
.
Sociology and Social Research
,
50
,
472
481
.
People of Rural America, by Hathaway, Dale E.; J. Allan Beegle; and W. Keith Bryant
. (
1968
).
Washington, D. C.
:
U. S. Government Printing Office
.
U. S. Census of Population, 1960. Detailed Characteristics, United States Summary. Area Classifications
. (
1963
).
Washington, D. C.
:
Government Printing Office
.