FranzKafkaOverrated

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Wednesday, 1 February 2012

yet again, the conventional divorce rate is pure bunk

Posted on 08:09 by Unknown
So Matt Yglesias and Mike Konczal  and presumably others are talking about divorce rates and the economy. Unfortunately, they are taking the conventionally-calculated divorce rate at face value, when in fact the statistic is useless. I bring this up again and again. As it only tracks number of divorces compared to number of new marriages, the conventional divorce rate is both easily susceptible to small numbers of serial marriers, and more importantly, matching the data pool of divorces from all existing marriages against the data pool of just new marriages. A couple that has been together for years and stays together has no positive impact on the divorce rate of any given year, despite the fact that this is precisely what we're interested in. Indeed, a couple that stays together until death is never represented in the divorce rate at all other than in the year that they are married. A more accurate divorce rate, tracking individual marriages until they end in divorce or don't, is a much more difficult statistic to derive, but much more accurate. The best info I've seen is that the true divorce rate peaked in the early 90s, never exceeded 40%, and has declined since.

This isn't some crank view of mine, by the way, but a well-known problem in sociology. Quoth the New York Times: 
But researchers say that this is misleading because the people who are divorcing in any given year are not the same as those who are marrying, and that the statistic is virtually useless in understanding divorce rates. In fact, they say, studies find that the divorce rate in the United States has never reached one in every two marriages, and new research suggests that, with rates now declining, it probably never will.
This particular discussion that Konczal and Yglesias are having is actually the perfect example of when the conventional divorce rate is most misleading. I don't blame them at all for using the conventional divorce rate, as despite its lack of analytic rigor, the popular press never stops using it. Maybe somebody with a better reputation than I have could get the word out.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • addendum
    If I was unclear about this, my point yesterday was not to say "everything in our culture is so trivial, man." I don't know w...
  • If yule excuse me...
    Well, the holiday season is upon us, and like a lot of you I'll be traveling and merrymaking and cavorting and such for the next couple ...
  • do Muslims deserve human rights?
    From today's big speech: When a U.S. citizen goes abroad to wage war against America – and is actively plotting to kill U.S. citizens; a...
  • a little additional info
    A few people have asked for a bit more about the situation with Moi-- not Muy, as I incorrectly put it in the original post. We had stopped ...
  • drones and election 2012
    I would never ever ever ever ever vote for Gary Johnson, being a socialist and all. But I do have to point out that if you're trying to ...
  • In greatest travesty of the 21st century, a pretty white lady is denied a golden trophy
    I'm glad the world has people like Scott Mendelson , to tell us who the real victims of the post-9/11 world are: millionaire Hollywood i...
  • structural change requires new structures
    As I've said, it's hard to think of any academics or scholars I know who are opposed in principle to open access of scholarly resear...
  • actual fascism
    It seems to me-- just spitballing here-- that enforcing a regime of joblessness and national humiliation, as is happening with austerity mea...
  • the forest for the trees
    Hamilton Nolan's work for Gawker, from the past several years, is a truly mixed bag. Nolan has always been a talented and perceptive wri...
  • the perfect piece for our times
    I think this Tim Parks piece is an absolutely perfect encapsulation of what it means to be a writer of commentary today. Your job is simple...

Categories

  • I'm mostly kidding (1)

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (218)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (42)
    • ►  April (39)
    • ►  March (37)
    • ►  February (35)
    • ►  January (43)
  • ▼  2012 (139)
    • ►  December (26)
    • ►  November (26)
    • ►  October (15)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  June (13)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (7)
    • ▼  February (11)
      • the second congress
      • the anti-authoritarian's authority
      • google's distractions
      • my piece at Consider, and new ventures
      • if only
      • day by day in China
      • credit where due
      • zunguzungu on Debt
      • astroturfing comes to memes
      • political nonexistence
      • yet again, the conventional divorce rate is pure bunk
    • ►  January (14)
  • ►  2011 (143)
    • ►  December (9)
    • ►  November (12)
    • ►  October (18)
    • ►  September (11)
    • ►  August (23)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (12)
    • ►  May (21)
    • ►  April (27)
    • ►  March (7)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile