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

  • what I mean when I talk about empiricism and self-determination
    In my Bloggingheads appearance, I mentioned to Conor my prediction that the empirical case against the notion that you are mostly responsibl...
  • self-implication
    Adam Serwer points out , correctly, that liberal excuses for extrajudicial killing make their opposition to torture nonsensical. The questio...
  • pacifism and intention
    Note: Because I am incompetent, I accidentally deleted this post, and I can't find any way to restore it through Blogger. I had to go in...
  • Randy Moss's unforgivable blackness
    I don't have a real rooting interest in the game tonight. But a part of me is rooting for the 49ers, only because I'd like to see a...
  • Benghazi: the worst of both Republicans and Democrats
    This Benghazi mess is enough to make you really despair. For years now, liberals have pushed back against the "both sides do it!" ...
  • Sabermetricians, like all nerds, must accept that they've won
    I'm not going to excerpt too much, because its a paid subscription service, but today on his (excellent) daily baseball missive The Slur...
  • the backwards causation
    Since reading educational research changed from being an amateur interest of mine to being a daily professional commitment, nothing has been...
  • moral support necessitates moral distinctions
    Chris Hayes is in quite a bit of hot water online because he said that he was uncomfortable calling dead soldiers heroes. Since his show st...
  • Ms. 21st century
    I occasionally get emails from people who find my critique of the Internet generation cruel. Last week, I got an email that said point blank...
  • Slate's Rosetta Stone
    Hidden in this piece on hating the band The National, Carl Wilson unintentionally provides the key for understanding Slate: In the end, it ...

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