Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 5 Effects of sibling sex composition by socioeconomic status, household registration status, and relative status of the mother

From: Sibling sex composition, intrahousehold resource allocation, and educational attainment in China

Independent variables Model (1) Model (2) Model (3) Model (4) Model (5) Model (6) Model (7) Model (8) Model (9) Model (10) Model (11) Model (12)
Have urban residential registration 2.145*** (0.231) 2.137*** (0.233) 2.142*** (0.230) 2.134*** (0.230) 2.146*** (0.233) 2.126*** (0.227) 1.806*** (0.306) 2.074*** (0.254) 1.556*** (0.233) 2.130*** (0.231) 2.151*** (0.234) 2.132*** (0.230)
Han ethnic group 0.930*** (0.313) 0.941*** (0.318) 0.928*** (0.310) 0.934*** (0.313) 0.935*** (0.314) 0.936*** (0.312) 0.925*** (0.314) 0.639* (0.344) 0.641* (0.342) 0.928*** (0.313) 0.936*** (0.314) 0.934*** (0.311)
Age −0.060*** (0.009) −0.058*** (0.009) −0.059*** (0.009) −0.059*** (0.009) −0.060*** (0.009) −0.058*** (0.009) −0.059*** (0.009) −0.064*** (0.007) −0.064*** (0.007) −0.059*** (0.009) −0.060*** (0.009) −0.058*** (0.009)
Female −1.571*** (0.125) −1.593*** (0.126) 1.838*** (0.165) −1.568*** (0.124) 1.591*** (0.125) 1.841*** (0.165) 1.566*** (0.124) 1.354*** (0.107) −1.535*** (0.126) 1.566*** (0.124) 1.591*** (0.125) 1.836*** (0.165)
Parental education 0.190*** (0.040) 0.316*** (0.040) 0.168*** (0.036) 0.237*** (0.024) 0.238*** (0.025) 0.237*** (0.024) 0.236*** (0.024) 0.238*** (0.017) 0.238*** (0.017) 0.235*** (0.024) 0.238*** (0.025) 0.234*** (0.024)
Father’s ISEI 0.010 (0.006) 0.010* (0.006) 0.009 (0.006) −0.013 (0.011) 0.019* (0.010) 0.022* (0.012) 0.009 (0.006) 0.008* (0.004) 0.009* (0.004) 0.010 (0.006) 0.010 (0.006) 0.010 (0.006)
Father’s ISEI missing −0.982*** (0.170) −0.970*** (0.167) −0.978*** (0.171) −0.996*** (0.167) −0.982*** (0.169) 1.000*** (0.167) 0.984*** (0.168) −0.921*** (0.132) −0.910*** (0.134) −0.977*** (0.170) −0.977*** (0.170) −0.969*** (0.170)
Father was a member of CCP 0.473** (0.216) 0.433** (0.216) 0.541** (0.216) 0.463** (0.216) 0.460** (0.215) 0.485** (0.216) 0.482** (0.215) 0.573*** (0.154) 0.591*** (0.153) 0.478** (0.216) 0.462** (0.214) 0.491** (0.215)
Sibling number −0.175*** (0.043) −0.217*** (0.050) −0.216*** (0.043) −0.180*** (0.043) −0.206*** (0.048) −0.218*** (0.043) −0.179*** (0.043) −0.211*** (0.046) −0.228*** (0.044) −0.179*** (0.043) −0.207*** (0.048) 0.217*** (0.043)
Ranking among siblings at birth 0.155*** (0.040) 0.158*** (0.040) 0.156*** (0.039) 0.157*** (0.040) 0.154*** (0.040) 0.156*** (.040) 0.156*** (0.040) 0.139*** (0.033) 0.141*** (0.033) 0.155*** (0.040) 0.154*** (0.040) 0.157*** (0.040)
Sibling sex composition −0.721*** (0.260) 0.559** (0.244) 0.332 (0.384) −1.632*** (0.539) 0.537 (0.566) 2.296** (0.900) −0.508* (0.260) −0.057 (0.174) 0.382 (0.273) −0.417** (0.203) 0.049 (0.167) 0.995*** (0.331)
Sibling sex composition × parental education level 0.054 (0.037) −0.096*** (0.031) 0.141*** (0.054)          
Sibling sex composition × father’s ISEI     0.027** (0.012) −0.011 (0.013) −0.028 (0.020)       
Sibling sex composition × urban household registration        0.393 (0.356) −0.106 (0.233) 0.888** (0.364)    
Sibling sex composition × relative status of mother           0.143 (0.156) −0.042 (0.207) 0.399 (0.306)
Constant 9.410*** (0.589) 8.328*** (0.696) 8.861*** (0.643) 10.138*** (0.716) 8.422*** (0.703) 7.898*** (0.703) 9.203*** (0.567) 9.834*** (0.554) 9.707*** (0.569) 9.100*** (0.572) 8.816*** (0.640) 8.464*** (0.637)
R 2 0.356 0.356 0.358 0.357 0.354 0.357 0.355 0.366 0.368 0.355 0.354 0.357
N 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271 5,271
  1. The variables of sibling sex composition for models (1), (4), (7), and (10) are “have brother(s)”, for model (2), (5), (8), and (11) are “have sister(s)”, and for model (3), (6), (9), and (12) are ‘proportion of female siblings,’ respectively. Data are weighted according to the sampling probabilities. Standard error for clustering robustness in the parentheses. *p < 0.1; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01.