Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/136568
題名: 新婚遷移行為性別差異現象之探討
A Study on Gender Differences in Migration Behavior of Newlyweds
作者: 曹榕
Tsao, Jung
貢獻者: 林祖嘉
曹榕
Tsao, Jung
關鍵詞: 新婚遷移行為
性別差異
華人家庭動態資料庫
Logit模型
Migration Behavior of Newlyweds
Gender Differences
PSFD
Logit Model
日期: 2021
上傳時間: 4-Aug-2021
摘要: 結婚是搬遷的重要動機之一,但在過去探討遷移決策的國內文獻中,鮮少有文獻聚焦在新婚時的遷移行為。本研究利用華人家庭動態資料庫(Panel Study of Family Dynamics,簡稱PSFD)1999年至2018年的資料,從中篩選出在追蹤調查期間結婚的樣本,並以Logit模型來分析新婚遷移決策是否存在性別差異現象。意即在新婚時,是男性搬遷的機率較高?還是女性?同時也加入年齡、教育程度、月收入、婚前是否與父母同住、婚前住宅權屬、婚前上下班交通時間、配偶年齡、配偶教育程度以及配偶月收入等解釋變數,來檢視這些變數對於新婚者搬遷行為的影響。另外,也分別統計在新婚時與先生父母以及與妻子父母同住的比例,以卡方檢定檢驗在不同的結婚年代(2000年至2010年、2011年至2018年),新婚時與先生父母同住以及與妻子父母同住的比例是否有所差異?\n本研究實證結果發現新婚遷移行為確實存在性別差異現象,男性在新婚時搬遷的機率較低,特別是在婚前與父母同住的男性更不傾向在新婚時搬遷,隱含著男性在新婚時傾向繼續與父母同住的比例較高。此外,年齡較大、婚前住宅權屬為自有的受訪者,在新婚時搬遷的機率較低;高教育程度、婚前與父母同住、婚前上下班交通時間較長的受訪者在新婚時的搬遷機率皆較高; 配偶收入越高,受訪者在新婚時搬遷的機率也會較高。另外,本研究也證實在新婚時與妻子父母同住的比例在兩個結婚年代有顯著差異,且比例隨時間呈現上升趨勢;與先生父母同住的比例雖並未達顯著水準,但比例隨著時間呈現下降趨勢,可見傳統上以男性為中心的居住安排已較為淡化。而在未來上述兩個趨勢是否會越來越顯著,值得進一步繼續研究。
Marriage is an important motivation for migration. However, there are only a few studies focusing on the migration behavior of newlyweds in previous domestic literature.\nFirst, this study utilized the data of Panel Study of Family Dynamics (PSFD) from 1999 to 2018, and the data were collected from all of the newlyweds who had got married during the follow-up survey period. The logit model is employed to analyze whether gender differences exist in marriage migration behaviors. In other words, this study analyzes if at the time of marriage, the men’s probability of moving is higher or the women’s is higher? In addition, the other explanatory variables include age, education level, monthly income, whether lived with parents before marriage, tenure before marriage, commuting time before marriage, spouse’s age, spouse’s education level, and spouse’s monthly income. Furthermore, this study shows and discusses the percentage of newlyweds who are living with either husbands’ parents or wives’ parents after getting married, and it employs chi-square test to evaluate whether the percentage of living with husbands’ parents and wives’ parents are significantly different between two marriage cohorts (2000-2010 and 2011-2018).\nThis study proves that gender differences exist in the migration behavior of newlyweds. It means that the men’s probability of moving is lower than women’s, especially for men living with parents before marriage. Due to this result, we can identify that men are prone to live with their parents after they get married. The results also find those who married at an older age or owned a house before marriage are less likely to move at the time of marriage. Individuals with a higher education level, those who lived with parents or spent longer time commuting before marriage are more likely to move. This study also shows that the higher the spouse’s monthly income, the higher the moving probability. Additionally, we prove the percentage of living with wives’ parents was significantly different in the two marriage cohorts mentioned above, and it shows an increasing trend. On the contrary, the percentage of the newlyweds living with husbands’ parents was decreasing but insignificantly. We conclude that the tradition of living with husbands’ parents at marriage is not that obvious anymore and whether this trend will continue is worthwhile for further research.
參考文獻: 中央研究院社會學研究所,《台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫執行報告》。\n王俊豪(2008),「台灣初婚夫妻的居住安排」,《人口學刊》,37,頁45-85。\n行政院主計總處,《國內遷徙調查》。\n行政院主計總處,《婦女婚育與就業調查報告》。\n行政院性別平等會,重要性別統計資料庫。\n林佩萱(2020),「先立業後成家?結婚行為與住宅消費型態的轉變」,中華民國住宅學會2020年會暨學術研討會。\n林祖嘉、陳建良(2005),「租買選擇、貸款選擇與世代組成-巢式LOGIT模型之應用」,《住宅學報》,14(1),頁1-20。\n洪嘉瑜、銀慶貞(2008),「台灣人口遷移屬性與動機的變化」,《東吳經濟商學學報》,61,頁31-66。\n胡志平(2013),「住宅對偶性與住戶搬遷分析」,《建築與規劃學報》,14(2/3),頁131-146。\n張慈佳(2013),「遷移與居住地點的性別選擇性」,《住宅學報》,22(1),頁1-24。\n陳妍君(2005),「住宅權屬選擇與預期遷移決策之聯立模式之建構」,國立成功大學都市計畫研究所碩士論文。\n陳建良(2005),「親子居住安排在家庭內與跨家戶成員間的權力互動」,《住宅學報》,14(2),頁51-82。\n陳建逢(2012),「夫妻資源與生男偏好對家戶內權力的影響」,國立中正大學國際經濟研究所碩士論文。\n陳淑美(1992),「近鄰不如遠親」,《臺灣光華雜誌》。檢自: https://www.taiwan-panorama.com/Articles/Details?Guid=f84cb7cc-7ec6-4d62-8ae7-376b3f42a3df\n陳淑美、張金鶚(1998),「戶長及其配偶對住宅區位選擇之影響力分析」,《住宅學報》,7,頁59-81。\n陳淑美、張金鶚(2002),「家戶遷移決策與路徑選擇之研究-台北縣市的實證研究」,《住宅學報》,11(1),頁1-22。\n彭建文、吳文傑、龔書玉(2009),「縣市內部人口遷徙影響因素分析」,《人口學刊》,39,頁85-118。\n黃文祺(2008),「家戶住宅居住時間分析-存活模型之應用」,國立政治大學地政學研究所碩士論文。\n黃靖容(2011),「臺灣年輕家戶之住宅權屬選擇-世代分析」,國立政治大學財政學研究所碩士論文。\n楊靜利、陳寬政(2002),「臺灣地區子女離家的原因與步調」,《人口學刊》,25,頁120-144。\n薛立敏、曾喜鵬、謝鈺偉(2007),「台灣地區近年來遷移行為變化之影響因素分析-家戶遷移決策與遷移地點選擇之聯合估計」,《人口學刊》,34,頁69-107。\n謝文盛、林素菁(2000),「租稅效果對住宅租買選擇影響之分析」,《住宅學報》,9(1),頁1-17。\n謝筱潔(2010),「影響夫妻權力關係之因素探討:1996年與2006年比較分析」,國立政治大學社會行政與社會工作研究所碩士論文。\nAbraham, M., S. Bähr, and M. Trappmann (2019), “Gender Differences in Willingness to Move for Interregional Job Offers,” Demographic Research, 40(53), 1537-1602.\nBrandén, M., and K. Haandrikman (2018), “Who Moves to Whom? Gender Differences in the Distance Moved to a Shared Residence,” European Journal of Population, 35(3), 435-458.\nChu, C. Y. C., Y. Xie, and R. R. Yu (2011), “Coresidence with Elderly Parents: a Comparative Study of Southeast China and Taiwan,” Journal of Marriage and Family, 73(1), 120-135.\nClark, W. A. V., and J. L. Onaka (1983), “Life Cycle and Housing Adjustment as Explanations of Residential Mobility,” Urban Studies, 20(1), 47-57.\nClark, W. A. V., and Y. Huang (2003), “The Life Course and Residential Mobility in British Housing Markets,” Environment and Planning A, 35(2), 323-339.\nCooke, T. J. (2003), “Family Migration and the Relative Earnings of Husbands and Wives,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(2), 338-349.\nDieleman, F. M. (2001), “Modelling Residential Mobility: A Review of Recent Trends in Research,” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 16(3), 249-265.\nFan, C. C., and Y. Huang (1998), “Waves of Rural Brides: Female Marriage Migration in China,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 88(2), 227-251.\nFlowerdew, R., and A. Al-Hamad (2004), “The Relationship Between Marriage, Divorce and Migration in a British Data Set,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 30(2), 339-351.\nGeist, C., and P. McManus (2011), “Different Reasons, Different Results: Implications of Migration by Gender and Family Status,” Demography, 49 (1), 197-217.\nGruijters, R. J., and J. Ermisch (2019), “Patrilocal, Matrilocal, or Neolocal? Intergenerational Proximity of Married Couples in China,” Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(3), 549-566.\nHelderman, A. C., M. Van Ham, and C. H. Mulder (2006), “Migration and Home Ownership,” Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 97(2), 111-125.\nLee, B. H. Y., and P. A. Waddell (2010), “Residential Mobility and Location Choice: A Nested Logit Model with Sampling of Alternatives,” Transportation, 37(4), 587-601.\nLøken, K., K. Lommerud, and S. Lundberg (2013), “Your Place or Mine? On the Residence Choice of Young Couples in Norway,” Demography, 50(1), 285-310.\nMincer, J. (1978), “Family Migration Decisions,” Journal of Political Economy, 86(5), 749-773.\nMulder, C. H., and M. Wagner (1993), “Migration and Marriage in the Life Course: A Method for Studying Synchronized Events,” European Journal of Population, 9(1), 55-76.\nShu, X., Y. Zhu, and Z. Zhang (2012), “Patriarchy, Resources, and Specialization: Marital Decision-Making Power in Urban China,” Journal of Family Issues, 34(7), 885-917.\nSmith, J. P., and D. Thomas (1998), “On the road – Marriage and Mobility in Malaysia,” Journal of Human Resources, 33(4), 805-832.\nSmits, J., C.H. Mulder, and P. Hooimeijer (2003), “Changing Gender Roles, Shifting Power Balance, and Long-Distance Migration of Couples,” Urban Studies, 40(3), 603-613.\nSpeare, A., Jr., and F. K. Goldscheider (1987), “Effects of Marital Status Change on Residential Mobility,” Journal of Marriage and Family, 49(2), 455-464.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
經濟學系
108258041
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108258041
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
804101.pdf2.03 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.