So you can evaluate all of our 2nd theory, we basic recoded, for https://datingranking.net/nl/casualdates-overzicht/ each and every of the things that towards the position measure, this new percentage of responses you to definitely reveal in the event that husbands have less, equal or higher score, specifically, status, having hypogamy, and therefore husbands has actually straight down reputation than simply spouses, homogamy, meaning equivalent updates, and you can hypergamy, meaning husbands with highest updates than just wives. To the potential connection away from nation, analyses was extreme in the degree (X 2 =eleven.9; df=2; p=.003; n=.20), and you can monetary impact regarding a prospective divorce or separation (X 2 =9.51; df=2; p=.009; n=.18). Research indicated that, getting Foreign language people, there is certainly a lot more degree hypogamy, while for Dominican participants there was so much more studies homogamy. Towards monetary things if there is divorce case, since there is a lot more homogamy to have Spanish users, discover a lot more hypergamy getting Dominicans (find Profile step one).
Which have previous marriages or not was not related so you’re able to differences in position. About the potential association ranging from status and age married, significant contacts was indeed included in wellness (X 2 =fourteen.7; df=4; p=.005; n=.16), and while to have people y is present (forty.4%, each), to possess couples y prevails (43.4%). To put it differently, into the class with additional ages hitched, husbands features all the way down health standing. Having youngsters off previous marriages and achieving students off current wedding didn’t notably apply to condition.
In share, the brand new analyses about the 2nd hypothesis revealed that in contrast to our very own expectations, the greatest ability related in order to position ‘s the country.
To contrast our third hypothesis, that predict that homogamy will be associated to higher marital satisfaction for both countries, we have estimated the scores in ong the three types of status (hypogamy, homogamy, and hypergamy) for the seven items of the scale. The analyses revealed significant differences in bda=.951, F(6, 584)= 2.47; p<.05]. Univariate tests revealed significant differences in factor 2 of marital satisfaction (F=4.54; df=2; p<.05; h 2 =.01), with no significant differences by country. Post hoc comparisons revealed that hypergamy in health status have significantly smaller y situations (M=4.14, SE=0.11; and M=4.57, SE=0.10, respectively).
Also, significant differences in marital satisfaction based on education status were found [Wilks’ Lambda=.938, F(6, 584)= 3.17; p<.01]. 46; df=2; p<.01; h 2 =.03), and total scale (F=3.61; df=2; p<.05; h 2 =.XX). There were also significant differences in factor 1 by country (F=; df=1; p<.001; h 2 =.04), as well as by the interaction of status by country (F=4.90; df=2; p<.05; h 2 =.03). Post hoc comparisons revealed that hypogamic education status situations have significantly smaller ic situations (M=4.18, SE=0.11; and M=4.58, SE=0.11, respectively). In addition, hypergamy situations in Spain and Dominican Republic scored significantly higher than hypogamy situations in Spain. Homogamy situations in Dominican Republic scored significantly higher than hypogamy situations in Spain.
Likewise, significant differences in marital satisfaction based on economic status were found [Wilks’ Lambda=.937, F(6, 584)= 3.21; p<.01]. Univariate tests revealed significant differences in factor 1 (F=6.64; df=2; p<.01; h 2 =.04). There were also significant differences in factor 1 by country (F=; df=1; p<.001; h 2 =.03), with Dominicans scoring significantly higher than Spaniards (M=4.8, SE=.015, and M=4.34, SE=.10, respectively). Economic hypergamy was associated to significantly higher ic and hypogamic status. Spaniards with hypergamy status scored significantly higher than the other two groups from Spain. Dominicans with hypogamic status scored significantly lower than the other two groups from the same country.
Additionally, significant differences in marital satisfaction based on housekeeping status were found [Wilks’ Lambda=.920, F(6, 584)= 4.12; p<.001]. Univariate tests revealed significant differences in factor 1 (F=; df=2; p<.001; h 2 =.06), and total scale (F=6.84; df=2; p=.001; h 2 =.04), without significant differences by country. Hypogamy status was associated to significantly higher y status (M=4.88, SE=.14, M=4.34, SE=.07, respectively).