IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/max/cprwps/30.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Well Can We Track Cohabitation Using the SIPP? A Consideration of Direct and Inferred Measures

Author

Listed:
  • Reagan Baughman
  • Stacy Dickert-Conlin
  • Scott Houser

Abstract

Cohabitation is an alternative to marriage and to living independently for an increasing number of Americans. Despite this fact, research exploring links between living arrangements and economic behavior is limited by a lack of data that explicitly identify cohabiting couples. To aid researchers in using the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) rich data for cohabitation issues, our paper considers direct and inferred measures of cohabitation. Our findings suggest that: (1) the best inferred measures in pre-1966 SIPP depends upon a researcher's goals, and (2) the SIPP counts a larger number of cohabiting couples than the widely used CPS.

Suggested Citation

  • Reagan Baughman & Stacy Dickert-Conlin & Scott Houser, 2000. "How Well Can We Track Cohabitation Using the SIPP? A Consideration of Direct and Inferred Measures," Center for Policy Research Working Papers 30, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University.
    • Handle: RePEc:max:cprwps:30
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://surface.syr.edu/cpr/125/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynne Casper & Philip Cohen, 2000. "How does POSSLQ measure up? Historical estimates of cohabitation," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(2), pages 237-245, May.
    2. Kiefer, Nicholas M, 1988. "Economic Duration Data and Hazard Functions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(2), pages 646-679, June.
    3. Ellwood, David T., 2000. "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 53(n. 4), pages 1063-1106, December.
    4. Kurt Bauman, 1999. "Shifting family definitions: The effect of cohabitation and other nonfamily household relationships on measures of poverty," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 36(3), pages 315-325, August.
    5. James Alm & Stacy Dickert-Conlin & Leslie A. Whittington, 1999. "Policy Watch: The Marriage Penalty," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 193-204, Summer.
    6. repec:bla:revinw:v:45:y:1999:i:2:p:179-91 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Dan Black & Gary Gates & Seth Sanders & Lowell Taylor, 2000. "Demographics of the gay and lesbian population in the United States: Evidence from available systematic data sources," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(2), pages 139-154, May.
    8. R. A. Moffitt & R. Reville & A. E. Winkler, "undated". "Beyond single mothers: Cohabition, marriage, and the U.S. welfare system," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1068-95, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    9. Feenberg, Daniel R. & Rosen, Harvey S., 1995. "Recent Developments in the Marriage Tax," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 48(1), pages 91-101, March.
    10. Rebecca A London, 2000. "The interaction between single mothers' living arrangements and welfare participation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 93-117.
    11. Marcia Carlson & Sheldon Danziger, 1999. "Cohabitation And The Measurement Of Child Poverty," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 45(2), pages 179-191, June.
    12. Ellwood, David T., 2000. "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 53(4), pages 1063-1106, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robert A. Moffitt & Brian J. Phelan & Anne E. Winkler, 2020. "Welfare Rules, Incentives, and Family Structure," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 55(1), pages 1-42.
    2. Patrick Ishizuka, 2018. "The Economic Foundations of Cohabiting Couples’ Union Transitions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(2), pages 535-557, April.
    3. Pirog, Maureen & Gerrish, Ed, 2015. "Impact of the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act on child support order establishment," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 104-117.
    4. repec:msl:workng:1008 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Gunnar Andersson & Turid Noack & Ane Seierstad & Harald Weedon-Fekjær, 2004. "The demographics of same-sex „marriages“ in Norway and Sweden," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2004-018, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    6. James Alm & Leslie Whittington, 2003. "Shacking Up or Shelling Out: Income Taxes, Marriage, and Cohabitation," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 169-186, September.
    7. Wendy D. Manning & Kara Joyner & Paul Hemez & Cassandra Cupka, 2019. "Measuring Cohabitation in U.S. National Surveys," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 56(4), pages 1195-1218, August.
    8. Natasha Pilkauskas & Katherine Michelmore, 2017. "Does the Earned Income Tax Credit Reduce Housing Instability?," Working Papers wp18-01-ff, Princeton University, School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Research on Child Wellbeing..

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David T. Ellwood, 1999. "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," JCPR Working Papers 124, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    2. V. Joseph Hotz, 2003. "The Earned Income Tax Credit," NBER Chapters, in: Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, pages 141-198, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Eissa, Nada & Hoynes, Hilary, 2011. "Redistribution and Tax Expenditures: The Earned Income Tax Credit," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 64(2), pages 689-729, June.
    4. Immervoll, Herwig & Jacobsen Kleven, Henrik & Thustrup Kreiner, Claus & Verdelin, Nicolaj, 2008. "An evaluation of the tax-transfer treatment of married couples in European countries," EUROMOD Working Papers EM7/08, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. James Alm & Leslie Whittington, 2003. "Shacking Up or Shelling Out: Income Taxes, Marriage, and Cohabitation," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 169-186, September.
    6. Dickert-Conlin, Stacy & Houser, Scott, 1998. "Taxes and Transfers: A New Look at the Marriage Penalty," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 2), pages 175-217, June.
    7. David T. Ellwood & Jeffrey B. Liebman, 2001. "The Middle-Class Parent Penalty: Child Benefits in the US Tax Code," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 15, pages 1-40, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Katherine Michelmore, 2018. "The earned income tax credit and union formation: The impact of expected spouse earnings," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 377-406, June.
    9. Sophie Buffeteau & Damien Echevin, 2008. "Taxation and marriage: Evidence from a natural experiment in France," Cahiers de recherche 08-01, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    10. Fisher, Hayley, 2011. "Marriage penalties, marriage, and cohabitation," Working Papers 2011-12, University of Sydney, School of Economics.
    11. Saul D. Hoffman, 2003. "The EITC Marriage Tax and EITC Reform," Working Papers 03-01, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    12. DAVID M. BLAU & WILBERT van der KLAAUW, 2013. "What Determines Family Structure?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 579-604, January.
    13. Nicole Simpson & Devin Reilly & Kartik Athreya, 2010. "The Earned Income Tax Credit: Insurance Without Disincentives?," 2010 Meeting Papers 1103, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Hélène Périvier, 2007. "Les femmes sur le marché du travail aux Etats-Unis: une mise en perspective avec la France et la Suède," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-00972845, HAL.
    15. Audrey Light & Yoshiaki Omori, 2009. "Economic Incentives and Family Formation," Working Papers 09-08, Ohio State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Eamon, Mary Keegan & Wu, Chi-Fang, 2011. "Effects of unemployment and underemployment on material hardship in single-mother families," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 233-241, February.
    17. Judith A. Seltzer, 2019. "Family Change and Changing Family Demography," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 56(2), pages 405-426, April.
    18. Gordon Jong & Deborah Graefe & Tanja St. Pierre, 2005. "Welfare reform and interstate migration of poor families," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 42(3), pages 469-496, August.
    19. Gunter, Samara, 2013. "State Earned Income Tax Credits and Participation in Regular and Informal Work," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 66(1), pages 33-62, March.
    20. Isaac, Elliott & Jiang, Haibin, 2022. "Tax-Based Marriage Incentives in the Affordable Care Act," IZA Discussion Papers 15331, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:max:cprwps:30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Katrina Fiacchi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cpsyrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.