IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuiedp/25.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Theoretische Ansätze zur Erklärung von Ähnlichkeit und Unähnlichkeit in Partnerschaften

Author

Listed:
  • Sichelstiel, Gerhard

Abstract

Im Hinblick auf die Ähnlichkeit (bzw. Unähnlichkeit) von Partnern existieren die Redewendungen Gleich und gleich gesellt sich gern sowie Gegensätze ziehen sich an. In dieser Arbeit wird zunächst unter Bezugnahme auf empirische Untersuchungen verdeutlicht, dass die erste der beiden genannten Redewendungen eher zutrifft als die zweite (Abschnitt 2). Anschließend werden zwei verschiedene theoretische Erklärungsansätze skizziert: der ökonomische Ansatz, bei dem die Partnerwahl unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Nutzenmaximierung betrachtet wird (Abschnitt 3), und der rollentheoretische Ansatz, demzufolge die Übereinstimmung der Rollenvorstellungen von Frau und Mann maßgebend für das Funktionieren einer Partnerschaft ist (Abschnitt 4).

Suggested Citation

  • Sichelstiel, Gerhard, 2001. "Theoretische Ansätze zur Erklärung von Ähnlichkeit und Unähnlichkeit in Partnerschaften," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 25, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuiedp:25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/27964/1/501502270.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Becker, Gary S, 1985. "Human Capital, Effort, and the Sexual Division of Labor," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 33-58, January.
    2. Gary S. Becker, 1981. "A Treatise on the Family," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number beck81-1, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jennifer Roberts & Karl Taylor, 2017. "Intra-household commuting choices and local labour markets," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 734-757.
    2. R.Ramya, 2019. "Care Work and Time Use: A Focus on Child Care, Personal Care and Elderly Care Time," Shanlax International Journal of Economics, Shanlax Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 34-41, March.
    3. Francine D. Blau & Lawrence M. Kahn & Matthew Comey & Amanda Eng & Pamela Meyerhofer & Alexander Willén, 2020. "Culture and gender allocation of tasks: source country characteristics and the division of non-market work among US immigrants," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 907-958, December.
    4. Do, Quy-Toan & Levchenko, Andrei A. & Raddatz, Claudio, 2016. "Comparative advantage, international trade, and fertility," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 48-66.
    5. Dávid Erát, 2021. "Educational assortative mating and the decline of hypergamy in 27 European countries: An examination of trends through cohorts," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(7), pages 157-188.
    6. Donatella Cavagnoli, 2008. "Addiction to work: An Inelastic Wage Elasticity of Labour Supply Equals Long Hours of Work," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 11(2), pages 129-147.
    7. Bjerk, David & Han, Seungjin, 2007. "Assortative marriage and the effects of government homecare subsidy programs on gender wage and participation inequality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 1135-1150, June.
    8. Sile Padraigin O'Dorchai, 2008. "Do women gain or lose from becoming mothers?," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 51(2/3), pages 243-268.
    9. Stephanie Coontz, 2010. "Why American Families Need the Census," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 631(1), pages 141-149, September.
    10. Lincove, Jane Arnold, 2009. "Determinants of schooling for boys and girls in Nigeria under a policy of free primary education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 474-484, August.
    11. Dao, N.T. & Davila, J., 2015. "Gender inequality, technological progress, and the demographic transition," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2015038, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    12. Yassine Khoudja & Fenella Fleischmann, 2017. "Labor Force Participation of Immigrant Women in the Netherlands: Do Traditional Partners Hold Them Back?," International Migration Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 506-541, June.
    13. Åström, Johanna, 2009. "The Effects of Assortative Mating on Earnings: Human Capital Spillover or Specialization?," HUI Working Papers 34, HUI Research.
    14. Ze'ev Shtudiner, 2015. "The Marriage Premium and Productivity: The Case of NBA Players," International Journal of Economic Sciences, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 4(4), pages 53-65, December.
    15. Stefan Liebig & Carsten Sauer & Jürgen Schupp, 2009. "The Justice of Earnings in Dual-Earner Households," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 216, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    16. Cristina BorraBy & Martin Browning & Almudena Sevilla, 2021. "Marriage and housework [Measuring trends in leisure: the allocation of time over five decades]," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(2), pages 479-508.
    17. Anastasia Dimiski, 2020. "Factors that affect Students’ performance in Science: An application using Gini-BMA methodology in PISA 2015 dataset," Working Papers 2004, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
    18. Ewa Cukrowska-Torzewska & Anna Matysiak, 2018. "The Motherhood Wage Penalty: A Meta-Analysis," VID Working Papers 1808, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    19. Robert A. Pollak, 2012. "Allocating Time: Individuals' Technologies, Household Technology, Perfect Substitutes, and Specialization," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 105-106, pages 75-97.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:tuiedp:25. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivtuide.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.