4.7 Article

Social network- and community-level influences on contraceptive use: evidence from rural Poland

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0398

关键词

contraception; social transmission; social networks; community effects; fertility decline; cultural evolution

资金

  1. ESRC
  2. Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research (Dissertation Fieldwork grant) [8182]
  3. UCL Graduate School
  4. Gay Clifford Fund
  5. ERC [AdG 249347]
  6. ANR - Labex IAST

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The diffusion of 'modern' contraceptives-as a proxy for the spread of low-fertility norms-has long interested researchers wishing to understand global fertility decline. A fundamental question is how local cultural norms and other people's behaviour influence the probability of contraceptive use, independent of women's socioeconomic and life-history characteristics. However, few studies have combined data at individual, social network and community levels to simultaneously capture multiple levels of influence. Fewer still have tested if the same predictors matter for different contraceptive types. Here, we use new data from 22 high-fertility communities in Poland to compare predictors of the use of (i) any contraceptives-a proxy for the decision to control fertility-with those of (ii) 'artificial' contraceptives-a subset of more culturally taboo methods. We find that the contraceptive behaviour of friends and family is more influential than are women's own characteristics and that community level characteristics additionally influence contraceptive use. Highly educated neighbours accelerate women's contraceptive use overall, but not their artificial method use. Highly religious neighbours slow women's artificial method use, but not their contraceptive use overall. Our results highlight different dimensions of sociocultural influence on contraceptive diffusion and suggest that these may be more influential than are individual characteristics. A comparative multilevel framework is needed to understand these dynamics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据