404 KALMIJN is that it is homogeneous with respect to factors such as ethnicity,race,reli- gion,and family background,i.e.characteristics transmitted by parents(Lie- berson 1980).Schools are less homogeneous in ascribed characteristics,al- though there are exceptions,e.g.Catholic colleges and black colleges.At the same time,schools are not necessarily homogeneous with respect to educa- tional attainment.Differences in ultimate educational attainment are larger in high schools,for example,than in universities,simply because the educational system works like a funnel,particularly in the United States(Mare 1991).In general,however,it is expected that colleges promote educational homogamy more than neighborhoods do,while neighborhoods promote ethnic endogamy and homogamy of family background more than schools.Whether workplaces encourage homogamy highly depends on the type of work,but on average, they probably do not encourage socioeconomic homogamy as much as schools. 'MA wo poppouMo1-6:8661010S EMPIRICAL WORK ON INTERMARRIAGE AND HOMOGAMY Empirical work has addressed four questions:(a)To what extent are groups endogamous or homogamous,and how do groups differ in these respects?(b) How have endogamy and homogamy changed over time?(c)Which factors are related to endogamy and homogamy,and in particular,what is the role of gender,education,and geographic regions and local marriage markets?(d) How do various dimensions of partner choice coincide?Before I summarize the main findings,I discuss how researchers have tackled these issues method- ologically. reyaueys q pop Measures and Models Intermarriage can be calculated for the stock of marriages at a given point in time(prevalence measures)or for people who marry in a given period of time (incidence measures).Incidence measures are generally preferable,in particu- lar if one analyzes trends.If the stock of marriages is used,one can analyze 具量 characteristics at the time of survey or characteristics at the time of marriage. The latter measures are more suitable than the former because some character- istics change after marriage.Because partners may become more alike during marriage-they may switch faith,for example,or influence each other's occu- pational career-current measures of homogamy tend to be biased upwardly. To describe intermarriage,various measures have been used.To explain these, it is helpful to consider the following marriage table. MEASURES The most general measure is the percentage of couples intermar- rying:(CBA+CAB)/N.When calculating group-specific measures,it makes a difference if one considers couples or individuals.The percentage of A-typeis that it is homogeneous with respect to factors such as ethnicity, race, reli￾gion, and family background, i.e. characteristics transmitted by parents (Lie￾berson 1980). Schools are less homogeneous in ascribed characteristics, al￾though there are exceptions, e.g. Catholic colleges and black colleges. At the same time, schools are not necessarily homogeneous with respect to educa￾tional attainment. Differences in ultimate educational attainment are larger in high schools, for example, than in universities, simply because the educational system works like a funnel, particularly in the United States (Mare 1991). In general, however, it is expected that colleges promote educational homogamy more than neighborhoods do, while neighborhoods promote ethnic endogamy and homogamy of family background more than schools. Whether workplaces encourage homogamy highly depends on the type of work, but on average, they probably do not encourage socioeconomic homogamy as much as schools. EMPIRICAL WORK ON INTERMARRIAGE AND HOMOGAMY Empirical work has addressed four questions: (a) To what extent are groups endogamous or homogamous, and how do groups differ in these respects? (b) How have endogamy and homogamy changed over time? (c) Which factors are related to endogamy and homogamy, and in particular, what is the role of gender, education, and geographic regions and local marriage markets? (d) How do various dimensions of partner choice coincide? Before I summarize the main findings, I discuss how researchers have tackled these issues method￾ologically. Measures and Models Intermarriage can be calculated for the stock of marriages at a given point in time (prevalence measures) or for people who marry in a given period of time (incidence measures). Incidence measures are generally preferable, in particu￾lar if one analyzes trends. If the stock of marriages is used, one can analyze characteristics at the time of survey or characteristics at the time of marriage. The latter measures are more suitable than the former because some character￾istics change after marriage. Because partners may become more alike during marriage—they may switch faith, for example, or influence each other’s occu￾pational career—current measures of homogamy tend to be biased upwardly. To describe intermarriage, various measures have been used. To explain these, it is helpful to consider the following marriage table. MEASURES The most general measure is the percentage of couples intermar￾rying: (CBA+CAB)/N. When calculating group-specific measures, it makes a difference if one considers couples or individuals. The percentage of A-type 404 KALMIJN Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1998.24:395-421. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Access provided by Shanghai Jiaotong University on 09/27/16. For personal use only