Preference Theory (Hakim)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The preference theory according to Catherine Hakim (* 1948) is a theory developed in the 1990s which, among other things, claims to explain falling birth rates.

Basic assumptions and result

Hakim sees the starting point for her theory as being based on five economic and social processes, which have greatly expanded women's options since the 1960s. These developments opened up new, unrestricted options for women, with Hakim assuming men as a homogeneous group focused on the job: the introduction of the birth control pill , the creation of equal opportunities for women in the labor market , the expansion of salaried professions , the introduction / expansion of Part-time work and the increasing importance of personal attitudes, values ​​and preferences regarding lifestyles in affluent modern societies.

As a result of two representative population studies in Great Britain and Spain, three female preferences could be distinguished:

  • The first group prioritizes family and household ( home-centered ). Their share is on average around 20 percent.
  • A second group focuses on the job ( work-centered ). Their share is on average around 20 percent.
  • Another group is trying to combine both models, e.g. B. by means of part-time work ( adaptive ). Their share is on average around 60 percent.

Lifestyles and Birth Rates

According to Hakim, the different preferences of women also have an impact on their birth rates. A 1999 UK population study found that the average number of children living at home were under 16 years of age

  • was 1.28 children in family-centered women
  • for women who combined family and work, was 1.02 children
  • women who preferred the job-oriented model had 0.61 children.

A follow-up study examining Hakim's theory using data from eleven countries found an association between the preferences of women and the number of children present in a large number of countries. On the other hand, no connection could be established between preferred lifestyles and intended births. In a further follow-up study, no connection between preferences and births in the Czech Republic was found.

From their results, Hakim concluded that the heterogeneity of preferences also made different demands on politics. If they want to increase the birth rate, they should pay more attention and support to the group that prefers the family and household, as this group has the most children. However, as the adaptive type continues to increase, Hakim sees a "home care allowance" as a solution to the problem, a monetary benefit that can be used as a reward for raising children at home or for childcare.

Hakim sees the fact that women are underrepresented in certain professions is mainly due to the fact that about half of men compared with about 30% of women focused on the profession.

Reception in politics

Around the year 2000 the then Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard , became aware of Hakim's preference theory. Her theory, which was mentioned, for example, in the interim report of a government commission on maternity leave, also had an impact on the policy of the Australian government with regard to birth rates.

criticism

A central point of criticism is the causal connection between preferences and behavior assumed by Hakim : According to Hakim, preferences cause actions. However, critics point to research that aims to show that preferences are determined by the circumstances and behavior of the individual, and not the other way around. It could therefore be that being a mother brings about a certain preference (such as a stronger child and family orientation) and not, as Hakim claims, is caused by this preference.

McRae complains that Hakim does not take into account the situational and structural conditions that influence and limit women's decisions. In addition, Hakim ignores the fact that preferences undergo a number of changes over the course of life. According to Dooreward et al. (2004) and Tomlinson (2006), women's decisions about family and work depend on many contextual factors and not (only) on preferences. According to this, the financial circumstances and family obligations of women, their work situation and education, the range of childcare options and the state's social policy have a decisive impact on their family and work-related actions.

Other critics argue that contrary to Hakim's assumption, there are not just three “types” of women who each orient their lives according to one of three preferences.

Hakim's basic assumption that men are a homogeneous group was also criticized. A meta study by the Humboldt University of Berlin a. a. identified a group that they refer to as "new fathers". That does not mean to live in a complete reversal of roles and to become "househusband", but to strive for a partnership that is equal to the sexes. This also includes giving her the option of her preferences in dialogue with her partner and accepting responsibility for the household and raising children., Cf. also:

Primary literature

  • Catherine Hakim, Work-Lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century: Preference Theory (Oxford University Press, 2000). With a Preface by Anthony Giddens . ISBN 0-19-924210-0
  • Catherine Hakim: A New Approach to Explaining Fertility Patterns: Preference Theory , in: Population and Development Review 29 (3), pp. 349-374.

further reading

  • Rosemary Crompton and Clare Lyonette: The new gender essentialism - domestic and family 'choices' and their relation to attitudes . In: The British Journal of Sociology . 56, No. 5, 2005, pp. 601-620. doi : 10.1111 / j.1468-4446.2005.00085.x
  • James Doney and Mary Leahy: Women, Work and Preference Formation: A Critique of Catherine Hakim's Preference Theory (PDF file; 234 kB). In: Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics . 1, No. 1, 2006, pp. 37-48.
  • Man Yee Kan: Work Orientation and Wives' Employment Careers. An Evaluation of Hakim's Preference Theory . In: Work and Occupations . 34, No. 4, 2007, pp. 430-462. doi : 10.1177 / 0730888407307200
  • Karina M. Shreffler and David R. Johnson (2012). Fertility Intentions, Career Considerations and Subsequent Births: The Moderating Effects of Women's Work Hours. In: Journal of Family and Economic Issues, August 22, 2012

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d The preferences of men - discrepancy between desire and reality? ( Memento of the original from November 15, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. A secondary analysis of the 2004 DFG dataset, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin , October 24, 2006 (pdf; 391 kB), pages 7-10, accessed on October 21, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.familienheute.de
  2. ↑ Sheree Cartwright: Women's Decisions about Paid Work and Family Life after Childbirth: A Critique of the Hakim Model , School of Social Science and Planning, RMIT University, page 30, published in: Women and Work: Current RMIT University Research, December 2004, Pages 27-40, accessed October 21, 2012
  3. ↑ Agnese Vitali, Francesco C. Billari, Alexia Prskawetz, Maria Rita Testa: Preference Theory and Low Fertility: A Comparative Perspective , in: European Journal of Population (2009) 25, pages 413-438, doi : 10.1007 / s10680-009- 9178-x , page 413.
  4. ↑ LADISLAV RABUŠIC, BEATRICE-ELENA CHROMKOVÁ MANEA: Hakim's preference theory in the Czech context (PDF; 132 kB). Czech Demography, 2008, 48 (2), pages 46-55.
  5. ↑ Stephen J. Ceci, Wendy M. Williams and Susan M. Barnett: Women's Underrepresentation in Science: Sociocultural and Biological Considerations  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as broken. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. . In: Psychological Bulletin . 135, No. 2, pp. 218-261.@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.ibro.info  
  6. ^ Bettina Arndt: Myths and misconceptions . In: The Sydney Morning Herald , February 7, 2003. Retrieved October 21, 2012. 
  7. ^ Ian Procter and Maureen Padfield: Work orientations and women's work: A critique of Hakim's theory of the heterogeneity of women . In: Gender, Work and Organization . 6, No. 3, 1999, pp. 152-162. doi : 10.1111 / 1468-0432.00078
  8. ^ Colette Fagan: Time money and the gender order: Work orientations and working-time preferences in Britain . In: Gender, Work and Organization . 8, No. 3, 2001, pp. 239-266. doi : 10.1111 / 1468-0432.00131
  9. ↑ Rosemary Crompton and Fiona Harris: Explaining women's employment patterns: 'Orientations to work' revisited . In: British Journal of Sociology . 49, No. 1, 1998, pp. 118-136. PMID 9569774
  10. ^ Susan McRae: Constraints and choices in mothers' employment careers: A consideration of Hakim's Preference Theory . In: British Journal of Sociology . 54, No. 3, 2003, pp. 317-338. doi : 10.1111 / j.1468-4446.2003.00317.x
  11. ↑ Hans Doorewaard, John Hendrickx and Piet Verschuren: Work Orientations of female returners . In: Work, Employment and Society . 18, No. 1, 2004, pp. 7-27. doi : 10.1177 / 0950017004038387
  12. ↑ a b Jennifer Tomlinson: Women's work-life balance trajectories in the UK: reformulating choice and constraint in transitions through part-time work across the life course . In: British Journal of Guidance and Counseling . 34, No. 3, 2006, pp. 365-382. doi : 10.1080 / 03069880600769555
  13. ↑ Arnstein Aassve, Francesco C. Billari and Raffaella Piccarreta: Strings of adulthood: A sequence analysis of young British women's work-family trajectories . In: European Journal of Population . 23, No. 3-4, 2007, pp. 369-388. doi : 10.1007 / s10680-007-9134-6
  14. ↑ The Preferences of Men - Discrepancy between Desire and Reality? Humboldt-Universität Berlin 2006, p. 71 f., Pdf ( Memento of the original dated November 15, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.familienheute.de
  15. ↑ Sustainable family policy, report by Prof. Dr. Hans Bertram, Dipl. Soz. Wiebke Rösler and Dipl. Soz. Nancy Enert, ed. Federal Ministry for Family, Seniors, Women and Youth, Berlin 2005