1. Family attitudes in Britain: The role of cohort replacement and intra-cohort change Ann Berrington & Peter Smith University of Southampton BSPS Annual Conference, September 10-12 th 2008

2. 2 Background (1) Family Change –Heterogeneity family forms historically unprecedented Coontz (2004) –Deinstitutionalisation of marriage Cherlin (2004) –Individualization of personal life Giddens (1991), Beck & Beck-Gernsheim (1995)

3. 3 Background (2) Role of Ideational Change –Lesthaeghe and van de Kaa (1987) Second demographic transition – refer to Inglehart (1977) Post-materialism, especially among cohorts born after World War II –Sexual revolution – 1960s & 1970s separation of sex & marriage –Gay rights – legal recognition same sex partnerships implemented in Civil Partnership Act, Dec 2005

4. 4 How does attitudinal change come about? Social norms change through a)Cohort replacement (succession), and/or b)Changes within individuals due to: Ageing effects Period effects Identification issue – within a single cross- sectional survey age and cohort are perfectly correlated

5. 5 Research Questions To what extent have family attitudes changed over time? What role do cohort replacement and intra-cohort change in family attitudes play? What role do compositional changes e.g. education and religiosity play?

6. 6 Data British Social Attitude Survey 1984 onwards 18-83 years – annual sample 1000-3000 persons Repeated cross sectional data Attitude statements – sexual morality, childbearing outside of marriage, cohabitation and divorce –Question interpretation and consistency over 22 year period?

7. Sexual morality questions repeated within the British Social Attitude Survey “If a man and a woman have sexual relations before marriage, what would your general opinion be? Please choose a phrase from this card” What about a married person having sexual relations with someone other than his or her partner?.” “What about sexual relations between two adults of the same sex?” 1 = always wrong 2 = mostly wrong 3 = sometimes wrong 4 = rarely wrong 5 = not wrong at all 6 = depends/varies

8. 8 Methods Descriptive analysis Quasi cohort approach – decomposing social change Logistic regression of attitudes – attempting to account for social change

9. Overall trend in sexual morality, Britain 1984-2006 Source: BSA

12. 12 Decomposing Social Change We can decompose overall social change into that which is between cohorts and within cohorts (Firebaugh, 1989) –Between cohort component of social trend can be interpreted as cohort replacement “if one is willing to assume that the age compositional differences between the cohorts are not actually producing the effect” (Alwin & McCammon, 2004, p. 4o) –Within cohort component represents either ageing and/or period effects

13. 13 Quasi cohort approach E.g. 11 year birth cohorts, followed over 22 year period (1984-2006) Assumptions made –Mortality risk not related to attitude of interest –Population closed to migration

14. 14 Percentage who say that premarital sex is “not wrong at all” Source: BSA 1984-2006

15. 15 Percentage who say that premarital sex is “not wrong at all” Source: BSA 1984-2006

16. 16 Percentage who say that sex between adults of the same sex is “not wrong at all” Source: BSA 1984-2006

17. 17 Percentage who say that sex between adults of the same sex is “not wrong at all” Source: BSA 1984-2006

18. 18 What role do changes in education and religion play? Logistic regression proportion who say that premarital sex and same sex “not wrong at all” in 2005/6 Covariates –Age –Sex –Marital status –Economic activity status –Highest educational qualification –Religious attendance See graphs

19. Educational Qualification Religious Attendance Source: BSA

20. Educational Qualification Religious Attendance Source: BSA

21. 21 Logistic regression 1984-2006 data (for cohorts fully observed) Model 1Model 2Model 3 Survey year Birth cohort Survey year Birth cohort Sex Marital Status Economic Activity Educational qualification Survey year Birth cohort Sex Marital Status Economic Activity Educational qualification Religious attendance

22. Source: BSA Model 1Model 2Model 3

23. Source: BSA Model 1Model 2Model 3

24. 24 Conclusions I Attitudes towards premarital sex, same sex relationships & childbearing outside of marriage continued to become more liberal Rapid increase in approval of same sex relationships in 1990s and 2000s, following a move to more conservative attitudes in late 1980s (HIV/AIDS publicity) Investigation of role of cohort, age and period effects on attitude is problematic due to identification problem Results appear to be robust to assumptions made within regression analysis

25. 25 Conclusions II Social change in attitudes to premarital sex –Largely driven by cohort replacement –Increased acceptance premarital sex associated with decline in religiosity –Increase in education having an offsetting effect

26. 26 Conclusions III Social change in attitudes to same sex relationships –result of cohort replacement and intra-individual change –increased acceptance associated with increases in education and declines in religiosity –possible evidence for period effects late 1980s (more conservative) and 2000-2006 (more liberal) –period effects may not be linear - under 50s more willing to adjust attitude in last decade –In future likely to be continued liberalisation due to cohort replacement – esp. until those now aged over 50 left the population

27. 27 References Alwin, D.F. and McCammon, R. J. (2004) Generations, cohorts and social change. Pp 23- 50 in J.T. Mortimer and M.J. Shanahan (eds.) Handbook of the Life Course. New York, NY: Springer. Crockett, A. and Voas, D. (2003) A divergence of views: Attitude change and the religious crisis over homosexuality. Sociological Research Online, 8,4. Duncan, S. and Phillips, M. (2008) New Families? Tradition and change in modern relationships. Pp 1-28 in A. Park et al. (eds.) British Social Attitudes: The 24th Report. London: Sage. Mason, K. O., Mason, W. M., Winsborough, H. H. and Poole, K. W. (1973) Some methodological issues in the cohort analysis of archival data. American Sociological Review, 38,242-258. Mason, K. O. And Lu, Y-H (1988) Attitude toward women’s familial roles: Changes in the United States 1977-1985. Gender and Society, 2, 39-57. Cohort vs intra cohort. Regress Rodgers, W. L. (1990) Interpreting the components of time trends. Sociological Methodology, 20, 421-438. Ryder, N. (1965) The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. American Sociological Review, 30, 843-861 Scott, J. (1998) Changing attitudes to sexual morality: A cross-national comparison. Sociology, 32, 815-845.