Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS): Marital Status/Cohabitation
QUESTION: I am trying to identify which PCGs are legally married and which ones are cohabiting. I determined married vs. cohabiting based on the following: If ae1=1, I coded PCGs as married and If (ae1==2 |ae32==1 |ae41==1), I coded PCGs as cohabiting. However my numbers aren’t consistent with the married variable in the PCG dataset. The documentation suggests using AE1 rather than the married indicator, but I’m worried about the fact that my numbers don’t match up very well. Is there a better way to identify whether the PCG is married or cohabiting?
Also, I cross-tabulated spous_id by ae32 and ae41 (both of which explicitly ask about cohabitation) and there are a few discrepancies. It also looks like there are 65 cases with ae1==2 (married and cohabiting), but no spous_id. What do you think is the best way to handle these discrepant cases?
RESPONSE:
There is always a problem with people cohabitating who say they are married, so it’s not always possible to correctly identify those who are truly married and those who are living with a partner.
What I do is I use AE1 and SPOUS_ID from the adult module (those with RSA_TYPE=2 or 3 are PCGS). If AE1=1 then the person is married; if AE1>1 and SPOUS_ID>0 then they are cohabitating. If they have no partner listed in the household roster(i.e., SPOUS_ID is blank), then we say they are not cohabitating. It’s sort of the best one can do. Remember, the MARITAL field in the roster is only self-reported for the roster respondent. The AE1 is a self-report on marital status for the adult respondents.
AE1=2 does not mean “married and cohabitating”. It means separated OR married to someone else and living with another. You can be separated and not living with a partner. Most cases of AE1=2 are separated and as opposed to married but living with someone else.
If AE32 says they are living with someone or AE41 says living with someone, then use that info since it is self-reported. The SPOUS_ID is based on the roster respondent saying who the spouse/partner is. Now if that partner happens to be temporarily absent, the roster respondent would not list them. Thus the AE32/AE41 reports are all we have to know about those living with a partner who is temporarily absent.
I should have mentioned this in my earlier email. The use of AE1>1 and spous_id>. to identify cohabitors is a quick and dirty method. The use of AE32/AE41 helps clean that up a bit.
Now there are likely to be a few cases where the person says they are not living with anyone at AE32 or AE41, but the roster respondent says the person is. At that point, you have to decide which to believe. Since some people don’t like to admit living with someone, the roster respondent report might be preferred. It’s the analyst’s call.