臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

婚姻不全然是個人的自由選擇，因為配偶的選擇過程涉及很多社會的因素。對社會階層研究而言，婚姻是理解社會階層結構的關鍵指標，因為來自兩個家庭所建構的婚姻關係涉及社會資源的維持與流動。本論文以台灣社會的教育婚姻配對模式為討論議題，利用多年「台灣地區社會變遷基本調查計畫」的資料建構婚姻趨勢的檔案資料，藉此分析台灣自1991年至2007年間的教育同質婚的變遷趨勢。本論文也檢視個人及家庭透過擇偶過程影響教育婚姻配對的因果機制，探究擇偶者在本身資本存量的利基/限制下，面對擇偶過程中的機會結構所賦予的限制與機會時所展現的婚姻選擇行為。在分析上述議題方面，本文運用「華人家庭動態資料庫」1999年主樣本調查、「台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫」第四期第二次與以及第五期第二次家庭組調查、與1991年「台灣社會意向調查」的資料，使用多類別邏輯迴歸分析。
首先，本論文發現，雖然台灣社會近二十年來在政治、經濟、社會、教育等面向經歷重要的變化，然而教育同質婚的整體趨勢在1991~2007年間沒有明顯的變化。教育層級中的最高教育者是社會中最封閉的團體，但是他們的教育通婚機會受到高等教育擴張政策的影響，教育異質婚的機會在1996-1997至2006-2007之間有明顯的提升。第二，本論文發現，結婚時機與擇偶時機明顯改變擇偶者所面對的婚姻市場的教育組成，而且此現象對於擁有大專學歷的擇偶者是更明顯的；然而，處於最低層級的教育群體因其在婚姻市場的劣勢情境，其通婚的機會將隨著結婚時機、擇偶時機的延遲而逐漸降低。
第三，本論文發現教育制度作為一種婚姻市場的重要性，教育制度為現代社會中的人們提供一個發展親密關係的環境，使得求學中的男女學生受限於教育制度下的人口組成而降低發展教育異質婚的機會，其中又以高等教育制度的影響力量最為明顯。此外，本文也發現介紹人雖然有助於擴展個人的擇偶圈範圍，但更深入的分析顯示，介紹人的分析結果不支持弱連帶優勢的論點，而是反映社會文化對教育婚配模式的偏好。此外，更重要的是介紹人的教育成就可以成為擇偶者向上流動的路徑。
最後，本論文發現父親、母親對子女的配偶選擇的影響具有不同的社會意涵，父親教育主要扮演促進子女向上通婚的橋梁，而母親多半擔任避免子女向下結婚的家庭地位守護者；同時本論文也發現女性比男性容易從父母的教育成就得益，男性在婚姻市場的優勢地位更需要依賴個人成功的代間流動。另外，本論文也發現，擇偶者對配偶選擇的自主權、或是擇偶者父母參與配偶選擇的程度，是隨著擇偶者自身所擁有的資本存量（例如，教育、教育流動）與父母具有的教育資本而變動，其中結婚年齡是影響擇偶者與其父母在擇偶過程中權力消長的重要因素。本文同時發現，父母教育程度越高，越傾向賦與子女婚姻選擇的自主權。然而，此舉並未降低子女教育同質婚的機會，此發現與過去研究習慣性推論父親教育越高越傾向透過限制子女的配偶選擇以達到鞏固家庭地位的說法，有所不同。

Marriage is not solely a personal choice, which is related to many social factors. Nevertheless, the pattern of marriages is a key indicator to understanding the process of social stratification. The marriage relationships built by members from two different families relate to the preservation and transmission of social resources. The main purpose of this dissertation aims to explore the pattern of the educational homogeneity marriage (homogamy) in Taiwan. With the data collected by the Taiwan Social Change Survey (TSCS), this dissertation investigates the trends of the educational assortative mating from 1990 to 2007 in Taiwan. This study focuses on the mechanisms of how individuals and families affect the outcomes of educational assortative mating through the process of mating. The analysis of the mechanisms takes into account the situations of mate choosers who are embedded in the opportunity structures in the process of mating. In order to analyze the above issues, this dissertation utilizes the multinomial regression analysis with data from the Panel Study of Family Dynamics (PSFD) of 1999, data from waves 4-2 and 5-2 of the TSCS, and data from the Taiwan Social Image Survey in 1991.
The results from this dissertation indicate that the trends of the educational homogenous marriage do not vary significantly in the past two decades in Taiwan. However, the likelihood of intermarriages for people with a bachelor degree becomes significantly lower after the expansion of higher education. Except for those with the lowest education, the findings support the marriage search theory, that is, the later for two people to get married, the less likely they would have similar educational background, especially for those with a college degree. The opportunities to cross the educational boundary for the lowest educational strata tend to decrease with a delay of getting married.
Furthermore, this dissertation examines the effects of institutions in the educational assortative mating through various ways of mating, settings of contact, types of matchmakers and their own social status. My analysis shows that schooling campus provides a fine place for educational assortative mating, and the effects are more salient for those with higher education. In addition, the matchmakers do help expand the scope of mating pool, and matchmaker’s education increases the chance for mate choosers to marry upward. However, the conventional social norms still play an important role as the standards of matching. Further analysis of the matchmakers does not support the hypothesis of the advantage of weak ties, but a reflection of social preference of educational assortative mating. The peer groups of mate choosers from higher educational strata will enhance the likelihood of homogamy, but such phenomenon does not appear in the group from lower educational strata.
By examining the parental effects on the pattern of the educational assortative mating, this study finds that father’s education works as a bridge to help daughter move upward through marriage, while mother’s education is to preserve the status of the family. Gender also influences the effects of family background on educational assortative mating. Daughters get more benefit from family backgrounds than sons do. The analytical results show that the autonomy of marriage varies with mate choosers’ capital stock and parent’s educational capital. Age of getting married is the key factor to determine the variation of the power of mate chooser’s autonomy and parental involvement. As a mate chooser, the higher one’s educational level is, the more autonomy one will have. However, higher parents’ educational level does not result in the decrease of the degree of homogamy, a result which is different from the conventional argument that parents with higher educational level tend to use marriage as a mean to protect the family’s status.

論文目錄
謝誌 i
中文摘要 iv
英文摘要 vi
論文目錄 ix
表目錄 xiv
圖目錄 xv

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究緣起 1
第二節 問題意識 8
第三節 論文章節安排 11

第二章 理論與文獻探討 14
第一節 婚姻市場中的行動者 15
第二節 教育與婚姻市場 18
一、教育系統作為一種婚姻市場 18
二、教育婚姻配對模式的趨勢變化 21
三、台灣1980~2007間教育婚姻配對的脈絡轉變…………………….. 25
(一) 教育擴張及兩性教育差距縮減 25
(二) 女性勞動參與率增加與延遲結婚年齡 29
第三節 婚姻選擇偏好的性別差異與轉變 34
一、分殊化的性別角色與婚姻交易模型 34
二、越趨對稱的性別角色與選擇偏好的轉變 37
第四節 婚姻市場中的結構機會與限制 39
一、團體規模與社會互動的機會 39
(一) 鉅觀人口結構理論 39
(二) 教育擴張與排他性假設 40
二、區域性婚姻市場的組成與接觸機會 42
(一) 微觀的機會結構供給觀點 42
(二) 婚姻搜尋理論：結婚時機、婚姻市場組成與教育婚姻配對 44
三、婚姻市場中的介紹人：社會網絡理論的運用 49
(一) 介紹人：弱連帶優勢或是鞏固社會規範的第三方？ 49
(二) 「借」介紹人的資本？ 52
第五節　父母的重量：家庭背景的影響機制 54
一、父母在擇偶過程中的角色轉變：從權威到協商 55
二、家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚姻配對模式 58

第三章 研究架構與研究設計 61
第一節 資料來源 61
第二節 「教育同質婚的變遷趨勢與結婚時機的影響」的研究設計 63
一、資料來源與分析樣本的建立 63
二、研究架構與分析模型的設定 66
(一) 分析方法與模型設定 66
(二) 模型選擇 70
三、變項測量 72
(一) 教育程度：尋找適切的分類 72
(二) 時間、結婚時機的測量 73
四、統計分析軟體 75
第三節 「遇見另一伴：擇偶過程中的擇偶時機與方式」的研究設計 77
一、樣本來源 77
二、研究架構與分析模型 79
(一)　研究架構 79
(二) 分析方法 80
三、變項定義與測量 85
(一) 應變項：教育婚姻配對模式 85
(二)　自變項 85
(三)　控制變項 89
第四節 「家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚配模式」之研究設計 90
一、樣本來源 90
二、研究架構與分析模型 91
三、變項定義與測量 94
(一)　應變項：擇偶方式與教育婚姻配對模式 94
(二)　自變項 94
(三)　其他控制變項 95

第四章 消失中的界限？教育同質婚的變遷與結婚時機的影響 97
第一節 研究假設 97
第二節 分析結果 102
一、初步的描述性統計分析 102
二、教育同質婚的趨勢變化：1991~2007 107
(一)對數線性與對數相乘模型分析：趨勢變化 107
(二)教育同質婚的趨勢 110
(三)教育層級間的社會距離 112
三、教育婚姻配對與結婚時機 115
(一)對數線性與對數相乘模型分析：結婚時機的影響 115
(二)教育同質婚、教育界限與結婚時機 117
第三節 本章小結 120

第五章 遇見另一伴：擇偶過程中的擇偶時機與方式 122
第一節 前言 122
第二節 研究假設 123
第三節 分析結果 127
一、教育婚姻配對模式的變化與基本特質 127
二、擇偶時機、接觸場合與介紹人類型之描述統計 132
三、教育婚姻配對的多類別邏輯迴歸模型 136
(一)何時遇到配偶：擇偶時機的影響 136
(二)如何遇到配偶：介紹人的作用 142
(三)接觸場合的影響力 150
第四節 本章小結 154

第六章 穿梭於父母與自我之間：家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚配模　　　 式 157
第一節　研究假設 158
第二節　樣本特質與分布 163
第三節　分析結果 167
一、教育婚姻配對與擇偶方式的描述性統計 167
二、家庭背景的影響及世代變化 170
三、擇偶方式的影響因素：教育資本、家庭背景與結婚時機 176
四、家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚配模式 181
第四節　本章小結 186

第七章　結論與討論 189
第一節　宏觀的圖像：台灣教育婚姻配對的模式與變遷 191
第二節　搜尋時間、擇偶方式與滲透界限的機會 193
第三節　家庭背景與教育婚姻配對模式的關係 197
第四節　未來的研究建議 200

附錄一：R Statistics程式語法 203
參考書目 206





表目錄

表2-1 台灣地區十五歲以上人口之教育程度分配 28
表3-1　「教育婚姻配對趨勢及結婚時機的影響」的分析資料來源　 64
表3-2 台灣教育婚姻配對之教育程度分類的集合偏誤 72
表4-1　夫妻教育成就之百分比分配 105
表4-2　教育婚姻配對的比例變化 106
表4-3　台灣教育婚姻配對趨勢之模型配適度測量：1991~2007 110
表4-4　台灣教育婚姻配對趨勢之參數估計 113
表4-5　跨越教育界限結婚的機率（相較於同質婚） 114
表4-6　台灣教育婚姻配對模式之模型配適度測量：結婚時機的影響 117
表4-7　結婚時機對教育婚姻配對模式之影響：參數估計 118
表4-8　跨越教育界限的機率：隨結婚時機變化 119
表5-1　教育婚配模式與自變項的雙變項關係 129
表5-2　擇偶過程相關變項之描述性統計 134
表5-3　擇偶時機與教育婚配模式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 140
表5-4　介紹人與教育婚配模式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 146
表5-5　介紹人類型與教育婚配模式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 147
表5-6　介紹人教育與教育婚配模式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 149
表5-6 接觸場合與教育婚配模式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 152
表6-1 「家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚配模式」之樣本特質 165
表6-2　家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚配模式之描述統計 168
表6-3　擇偶方式之描述統計分析 169
表6-4　家庭背景與教育婚配模式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 174
表6-5 擇偶方式之多類別邏輯迴歸分析 179
表6-6　家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚配模式多類別邏輯迴歸分析 184

圖目錄

圖2-1 台灣高等教育歷年在學學生數的變化 27
圖2-2 高等教育在學學生數女性比例的歷年變化 27
圖2-3 台灣地區各教育層級勞動參與率的性別差異與變化 32
圖2-4 台灣1980~2007年間初婚年齡（中位數）之變化 33
圖2-5 2007年台閩地區各教育層級之初婚年齡（中位數） 33
圖3-1 教育婚姻配對趨勢分析的矩陣設計 70
圖3-2 「遇見另一伴：擇偶過程中的擇偶時機與方式」研究架構圖 80
圖3-3　「家庭背景與教育婚姻配對」研究架構圖 93
圖3-4　「家庭背景、擇偶方式與教育婚姻配對」研究架構圖 93
圖4-1　台灣1990~2007年間之教育組成異質程度的變化 99

內政部，2000，〈98年初婚者與再婚者統計〉，《內政部統計通報》26。
王濟川、郭志剛，2003，《Logistic迴歸模型：方法及應用》。台北：五南。
王甫昌，1993，〈光復後台灣漢人族群通婚的原因與形式初探〉，《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》76：43-96。
朱敬一、章英華，2001，〈家庭動態資料庫簡介〉，收錄於《Panel Study of Family Dynamics華人家庭資料庫學術研討會論文集》。台北：中央研究院經濟學研究所。
伊慶春、楊文山，1991，《台灣地區社會意向調查八十年六月專題調查報告》。中央研究院中山人文科學研究所。
伊慶春、熊瑞梅，1994，〈擇偶過程之網絡與婚姻關係：對介紹人、婚姻配對和婚姻滿意度之分析〉。頁135-177，收錄於伊慶春主編《台灣社會的民眾意向：社會科學的分析》。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
行政院，1992，《中華民國七十九年台閩地區戶口及住宅普查報告》。台北：行政院戶口普查處。
余德林，2004，《認識方式與教育、族群婚姻配對：以介紹人為例》。台北：台北大學社會學系碩士論文。
巫麗雪，2003，《跨越教育與族群的藩籬：台灣跨越界限之婚姻配對分析》。台中市：東海大學社會學系碩士論文。
巫麗雪、蔡瑞明，2006，〈跨越族群的藩籬：從機會供給觀點分析台灣的族群通婚〉，《人口學刊》32：1-40。
李沛良，1988，《社會研究的統計分析》。台北：巨流。
風孝天，2011，〈城市青年的擇偶方式：未婚到已婚的變化及相關因素分析〉，文章發表於《兩岸三地華人青少年研究暨台灣青少年成長歷程第四次學術研討會》。台北：中研院。2011/11/25~2011/11/26。
教育部，2008，《中華民國教育統計》。台北：教育部統計處。
傅仰止，2001，〈個人網絡中他人連繫強度的結構原理〉，《台灣社會學》3：163-209。
章英華、傅仰止，2002，《台灣地區社會變遷基本調查報告：第四期第二次》。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
章英華、傅仰止，2003，《台灣地區社會變遷基本調查報告：第四期第三次》。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
陳湘琪，2010，《台灣年齡婚配模式之分析》。嘉義：國立中正大學社會福利研究所碩士論文。
張茂桂、蕭新煌，1987，〈大學生的「中國結」與「台灣結」-自我認定與通婚觀念的分析〉，《中國論壇》289：34-53。
張維安、王德睦，1983，〈社會流動與選擇性婚姻〉，《中國社會學勘》7：191-214。
張思嘉、周玉慧、黃宗堅，1999，〈從擇偶歷程看婚姻關係的形成與發展〉。國科會八十八年度專題研究計畫報告。
張思嘉，2001，〈擇偶歷程與婚前關係的形成與發展〉，《中華心理衛生期刊》4：1-29。
張晉芬、蔡瑞明，2006，《台灣全志：卷九社會志—勞動力與勞動市場篇》。南投：國史館台灣文獻館。
張苙雲、廖培珊，2008，《台灣地區社會變遷基本調查報告：第五期第三次》。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
楊靜利、李大正、陳寬政，2006，〈台灣傳統婚配空間的變化與婚姻行為的變遷〉，《人口學刊》33：1-32。
蔡淑鈴，1994，〈台灣之婚姻配對模式〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》6(2)：335-371。
蔡淑鈴，2004，〈高等教育的擴展對教育機會分配的影響〉，《台灣社會學》7：47-88。
蔡瑞明，1997，〈「對數線性模型」與「對數相乘模型」的發展與運用：以社會流動的分析為例〉。頁61-102，收錄於楊文山主編《社會科學計量方法發展與應用》。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
蔡宏進，2010，《人口學》。台北：三民書局。
蔡婉琦，2005，《年齡、教育程度與盛行的婚配模式》。台北：政治大學社會學系碩士論文。
瞿海源，1991，《台灣地區社會變遷基本調查報告：第二期第二次》。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。
瞿海源，1992，《台灣地區社會變遷基本調查報告：第二期第三次》。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。
瞿海源，1996，《台灣地區社會變遷基本調查報告：第三期第二次》。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。
薛承泰，1993，〈台灣地區夫妻配對的初探：年齡、省籍、教育程度同質性〉。頁19-43，《台灣地區社會意向調查八十二年二月定期報告》。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
駱明慶，2006，〈教育成就的性別差異與國際通婚〉，《經濟論文叢刊》 34(1): 79-115。
Agresti, Alan. 2002. Categorical Data Analysis (2 ). Hoboken: Wiley.
Agresti, Alan. 2010. Analysis of Ordinal Categorical Data (2 ). Hoboken: Wiley.
Ahuvia, Aaron C., and Mara B. Adelman. 1992. “Formal Intermediaries in the Marriage Market: A Typology and Review.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 54: 452-463.
Applbaum, Kalman. 1995. “Marriage with the Proper Stranger: Arranged Marriage in Metropolitan Japan.” Ethnology 34(1): 37-51.
Arum, R., J. Roksa, and M. J. Budig. 2008. “The Romance of College Attendance: Higher Education Stratification and Mate Selection.” Research in Social Dtratification and Mobility 26(2): 107-121.
Beck, Ulrich and Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim. 1995. The Normal Chaos of Love. Cambridge: Polity.
Becker, Gary S. 1973. “A Theory of Marriage: Part I.” Journal of Political Economy 81(4): 813-846.
Becker, Gary S. 1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.（王文娟、李華夏、吳惠林、鄒繼礎譯）《家庭論》。台北：立緒。
Becker, Gary S. 1973. “A Theory of Marriage: Part I.” Journal of Political Economy 81(4): 813-846.
Becker, Gary S. 1974. “A Theory of Marriage: Part II.” Journal of Political Economy 82(2): S11-S26.
Becker, Gary S. 1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.（王文娟、李華夏、吳惠林、鄒繼礎譯，1997）《家庭論》。台北：立緒。
Becker, Gary S. 1985. “Human Capital, Effort, and Sexual Division of Labor.” Journal of Labor Economics 81(4): 813-846.
Beller, Emily. 2009. “Bringing Intergenerational Social Mobility Research into Twenty-first Century: Why Mother Matter.” American Sociological Review 74: 507-528.
Bernardi, Fabrizio. 2003. “Who Marries Whom in Italy?” Pp. 113-140 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bernasco, Wim, Paul M. De Graaf, and Wout C. Ultee. 1996. “Effects of Spouse’s Resources on Occupational Attainment in the Netherlands.” European Sociological Review 14(1): 15-31.
Berry, William D., and Stanley Feldman. 1985. Multiple Regression in Practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publiciations.
Birkelund, Gunn Elisabeth and Johan Heldal. 2003. “Who Marries Whom? Educational Homogamy in Norway.” Demographic Research 8: 1-30.
(HTUhttp://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol8/1/8-1.pdfUTH)
Blackwell, Debra L. 1998. “Marital Homogamy in the United States: The Influence of Individual and Paternal Education.” Social Science Research 27: 159-188.
Blau, Peter M. 1956. “Social Mobility and Interpersonal Relations.” American Sociological Review 21(3): 290-295.
Blau, Peter M. 1978. Inequality and Heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.
Blau, Peter M. and Otis Dudley Duncan. 1967. The American Occupational Structure. New York: Free Press.
Blau, Peter M. and Otis Dudley Duncan. 1994. “The Process of Stratification.” Pp. 317-329 in Social Stratification in Sociological Perspective, edited by David B. Grusky. Boulder: Westview Press.
Blau, Peter M. Terry C. Blum and Joseph E. Schwartz. 1982. “Heterogeneity and Intermarriage.” American Sociological Review 47: 45-62.
Blau, Peter M. Carolyn Beeker, Kevin M. Fitzpatrick. 1984. “Intersecting Social Affiliations and Intermarriage.” Social Forces 62(3): 585-606.
Blau, Peter M. and Joseph E. Schwartz. 1984. Crosscutting Social Circles. Orlando: Academic Press.
Blau, Peter M. 1994. Structural Contexts of Opportunities. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Blossfeld, Hans-Peter and Johannes Huinink. 1991. “Human Capital Investments or Norms of Role Transition? How Women’s Schooling and Career Affect the Process of Family Formation? ” American Journal of Sociology 97: 143-168.
Blossfeld, Hans-Peter. 1995. The New Role of Women: Family Formation in Modern Societies. Boulder,CO: Westview Press.
Blossfeld, Hans-Peter, and Yossi Shavit. 2000. “Persisting Barriers: Changes in Educational Opportunities in Thirteen Countries.” Pp. 245-260 in The Structure of Schooling: Readings in Sociology of Education, edited by Richard Arum and Irenee R. Beattie. California, Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Blossfeld, Hans-Peter and Sonja Drobnič. 2001. Careers of Couples inContemporty Society: From Male Breadwinner to Dual-Earner Families. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blossfeld, Hans-Peter and Andreas Timm. 2003. Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies: A Comparison of Thirteen Countries. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Loïc J. D. Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bozon, M. and F. Héran. 1989. “Finding a Spouse: A Survey of How French Couples Meet.” Population 44(1): 91-121.
Brines, Julie. 1994. “Economic Dependency, Gender, and Division of Labor at Home.” American Journal of Sociology 100: 652-688.
Brint, Steven. 1998. Schools and Societies. London: Pine Forge Press.
Bukodi, Erzsébet and Péter Róbert. 2003. “Who Marries Whom in Hungary?” Pp. 267-294 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burt, Ronald S. 1997. “The Contingent Value of Social Capital.” Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 339-365.
Burt, Ronald S. 1998. “The Gender of Social Capital.” Rationality and Society 10(1): 5-46.
Chan, Tak Wing and Brendan Halpin. 2000. “Who Marries Whom in Great Britain?” ISER Worker Paper Series from Institute for Social and Economic Research, No. 2000-12. Essex: Institute for Social and Economic Research.
Clogg, Clfford C. 1982. “Some Models for the Analysis of Association in Multiway Cross-Classification Having Ordered Categories.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 77: 803-815.
Craib, Ian. 1984. Modern Social Theory from Parsons to Habermas. Palgrave Macmillan. （丁庭宇譯，1991）《當代社會理論》。台北：桂冠。
Coleman, James S. 1988. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology 94: s95-s120.
Coleman, James S. 1990. “Social Capital.” Pp. 300-321, in Foundation of Social Theory, by Coleman. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Coleman, James S. 1991. “Matching Processes in the Labor Market.” Acta Sociologica 34: 3-12.
Corijn, Martine. 2003. “Who Marries Whom in Flemish Belgium?” Pp. 267-294 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
De Graaf, Nan Dirk, and Hendrik Dere Flap. 1988. “With a Little Help from My Friends: Social Resources as an Explanation of Occupational Status and Income in West Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States.” Social Forces 67(2): 452-472.
De Graaf, Nan Dirk, Wilma Smeenk, Wout Ultee, and Andreas Timm. 2003. “The When and Whom of First Marriage in the Netherlands.” Pp. 79-111 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
DiMaggio, Paul and John Mohr. 1985. “Cultural Capital, Educational Attainment, and Martial Selection.” American Journal of Sociology 90: 1231-1261.
Durkheim, Emile. 1984. The Division of Labor in Society. London: Ｍacmillan.
Eckland, Bruce K. 1968. “Theories of Mate Selection.” Eugenics Quarterly 15: 71-84.
Egebeen, D. J. and A. J. Hawkins. 1990. “Economic Need and Wives Employment.” Journal of Family Issue 11: 48-66.
Erikson, Robert and John H. Goldthorpe. 1992. The Constant Flux. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ermisch, John and Francesconi. 2002. “Intergenerational Social Mobility and Assortative Mating in British.” IZA Discussion Paper from Institute for the Study of Labor, No. 465. Bonn: Institute for the Study of labor.
Esteve, A., and C. Cortina. 2006. “Changes in Educational Assortative Mating in Contemporary Spain.” Demographic Research 14(17): 405-428.
Eve, Michael. 2002. “Is Friendship a Sociological Topic?” European Journal of Sociology 43: 386-409.
Featherman, David L. and Robert M. Hauser. 1978. Opportunity and Change. New York: Academic Press.
Feld, Scott. 1981. “The Focused Organization of Social Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 86: 1015-1035.
Feld, Scott. 1984. “The Structured Use of Personal Networks.” Social Forces 62: 640-652.
Giddens, Anthony. 1992. The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity.
Gigerenzer, Gerd, Peter M. Todd, and ABC Research Group (eds.). 1999. Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldthorpe, John H. 1980. Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain. New York: Oxford University Press.
Goode, William J. 1959. “The Theoretical Importance of Love.” American Sociological Review 24(1): 38-47.
Goodman, Leo A. 1979. “Some Multiplicative Models for the Analysis of Occupational Mobility Tables and Other Kinds of Cross-Classification Tables.” American Journal of Sociology 84: 804-819.
Goodman, Leo A. 1981. “Criteria for Determining Whether Certain Categories in a Cross-Classification Table Should be Combined with Special Reference to Occupational Categories in an Occupational Mobility Table.” American Journal of Sociology 87: 612-650.
Goodman, Leo A. 1984. The Analysis of Cross-Classified Data Having Ordered Categories. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Goux, Dominique and Eric Maurin. 2003. “Who Marries Whom in France?” Pp. 57-79 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78: 1360-1380.
Granovetter, Mark. 1983. “The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited.” Sociological Theory 1: 201-233.
Granovetter, Mark. 1985. “Economic Action and Social Structure: the Problem of Embeddedness.” American Journal of Sociology 91: 481-510.
Han, Hongyun. 2010. “Trends in Educational Assortative Marriage in China from 1970 to 2000.” Demographic Research 22: 733-770.
Halpin, Brendan, and Tak Wing Chan. 2003. “Educational Homogamy in Ireland and Britain: Trends and Patterns.” British Journal of Sociology 54(4): 473-495.
Hanushek, Eric A., and John E. Jackson. 1977. Statistical Methods for Social Science. Academic Press.
Houston, S., R. Wright, M. Ellis, S. Holloway, and M. Hudson. 2005. “Places of Possibility: Where Mixed-Race Partners Meet.” Progress in Human Geography 29(6): 700-717.
Hout, Michael and Thomas DiPrete. 2006. “What We Have Learned: RC28’s Contributions to Knowledge about Social Stratification.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 24: 1-20.
Huckfeldt, R. Robert. 1983. “Social Context, Social Networks, and Urban Neighborhoods: Environmental Constraints on Friendship Choices.” American Journal of Sociology 89: 651-669.
Hwang, Sean-Shong, Rogelio Saenz, and Benigno E. Aguirre. 1994. “Structural and Individual Determinants of Outmarriage among Chinese, Filipino, and Japanese Americans in California.” Sociological Inquiry 64:396-414.
Jagger, Elizabeth. 2001. “Marketing Molly and Melville: Dating in a Postmodern, Consumer Society.” Sociology 35(1): 39-57.
Jamieson, Lynn. 1998. Intimacy: Personal Relationships in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity.
José, María and González López. 2003. “Who Marries Whom in Spain?” Pp. 141-170 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Johnson, Robert Alan. 1987. Religious Assortative Marriage in the United States. New York: Academic Press.
Jones, F. L. 1987. “Marriage Patterns and the Stratification System: Trends in Educational Homogamy since the 1930s.” Journal of Sociology 23(2): 185-198.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1991a. “Status Homogamy in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 97(2): 496-523.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1991b. “Shifting Boundaries: Trends in Religious and Educational Homogamy.” American Sociological Review 56(6): 786-800.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1993. “Trends in Black/White Intermarriage.” Social Forces 72(1): 119-146.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1994. “Assortative Mating by Cultural and Economic Occupational Status.” American Journal of Sociology 100(2): 422-452.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1998. “Intermarriage and Homogamy: Causes, Patterns, and Trends.” Annual Review of Sociology 24: 395-421.
Kalmijn, Mathijs. 2006. “Educational Inequality and Family Relationships: Influences on Contact and Proximity.” European Sociological Review 22(1): 1-16.
Kalmijn, Matthijs and Henk Flap. 2001. “Assortative Meeting and Mating: Unintended Consequences of Organized Setting for Partner Choices.” Social Forces 79: 1289-1312.
Kam, Cindy D. and Robert J. Franzese. 2007. Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor, Michagan: University of Michigan Press.
Katrňák, Tomáš, Martin Kreidl, and Laura Fónadová. 2004. “Has the Post-Communist Transformation Led to an Increase in Educational Homogamy in the Czech Republic after 1989?” Czech Sociological Review 40(3): 297-318.
Katrňák, Tomáš, Martin Kreidl, and Laura Fónadová. 2006. “Trends in Educational Assortative Mating in Central Europe: The Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, and Hungary, 1988-2000.” European Sociological Review 22(3): 309-322.
Katrňák, Tomáš, Peter Fucik, and Ruud Luijkx. Forthcoming. “The Relationship between Educational Homogamy and Educaional Mobility in 29 European Countries.” International Sociology. Prepublished Mar/27/2012. DOI: 10. 1177/0268580911423045
Kerckhoff, Alan C. 1995. “Institutional Arrangements and Stratification Processes in Industrial Societies.” Annual Review of Sociology 15: 323-347.
Kinnear, Paul R. and Colin D. Gray. 1999. SPSS for Windows Made Simple (3 ).Psychology Press.
Lampard, Richard. 2007. “Couples’ Places of Meeting in Late 20PthP Century Britain: Class, Continuity and Change.” European Sociological Review 23(3): 357-371.
Lareau, Annette. 2003. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Laumann, Edward O. 1973. Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks. New York: J. Wiley.
Lawton, Leora, Merril Silverstein, and Vern L. Bengtson. 1994. Affection, Social Contact, and Geographic Distance Between Adult Children and their Parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family 56: 57–68.
Leth-Sørensen, Søren. 2003. “Who Moves Together with Whom in Denmark?” Pp. 213-234 in Who Marries Whom? Educational Systems as Marriage Markets in Modern Societies, edited by Hans-Peter Blossfeld and Andreas Timm. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lews, Susan K. and Valerie Kincade Oppenheimer. 2000. “Educational Assortative Mating across Marriage Market: Non-Historic White in the United States.” Demography 37(1): 29-40.
Lichter, Daniel T. 1990. “Delayed Marriage, Marital Homogamy, and the Mate Selection Process among White Women.” Social Science Quarterly 71(4): 802-811.
Lichter, Daniel T., Robert N. Anderson, and Mark D. Hayward. 1995. “Marriage Market and Marital Choice.” Journal of Family Issues 16:412-431.
Liefbroer, A. C. and M. Corijn. 1999. “Who, What, Where, and When? Specifying the Impact of Educational Attainment and Labour Force Participation on Family Formation.” European Journal of Population 15: 45–75.
Lin, Nan, Walter M. Ensel, and John C. Vaughn. 1981. “Social Resources and Strength of Ties: Structural Factors in Occupational Attainment Process.” American Sociological Review 46(4): 393-405.
Lin, Nan. 2001. Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge University Press.
Liu,Haoming and Jingfeng Lu. 2006. “Measuring the Degree of Assortative Mating.” Economic Letters 92: 317-322.
Litwak, Eugene 1960. Occupational Mobility and　Extended Family Cohesion. American Sociological Review 25: 9–21.
Long, Scott J., and Jeremy Frees. 2003. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. College Station, Tex.: Stata Press.
Mare, Robert D. 1980. “Social Background and Social Continuation Decisions.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 75: 295-305.
Mare, Robert D. 1991. “Five Decades of Educational Assortative Mating.” American Sociological Review 56: 15-32.
Mare, Robert D. 2000. “Assortative mating, Intergenerational Mobility, and Educational Inequality.” On-line Working Paper Series from California Center for Population Research, 004-00. Los Angeles: California Center for Population Research.
Mare, Robert D. and Christina R. Schwartz. 2006. “Educational Assortative Mating and the Family Background of the Next Generation.” Sociological Theory and Methods 21(2): 253-278.
Marini, Margaret M. 1985. “Determinants of the Timing of Adult Role Entry.” Social Science Research 14: 309-350.
Marsden, Peter. 1990. “Network Diversity, Substructures, and Opportunities for Contact.” Pp. 397-410 in Structures of Power and Constraint, edited by Craig Calhoun, Marshall W. Meyer, and W. Richard Scott. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marsden, Peter, and Jeanne S. Hurlbert. 1988. “Social Resources and Mobility Outcomes: A Replication and Extension.” Social Forces 66(4): 1038-1059.
Meyer, David, Achim Zeileis, and Kurt Hornik. 2006. “The Strucplot Framework: Visualizing Multi-Way Contingency Tables with vcd.” Journal of Statistical Software 17(3): 1-48.
McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M Cook. 2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology 27:415-444.
Michielutte, Robert. 1972. “Trends in Educational Homogamy.” Sociology of Education 45: 288-302.
Mollenhorst, Gerald, Beate Völker, and Henk Flap. 2008. “Social Contexts and Personal Relationships: The Effect of Meeting Opportunities on Similarity for Relationships of Different Strength.” Social Network 30(1): 60-68.
Oppenheimer, Valerie Kincade. 1988. “A Theory of Marriage Timing.” American Journal of Sociology 94(3): 563-591.
Oppenheimer, Valerie Kincade. 1994. “Women’s Rising Employment and the Future of the Family in Industrial Societies.” Population and Development Review 20(2):293-342.
Oppenheimer, Valerie Kincade. 1997. “Women’s Employment and the Gain to Marriage: The Specialization and Trading Model.” Annual Review of Sociology 23: 431-453.
Oppenheimer, V.K. 1988. “A Theory of Marriage Timing: Assortative Mating Under Varying Degrees of Uncertainty.” American Journal of Sociology 94(3): 563-591.
Park, Mee-Hae. 1991. “Pattern and Trends of Educational Mating in Korea.” Korea Journal of Population and Development 20(2): 1-16.
Park, Hyunjoon and Jeroen Smits. 2005. “Educational Assortative Mating in South Korea: Trends 1930-1998.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 23: 103-127.
Parkin, Frank. 1971. Class Inequality and Political Order: Social Stratification in Capitalist and Communist Societies. New York: Praeger.
Parkin, Frank. 1974. The Social Analysis of Class Structure. London: Tavistock Publications.
Persons, Talcott. 1949. The Structure of Social Action. Gelencoe: Free Press.
Pencavel, John. 1998. “Assortative Mating by Schooling and the Work Beavior of Wives and Husbands.” Anerican Economic Review 88: 326-329.
Powers, Daniel A. and Yu Xie. 2000. Statistical Methods for Categorical Data Analysus. San Diego: Academic Press.
Qian, Zhenchao and Samuel H. Preston. 1993. “Changes in American Marriage, 1972 to 1987: Availability and Forces of Attraction by Age and Education.” American Sociological Review 58: 482-495.
Qian, Zhenchao. 1998. “Changes in Assortative Mating: The Impact of Age and Education, 1970-1990.” Demography 35(3): 279-292.
Raftery, Adrian E. 1986. “Choosing Models for Cross-Classifications.” American Sociological Review 51: 145-146.
Raley, R. Kelley and Jenifer Bratter. 2004. “Not Even if You were the Last Persons on Earth! How Marital Search Constraints Affect the Likelihood of Marriage.” Journal of Family Issues 25: 167-181.
Raymo, James M. and Yu Xie. 2000. “Temporal and Regional Variation in the Strength of Educational Homogamy.” American Sociological Review 63: 773-781.
Rockwell, Richard C. 1976. “Historical Trends and Variations in Educational Homogamy.” Journal of Marriage and Family 38(1): 83-95.
Rose, Elaina. 2001. Marriage and Assortative Mating: How Have the Patterns Changed? Working Paper No. 22, University of Washington, WA: Seattle.
(http://www.csss.washington.edu/Paper/wp22.pdf)
Rosenfeld, Michael J. 2008. “Racial, Educational, and Religious Endogamy in the United States: A Comparative Historical Perspective.” Social Forces 87(1): 1-32.
Schwartz, Christine R., and Robert D. Mare. 2005. “Trends in Educational Assortative Marriage from 1940 to 2003.” Demography 42(4): 621-646.
Simmel, Georg. 1950. “The Web of Group Affiliations.” Pp. 125-195 in Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations. Glencoe: Free Press.
Shafter, Kevin, and Zhenchao Qian. 2010. “Marriage Timing and Educational Assortative Mating.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 41:661-691.
Shavit, Y. and W. Műller. 1998. From School to Work. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
Simon, Herbert A. 1956. “Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment.” Psychological Review 63(2): 129-138. Reprinted in Simon 1982b.
Simon, Herbert A. 1982. Models of Bounded Rationality. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Simon, Herbert A. 1955. “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 69: 99-118.
Simon, Herbert A. 1987. “Bounded Rationality.” Pp. 266-268 in The New Palgrave, edited by J. Eatwell et al. London: Maemillan.
Smith, Daniel Scott. 1973. “Parental Power and Marriage Patterns: An Analysis of Historical Trends in Hingham, Massachusetts.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 35(3): 419-428.
Smits, Jeroen, Wout Ultee, and Jan Lammers. 1998. “Educational Homogamy in 65 Countries: An Explanation on Differences in Openness Using Country-Level Explanatory Variables.” American Sociological Review 63: 264-285.
Smits, Jeroen Wout Ultee, and Jan Lammers. 2000. “More or Less Educational Homogamy? A Test of Different Versions of Modernization Theory Using Cross-Temporal Evidence for 60 Countries.”American Sociological Review 65: 773-781.
Smits, Jeroen. 2003. “Social Closure among the Higher Educated: Trends in Educational Homogamy in 55 Countries.” Social Science Research 32(2): 251-277.
Smits, Jeroen and Hyunjoon Park. 2009. “Five Decades of Educational Assortative Mating in 10 East Asian Societies.” Social Forces 88(1): 227-255.
Sewell, William H. and Robert M. Hauser. 1980. “The Wisconsin Longitudinal Study of Social and Psychological Factors in Aspirations and Achievements.” Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization 1: 59-99.
Treiman, Donald. 1977. Occupational Prestige in Comparative Perspective. New York: Academic Press.
Tsai, Shu-Ling, Hill Gate, and Hei-Yuan Chiu. 1994. “Schooling Taiwan’s Women: Educational Attainment in the Mid-20PthP Century.” Sociology of Education 67(4): 243-263.
Tsai, Shu-Ling. 1996. “The Relative Importance of Ethnicity and Education in Taiwan’s Change Marriage Market.” Proceedings of Humanities and Social Science 6(2): 301-315.
Tsay, Ruey-Ming. 1996. “Who Marries Whom? The Associations between Wives’ and Husbands’ Educational Attainment.” Proceedings of Humanities and Social Science 6(2): 258-277.
Tsay, Ruey-Ming, and Li-Hsueh Wu. 2006. “Marrying Someone from an Outside Group: An Analysis of Boundary-Crossing Marriage in Taiwan.” Current Sociology 54(2): 165-186.
Thompson, Laura A. 2009. R (and S-PLUS) Manual to Accompany Agresti’s Categorical Data Analysis (2002) 2 edition.
(http://home.comcast.net/~lthompson221/Splusdiscrete2.pdf)
Thornton, Arland, William G. Axinn, and Jay D. Teachman. 1995. “The Influence of School Enrollment and Accumulation on Cohabitation and Marriage in Early Adulthood.” American Sociological Review 60(5): 762-774.
Thornton, Arland, Jui-Shan Chang, and Hui-Sheng Lin. “Form Arranged Marriage toward Love Match.” Chapter 6 in Social Change and the Family in Taiwan, edited by Arland Thornton and Hui-Sheng Lin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Turner Heather and David Firth. 2011. Generalized Nonlinear Models in R: An Overview of the GNM Package.
(http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gnm/vignettes/gnmOverview.pdf)
Tzeno,Meei-Shenn. 1992. “The Effects of Socioeconomic Hetergamy and Changes on Marital Dissolution for First Marriages.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 54:609-619.
Van Bavel, Jan, Hilde Peeters, Koen Matthijs. 1998. “Connections Between Intergenerational and Marital Mobility.” Historical Methods 31(3): 122-134.
Vermmunt, Jeroen. 1997. LEM: A General Program for the Analysis of Categorical Data. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University.
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Socioety: An Outline of Interpretive Sociolgy. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Whyte, Martin King. 1995. “From Arranged Marriage to Love Matches in Urban China.” Pp. 33-83 in Family Formation and Dissolution: Perspectives from East and West, edited by Chin-Chun Yi. Taipei: Sun Yat-Sen Institute for Social Sciences and Philosophy.
Wong, Raymond Sin-Kwok. 2003. “To See or Not to See: Another Look at Research on Temporal Trends and Cross-National Differences in Educational Homogamy.” 《台灣社會學刊》31: 47-91。
Ultee, Wout C. and Ruud Luijkx. 1990. “Educational Hetergamy and Father-to-Son Occupational Mobility in 23 Industrial Nations.” European Sociological Review 6(2): 125-149.
Uunk, Wilfred J. G., Harry B. G. Ganzeboom, and Péter Róbert. 1996. “Bivariate and Multivariate Scaled Association Models. An Application to Homogamy of Social Origin and Education in Hungary between 1930 and 1979.” Quality and Quanity 30: 323-343.
Xiaohe, Xu and Martin King Whyte. 1990. “Love Matches and Arranged Marriages: A Chinese Replication.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 52: 709-722.
Xie, Yu. 1992. “The Log-Multiplicative layer Effect Model for Comparing Mobility Tables.” American Sociological Review 57: 380-395.
Yamaguchi, Kazuo. 1987. “A Methodological Inquiry into Social Mobility.” American Sociological Review 29: 16-23.