• Vienna Institute of Demography (Ed.)

Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 2011

Bild

Introduction
Maria Rita Testa, Tomás Sobotka and Philip S. Morgan: Reproductive decision-making: towards improved theoretical, methodological and empirical approaches.
Demographic Debate
S. Philip Morgan and Christine A. Bachrach: Is the Theory of Planned Behaviour an appropriate model for human fertility?
Warren B. Miller: Comparing the TPB and the T-D-I-B framework
Jennifer Barber: The Theory of Planned Behaviour: considering drives, proximity and dynamics
Dimiter Philipov: Theories on fertility intentions: a demographer's perspective
Jane Klobas: The Theory of Planned Behaviour as a model of reasoning about fertility decisions
Aart C. Liefbroer: On the usefulness of the Theory of Planned Behaviour for fertility research
Icek Ajzen: Reflections on Morgan and Bachrach's critique
Christine A. Bachrach and S. Philip Morgan: Further reflections on the Theory of Planned Behaviour and fertility research
Refereed Articles
Warren B. Miller: Differences between fertility desires and intentions: implications for theory, research and policy
Máire Ní Bhrolcháin and Éva Beaujouan: Uncertainty in fertility intentions in Britain, 1979–2007
Saskia Hin, Anne Gauthier, Joshua Goldstein and Christoph Bühler: Fertility preferences: what measuring second choices teaches us
Maria Rita Testa, Laura Cavalli and Alessandro Rosina: Couple´s childbearing behaviour in Italy: which of the partners is leading it?
Nicoletta Balbo and Melinda Mills: The influence of the family network on the realisation of fertility intentions
Markus Kotte and Volker Ludwig: Intergenerational transmission of fertility intentions and behaviour in Germany: the role of contagion
David De Wachter and Karel Neels: Educational differentials in fertility intentions and outcomes: family formation in Flanders in the early 1990s
Clémentine Rossier, Sara Brachet and Anne Salles: Family policies, norms about gender roles and fertility decisions in France and Germany
Anna Rotkirch, Stuart Basten, Heini Väisänen and Markus Jokela: Baby longing and men's reproductive motivation
Anna Baranowska and Anna Matysiak: Does parenthood increase happiness? Evidence for Poland
Data and Trends (non-refereed contributions)
Jennifer S. Barber, Yasamin Kusunoki and Heather Gatny : Design and implementation of an online weekly survey to study unintended pregnancies
Beatrice Chromková Manea and Petr Fucík: Couples disagreement about fertility preferences and family-friendly policy measures in the Czech Republic

Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Austrian Academy of Sciences Press
A-1011 Wien, Dr. Ignaz Seipel-Platz 2
Tel. +43-1-515 81/DW 3420, Fax +43-1-515 81/DW 3400
https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at, e-mail: verlag@oeaw.ac.at

Bestellung/Order


Bild
Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 2011
ISSN 1728-4414
Print Edition
ISSN 1728-5305
Online Edition
ISBN 978-3-7001-7235-2
Print Edition
ISBN 978-3-7001-7252-9
Online Edition



Send or fax to your local bookseller or to:

Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Austrian Academy of Sciences Press
A-1011 Wien, Dr. Ignaz Seipel-Platz 2,
Tel. +43-1-515 81/DW 3420, Fax +43-1-515 81/DW 3400
https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at, e-mail: bestellung.verlag@oeaw.ac.at
UID-Nr.: ATU 16251605, FN 71839x Handelsgericht Wien, DVR: 0096385

Bitte senden Sie mir
Please send me
 
Exemplar(e) der genannten Publikation
copy(ies) of the publication overleaf


NAME


ADRESSE / ADDRESS


ORT / CITY


LAND / COUNTRY


ZAHLUNGSMETHODE / METHOD OF PAYMENT
    Visa     Euro / Master     American Express


NUMMER

Ablaufdatum / Expiry date:  

    I will send a cheque           Vorausrechnung / Send me a proforma invoice
 
DATUM, UNTERSCHRIFT / DATE, SIGNATURE

BANK AUSTRIA CREDITANSTALT, WIEN (IBAN AT04 1100 0006 2280 0100, BIC BKAUATWW), DEUTSCHE BANK MÜNCHEN (IBAN DE16 7007 0024 0238 8270 00, BIC DEUTDEDBMUC)
Bild

REFEREED ARTICLES - Differences between fertility desires and intentions: implications for theory, research and policy

    Warren B. Miller

Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 2011, pp. 75-98, 2012/02/02

doi: 10.1553/populationyearbook2011s75


PDF
X
BibTEX-Export:

X
EndNote/Zotero-Export:

X
RIS-Export:

X 
Researchgate-Export (COinS)

Permanent QR-Code

doi:10.1553/populationyearbook2011s75


Abstract

In previous research I have theorised that there is a three-step motivational sequence that drives fertility behaviour, beginning with motivational traits, continuing with fertility desires and concluding with fertility intentions. In this article I focus on four properties of fertility desires and intentions, examining some recent research findings that bear on the similarities and differences between these two constructs. The four properties include the degree to which either construct has direct genetic antecedents, the degree to which either construct directly predicts behaviour, what type of dimension is used to measure each construct, and the effects that each construct has on the individual’s satisfaction with being pregnant. The findings regarding these four properties suggest that fertility desires are intermediate between two evolutionally distinct motive systems that drive reproductive behaviour. The findings also suggest additional research questions that require further pursuit. Finally, the findings inform certain fertility-related policy issues, in particular the gap between desired or intended fertility and actual fertility.

Published Online: 2012/02/02 15:14:21

Object Identifier: 0xc1aa5572 0x002a70f5

Document viewed: Calculating...

Rights: All rights reserved. For questions regarding copyright and copies please contact us by email.

REFERENCES Adsera, A. 2006. An economic analysis of the gap between desired and actual fertility: the case of Spain. Review of the Economics of the Household 4(1).Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50: 179-211.Ajzen, I. 2005. Attitudes, personality, and behaviour. Second edition, Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Open University Press.Barber, J.S., W.B. Miller and H.H. Gatny 2010. The desire to become pregnant and the desire to avoid pregnancy: ambivalence, indifference, pronatalism and antinatalism. Paper presented at the REPRO conference “From intentions to behaviour: reproductive decision-making in a macro-micro perspective”, Vienna, Austria, 2-3 December 2010. http://www.oeaw.ac.at/vid/in2b, accessed on 1 January 2011.Cacioppo, J.T. and G.G. Berntson 1994. Relationships between attitudes and evaluative space: a critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin 115(3): 401-423.Chesnais, J.-C. 2000. Determinants of below replacement fertility. In Below replacement fertility. Population Bulletin of the United Nations, Special Issue 1999, 40/41: 126-136.Davidson, R.J., W. Irwin 1999. The functional neuroanatomy of emotion and affective style. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3(1): 11-21.Goldstein, J., W. Lutz and M. R. Testa 2003. The emergence of subreplacement family size ideals in Europe. Population Research and Policy Review 22: 479-496.Hagewen, K. J. and S. P. Morgan 2005. Intended and ideal family size in the United States, 1970-1998. Population and Development Review 31(3): 507-527.Heckhausen, J. and R. Schultz 1995. A life-span theory of control. Psychological Review 102: 284-304.Heiland, F., A. Prskawetz and W. Sanderson 2008. Are individuals’ desired family sizes stable? Evidence from West German panel data. European Journal of Population 24(2): 129-156.Iacovou, M and L.P. Tavares 2010. Yearning, learning and conceding: (some of) the reasons people change their childbearing intentions. Institute for Social and Economic Research Working Paper 2010(22). University of Essex. Available at www.iser.essex.ac.ukJorescog, K.G. and D. Sorbom 1996. LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Lee, R. 1980. Aiming at a moving target: period fertility and changing reproductive goals. Population Studies 34(2): 205-226.Liefbroer, A.C. 2009. Changes in family size intentions across young adulthood: a lifecourse perspective. European Journal of Population 25(4): 363-386.McQuillan, J., A.L. Greil and K.M. Shreffler 2011. Pregnancy intentions among women who do not try: focusing on women who are okay either way. Maternal and Child Health Journal 15: 178-187.Miller, W.B. 1986. Proception: an important fertility behavior. Demography 23(4): 579-594.Miller, W.B. 1994. Childbearing motivations, desires, and intentions: a theoretical framework. Genetic, Social, and General Psychological Monographs 120(2):223-258.Miller, W.B. 1995. Childbearing motivation and its measurement. Journal of Biosocial Science 27: 473-485.Miller, W.B. 2007. The interaction of positive and negative childbearing desires: a graphic model. Available at www.tfri.orgMiller, W.B. 2011. Why we have children: building a unified theory of the reproductive mind. Available at www.tfri.orgMiller, W.B. and D.J. Pasta 1993. Motivational and nonmotivational determinants of child-number desires. Population and Environment 15(2): 113-138.Miller, W.B. and D.J. Pasta 1994. The psychology of child timing: a measurement instrument and a model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 24(3): 221-250.Miller, W.B. and D.J. Pasta 1995. How does childbearing affect fertility motivations and desires? Social Biology 42(3-4): 185-198.Miller, W.B. and D.J. Pasta 1996. The relative influence of husbands and wives on the choice and use of oral contraception, a diaphragm, and condoms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 26: 1749-1774.Miller, W.B. and J. Jones 2009. Modeling the motivational antecedents to pregnancy intendedness and wantedness in the 2002 NSFG. Journal of Population Research 26(4): 327-357.Miller, W.B. and J.L. Rodgers 2001. The ontogeny of human bonding systems. Boston: Kluwer.Miller, W.B., D.E. Bard, D.J. Pasta and J.L. Rodgers 2010b. Biodemographic modeling of the links between fertility motivation and fertility outcomes in the NLSY79. Demography 47(2): 393-414.Miller, W.B., D.J. Pasta and J.L. Rodgers 2010a. The fertility motivations of youth predict later fertility outcomes: a prospective analysis of NLSY data. Biodemography and Social Biology 56(1): 1-23.Miller, W.B., D.J. Pasta, J. MacMurray, D. Muhleman and D.E. Comings 2000. Genetic influences on childbearing motivation: further testing a theoretical model. In Genetic. influences on human fertility and sexuality, ed. J.L. Rodgers, D.C. Rowe and W.B. Miller, 35-66. Boston: Kluwer.Miller, W.B., L.J. Severy, and D.J. Pasta 2004. A framework for modeling fertility motivation in the dyad. Population Studies 58(2): 193-205.Neale, M.C., S.M. Boker, G. Xie and H.H. Maes 2003. Mx: Statistical modeling. Sixth edition, Richmond, Department of Psychiatry, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityNí Bhrolcháin, M.N., E. Beaujouan and A. Berrington 2010. Stability and change in fertility intentions in Britain, 1991-2007. Population Trends 141: 1-23.Philipov, D., O. Thévenon, J. Klobas, L. Bernardi and A.C. Liefbroer 2009. Reproductive decision-making in a macro-micro perspective (REPRO): a state of the art review. A working paper of the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme under the Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities theme. Available at http://www.oeaw.ac.at/vid/download/edrp_1_09.pdfRolls, E.T. 1999. The brain and emotion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Sheeder, J., S.B. Teal, L.A. Crane and C. Stevens-Simon 2010. Adolescent childbearing ambivalence: Is it the sum of its parts? Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology 23: 86-92.Zabin, L.S. 1999. Ambivalent feelings about parenthood may lead to inconsistent contraceptive use and pregnancy. Family Planning Perspectives 31: 250-251.