Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany Matthias Pollmann-Schult Abstract: This article examines the association between parenthood and life satis- faction. It focuses on the question to which extent parental life satisfaction is infl u- enced by individual and familial context. The empirical study is based on the data from the fi rst wave of the German Family Panel (pairfam). All in all, the analyses show that although parents are less satisfi ed with their leisure time, their social contacts and their relationship, they are nonetheless more satisfi ed with their life in general than their childless peers. Increased life satisfaction is observed in par- ticular in the fi rst years following the birth of a child. The satisfaction of parents is, however, dependent upon different contextual factors. Parents in the medium and higher income ranges report a comparatively high degree of life satisfaction, whereas only a weak association is observed between parenthood and life satisfac- tion among low-income persons. Moreover, the life satisfaction of mothers, but not of fathers, varies with their employment status. For instance, only non-employed and part-time employed mothers report a greater life satisfaction than childless women. Finally, fathers whose family formation was presumably unplanned record no higher level of satisfaction than men without children. Keywords: Life satisfaction · Parenthood · Happiness 1 Introduction Familial events such as starting a family are central status passages in the life course, which bring about an extensive restructuring of lifestyles. They affect, for example, employment, the use of leisure time and the social participation. The transition to parenthood can have both positive and negative effects on the various spheres of life (cf. Nomaguchi/Milkie 2003). On the one hand, starting a family can be a stressful event accompanied by restrictions to one’s own needs and interests. Fathers and mothers often report a lower marital satisfaction (Keizer et al. 2010; Twenge et al. 2003) and a greater psychological distress (Ross/van Willigen 1996) than childless people. Furthermore, Comparative Population Studies – Zeitschrift für Bevölkerungswissenschaft Vol. 38, 1 (2013): 85-108 (Date of release: 14.03.2013) © Federal Institute for Population Research 2013 URL: www.comparativepopulationstudies.de DOI: 10.4232/10.CPoS-2013-05en URN: urn:nbn:de:bib-cpos-2013-05en6 • Matthias Pollmann-Schult86 starting a family causes a decline in leisure activities away from home (Knoester/ Eggebeen 2006; Pollmann-Schult 2010). In spite of the diverse stressful effects of parenthood, we frequently also ob- serve an increase – at least temporarily – in general life satisfaction after starting a family (Kohler et al. 2005; Pollmann-Schult 2010; Myrskylä/Margolis 2012). The happiness-enhancing effect of children is usually explained by the fact that children satisfy a variety of their parent’s psychological needs. The Value of Children (VOC) approach (Nauck 2001) ties in with the social production function theory (Ormel et al. 1999) and postulates that parents attempt to use having children to maximise both their social and physical well-being. In modern societies, children contribute mainly to optimising social well-being, in other words, by having children, close, intimate and long lasting social relationships are created that satisfy the parents’ emotional needs. Also, children can be a status symbol that generates social es- teem. Finally, children can promote the social integration of their parents, since par- enthood results in opportunities for new social contacts and social involvement. For example, the institutional participation of a child in kindergarten, school or a sports club often demands the civic engagement of fathers and mothers and gen- erates new opportunities for contact with other parents (Eggebeen/Knoester 2001; Knoester/Eggebeen 2006). The question arises, however, whether an increase in life satisfaction following the start of a family is lasting or instead of a temporary nature. The dominant ex- planatory approaches in happiness research – i.e. the adaptation level theory (Brick- man/Campell 1971) and the set point theory (Headey/Wearing 1989) – grasp life satisfaction as a time-constant individual trait. According to empirical studies, life satisfaction is chiefl y infl uenced by personality traits such as neuroticism and ex- traversion that remain stable over time (Diener/Lucas 1999). All in all, it is assumed that signifi cant life events only temporarily alter the subjective well-being and that after a certain time span it again approximates the original level of satisfaction. Corresponding studies do show that major life events only infl uence the level of satisfaction for a shorter term (Lucas et al. 2003; Clark et al. 2008). For instance, matrimony only has a positive effect on life satisfaction during the fi rst years of mar- riage (Stutzer/Frey 2006), but even negative events such as divorce or the death of a partner have a relatively short-term effect on the subjective well-being (Andreß/ Bröckel 2007; Lucas et al. 2003). With regard to the effect of parenthood on life sat- isfaction, we can therefore anticipate that an increased level of satisfaction can be mainly found during the fi rst years after the birth of a child. In this article, parental life satisfaction is seen against different contextual fac- tors such as the income situation, participation in employment and family planning. Moreover, I examine the extent to which biological children and stepchildren infl u- ence their parents’ level of satisfaction in different ways. Although we use a caus- al language, the available data allow us to examine only the association between parenthood and life satisfaction. The following second section outlines the current state of research with regard to the effects of parenthood on life satisfaction. Then in the third section, I describe the data basis and methodical procedure. The fourth section presents fi ndings on the association between subjective well-being and par- Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 87 enthood, and the fi fth section discusses methodological problems of the analysis. In the last section, the results are discussed. 2 Parenthood and Life Satisfaction Although in the past two decades life satisfaction has enjoyed an enormous inter- est, the association between fertility and life satisfaction has hardly been explicitly examined in either German-language or in international studies. Many studies on subjective well-being take the existence of children into account as one of many ex- planatory variables. This particularly applies to longitudinal studies that investigate how crucial life events – marriage, divorce, death of a spouse, unemployment and the birth of a child – affect life satisfaction. Usually, these studies reveal an increase in life satisfaction in the time period of the birth of a child and an ensuing decrease from the child’s fi rst birthday (Clark et al. 2008; Frijters et al. 2011; Clark/Georgellis 2012; Angeles 2010). Some of these studies observe a drop in life satisfaction be- low the pre-birth level and conclude that parenthood in the long-term has a nega- tive effect on the subjective well-being (Clark et al. 2008; Clark/Georgellis 2012). Such a long-term negative effect is ascribed to a decrease in shared leisure time with the partner (Claxton/Perry-Jenkins 2008) and an increase in marital confl icts (Nomaguchi/Milkie 2003) and depression (Evenson/Simon 2005). However, the above-mentioned longitudinal studies do not take into considera- tion that the effect of parenthood on life satisfaction can vary with the individual and the familial context. This study therefore pursues the question to which extent parental life satisfaction is infl uenced by context factors. First, the life satisfaction of fathers and mothers may differ. Frequently, the as- sumption is made that starting a family has a more negative effect on women’s lifestyles and well-being than on men’s (Nomaguchi/Milkie 2003; Umberson/Grove 1989). Nomaguchi and Milkie ascribe this to the fact that mothers do a greater share of the housework and family-related work and experience greater problems rec- onciling family and work than fathers. Contradictory to this view, however, various studies reveal a greater increase in life satisfaction after starting a family among women than among men (Clark et al. 2008; Kohler et al. 2005; Myrkylä/Margolis 2012; Clark/Georgellis 2012). Parental life satisfaction also varies with the marital status. For example, single parents report a considerably lower life satisfaction than the childless (Aassve et al. 2011; Frey/Stutzer 2000). The lesser life satisfaction of single parents appears to result mainly from fi nancial problems and psychological stress, which are observed among this group of persons at above-average frequency. An enduring cohabitation or marriage is apparently a basic prerequisite for an increase in life satisfaction fol- lowing the start of a family. Moreover, the life satisfaction of parents can be infl uenced by the income and employment situation. Children bring about high fi nancial costs, which are particu- larly stressful for low-income households. For instance, Bird (1997) argues that chil- dren as such do not impair the psychological well-being of parents, but primarily • Matthias Pollmann-Schult88 the economic and social burdens that accompany the starting of a family (cf. also Ross/van Willigen 1996). Even though fi nancial stress among German parents are lessened by social benefi ts such as child allowances or parental leave benefi ts and the fi ndings of US studies cannot be transferred to German circumstances without further ado, we can nonetheless assume that starting a family has a more positive effect on the life satisfaction of high-earning couples than of low-income couples. Differences in life satisfaction also exist with regard to the employment status of the parents. Among dual-income couples, parental child-raising and childcare tasks lead to an increased work–life imbalances (Winslow 2005) and can therefore lessen marital satisfaction and exacerbate marital confl ict (Claxton/Perry-Jenkins 2008). Since parents in single-earner households are subjected to such a dual burden to a lesser extent, we can expect that these people demonstrate a greater life satisfac- tion than parents in dual-income households. Working mothers, who often do the larger share of housework and family-related work alongside their gainful employ- ment (Grunow et al. 2007), are affected by work–life confl icts to a special extent. We therefore anticipate that mothers in dual-income households will report a low level of satisfaction. Among fathers, who frequently only do a small share of the house- hold work, life satisfaction by contrast should be infl uenced by the employment arrangement only to a low extent. Finally, the life satisfaction of parents can vary with the type of kinship relation to the child as well as family planning. For example, parent-child confl icts, which can impair subjective well-being, are observed more frequently in stepfamilies (Schlomer et al. 2010). In fact, various studies indicate that parents of stepchildren are less satisfi ed than parents of only biological children (Kohler et al. 2005; Rog- ers/White 1998). Also, the life satisfaction of parents can depend on whether they planned to start a family or whether their families were unplanned. Unplanned fami- lies have a negative effect on the quality of parental relationships (Cox et al. 1999) and the subjectively perceived distress (Leathers/Kelley 2000). In particular, unwant- ed children can have long-term negative consequences on life satisfaction (Barber et al. 1999). All in all, we anticipate parents of stepchildren reporting a lesser life satisfaction than parents with exclusively biological children and unplanned families leading to a lower level of satisfaction than planned families. 3 Data, Operationalisation and Method 3.1 Data basis The data from the German Family Panel (pairfam), supervised by Josef Brüderl, Jo- hannes Huinink, Bernhard Nauck and Sabine Walper (Huinink et al. 2011) is used for the following analyses. The pairfam study is designed as an annually recurring sur- vey and is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) as a long-term project. In the fi rst survey wave conducted in 2008/09 approximately 12,000 young people and adults from the birth cohorts 1971-1973, 1981-1983 and 1991-1993 were inter- viewed. At the time of the fi rst survey, therefore, the respondents were 15-17, 25-27 Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 89 and 35-37 years old. In addition to the 12,402 anchors, 3,729 partners of the anchors were also interviewed, whose responses on life satisfaction are not, however, taken into account in this study. The pairfam study focuses on surveying information on intimate relationships, having children and on parent-child relationships. Further- more, the study records information on general life satisfaction, as well as marital satisfaction or leisure satisfaction. Moreover, the dataset contains basic information on labour market participation and income. In the following, cross-sectional analyses are conducted using the data from the fi rst survey wave. It is therefore not possible to adequately control for selection effects and to clearly determine the causal direction of the association between parenthood and life satisfaction. Following the discussion of results, I will talk about the implications resulting from this. The analysis is limited to the data from the two older cohorts, hence that of the 25-27 and 35-37-year-old respondents as well as to women and men with a heterosexual partner. Therefore, single parents are not included in the analyses. In addition, people with adult children as well as childless couples that are physically unable to have children and people with only modest or poor German skills are excluded from the analysis. Ultimately, the analysis is restricted to childless people and parents living together with their children in one household. Restricting the survey sample to coupled men and women who do not live apart from their children avoids possible confounding between parenthood and marital status. However, this also means that the analyses do not enable any conclusions about the life satisfac- tion of single parents or parents living apart from their children. The data of the birth cohorts 1981-1983 and 1971-1973 are pooled in the analy- ses. To take into account the disproportionate stratifi ed sample and the systematic nonresponse, the design weighting recommended by Brüderl et al. (2010) is used in all analyses. 3.2 Operationalisation and method The key explanatory variable of the study is the life satisfaction of the respondents. Life satisfaction is based upon an assessment of their own lives (Diener/Lucas 1999; Diener et al. 1999). It results from a judgment process in which an individual evalu- ates his or her quality of life according to his or her own chosen criteria. Therefore, life satisfaction is a purely cognitive construct and independent of moods, how- ever it is usually impossible to clearly differentiate between a momentary mood and life satisfaction in empirical research. Life satisfaction as well as satisfaction with leisure time, the relationship and social contacts were surveyed in the pair- fam study using an 11-point scale (0 = very dissatisfi ed; 10 = very satisfi ed). The measurement of satisfaction in the pairfam study largely corresponds to that used by the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) and other representative population surveys. In happiness research, life satisfaction is frequently measured using multi- item scales, however various studies show that the measurement of satisfaction us- ing one single item also generates reliable and valid results. For instance, Lucas and Donnellan (2012) use the longitudinal information on life satisfaction in the SOEP • Matthias Pollmann-Schult90 to calculate a reliability of 0.74. Abdel-Khalek (2006) reports of a high test-retest reliability (r = 0.86) in measuring life satisfaction by means of a single-item scale at one-week intervals. Furthermore, Abdel-Khalek describes a satisfactory correlation between the single-item scale and established multi-item scales such as the Oxford Happiness Inventory (r = 0.63) and the Satisfaction with Life Scale (r = 0.58), which indicates a good criterion validity of the single-item scale. The main covariate of the analysis is the familial situation. It is portrayed in the various models through the existence of parenthood or the age of the youngest child. Other important covariates are the employment status, the income situation, the type of kinship relation to the child and family planning. The different catego- ries of the employment status are the non-employed, part-time employed (up to 30 hours per week) and full-time employed (30 hours per week and more). In order to account for the income situation, the respondents are divided into four income groups using the household equivalent income. Based on the categorisation of the “Datenreport” (Statistisches Bundesamt 2011), the following income groups are formed: less than 75 % of the mean household equivalent income (poverty and precarious prosperity), 75-100 % of the mean household equivalent income (lower and medium income range), 100-125 % of the mean household equivalent income (medium to upper income range) and over 125 % of the mean household equivalent income (upper income range). The average household equivalent income in 2009 was exactly € 1499 (Statistisches Bundesamt 2011). With regard to the type of kinship relation between parents and children, three groups are differentiated: respondents with only biological children of both part- ners, respondents with at least one stepchild, and respondents with at least one biological child from an earlier relationship.1 Family planning was not explicitly sur- veyed in the pairfam study, so this is indicated based on the time the partners com- menced cohabitation. In the following, a family is referred to as “unplanned” when the partners commenced cohabitation following conception – or 9 months before the birth of the fi rst child. A family is referred to as “planned” when the partners began cohabitating before conception. Although the validity of the indicator used is limited, in particular because unplanned pregnancies can also occur in married or cohabitating couples, all in all we can assume that an unplanned pregnancy occurs far more frequently if the couple is not yet living together at the time of conception. The average life satisfaction of women and men differentiated according to primary socio-demographic variables is shown in Table 1. Furthermore, various control variables are taken into account, their coeffi cients are, however, not reported here. Relevant tables that also show the coeffi cients of the control variables are to be found in the appendix. I control for the birth co- hort (1971-1973, 1981-1983), the region (Eastern Germany, Western Germany), the respondent or their partner being pregnant, the migration background (no migra- tion background, the fi rst immigrant generation, the second immigrant generation), 1 In fi ve cases, both partners brought a child from an earlier relationship into the current relation- ship. These persons were not included in this stage of the analysis. Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 91 the educational level (in training, no certifi cation, apprentice certifi cate, vocational school, university of applied science, university degree), the occupational class based on the Goldthorpe class scheme (7 classes) as well as for the employment status (employed, in training, non-employed, unemployed) and for the subjectively perceived health (poor, not good, satisfactory, good, very good). The personality Tab. 1: Average life satisfaction of women and men differentiated according to socio-demographic variables Women Men Mean SD Mean SD Parenthood No children 7.8 1.6 7.7 1.5 At least 1 child 7.9 1.6 7.7 1.6 Income position a No children, max. precarious prosperitya 7.5 1.5 7.5 1.8 Children, max. precarious prosperitya 7.6 1.8 7.3 1.9 No children, lower to medium income rangeb 7.6 1.5 7.5 1.5 Children, lower to medium income rangeb 7.9 1.6 7.8 1.4 No children, medium to upper income rangec 7.6 1.8 7.8 1.3 Children, medium to upper income rangec 8.0 1.4 8.0 1.4 No children, upper income ranged 8.0 1.5 8.1 1.2 Children, upper income ranged 8.3 1.3 8.1 1.4 Employment arrangement No children, man full-time, woman non-employed 7.9 1.6 7.6 1.7 No children, man full-time, woman part-time 7.3 1.9 7.6 1.4 No children, man full-time, woman full-time 7.8 1.6 7.9 1.4 Children, man full-time, woman non-employed 8.0 1.7 7.8 1.6 Children, man full-time, woman part-time 7.9 1.5 8.0 1.5 Children, man full-time, woman full-time 7.7 1.7 7.7 1.6 Type of relationship to the children Only biological children 7.9 1.6 7.6 1.7 At least 1 stepchild: respondent 7.7 1.7 7.3 1.4 At least 1 stepchild: partner 7.6 1.7 7.7 1.6 Family planning „Planned” family 7.9 1.6 7.8 1.6 „Unplanned” family 7.8 1.7 7.5 1.6 SD = Standard Deviation a lower than 75 % of the mean equivalent net income (max. 1124 €); b 75-100 % of the mean equivalent net income (1125 €-1499 €); c 101-125 % of the mean equivalent net income (1500 €-1875 €); d over 125 % of the mean equivalent net income (over 1875 €). Source: pairfam, author’s calculations • Matthias Pollmann-Schult92 traits surveyed in the fi rst pairfam survey (explosiveness and anger, emotional au- tonomy, self-worth, shyness) are also incorporated. All four scales are composed of three items each (Walper et al. 2010). The Cronbach’s alpha of these four scales ranges between 0.63 and 0.80 (Walper et al. 2010: 55), so that the internal consist- ency of the scales can be assessed as satisfactory. The information on the level of satisfaction is ordinal and analysed using ordered logit regression (cf. e.g. Long/Freese 2003). Due to the skewed distribution of the satisfaction data, instead of the more common logit-link function, the complemen- tary log-log link function was used. The tables show the non-standardised β coef- fi cients. Almost all of the regression models are estimated separately for women and men. Possible differences in the effect size between men and women are checked using the test method designed by Williams (2009) to compare logit coeffi cients. 4 Results In a fi rst step, we look at the effect of parenthood on satisfaction with leisure time, the relationship, social contacts and general life satisfaction (Table 2). As can be seen in the fi rst model, mothers as well as fathers report a lesser satisfaction with leisure time than childless women and men. Furthermore, fathers record a lesser satisfaction with social contacts and mothers a lesser marital satisfaction compared to people without children. The coeffi cients of the fi nal models, however, indicate that mothers and fathers experience a signifi cantly greater life satisfaction than childless people. In general, these fi ndings confi rm the results of earlier studies: although starting a family apparently leads to confl icts and tensions in the relation- ship and greatly limits opportunities for leisure time activities, parenthood appears to have a positive infl uence on the general satisfaction with life. In the second step, we now look at the life satisfaction of parents depending on the age of the children (Fig. 1). Due to the low number of cases in the individual age classes, a combined model is estimated for women and men. In accord with the as- sumptions of the set-point theory, there is an increased level of life satisfaction espe- cially among young parents, whereby a particularly high degree of life satisfaction is observed during the fi rst year of the youngest child’s life. A distinctly increased level of life satisfaction is only observed until the third birthday of the youngest child, and from the sixth birthday, the difference in life satisfaction between parents and child- less people is only minor and no longer statistically signifi cant. The assumptions of the set-point theory also include anticipation effects, meaning that life satisfac- tion ought to increase during pregnancy. For instance, the analyses by Clark et al. (2008) reveal a signifi cantly increased life satisfaction in the year before the birth of a child. This effect cannot be ascertained, however, in the analyses conducted here. Although the coeffi cient for pregnancy is positive in all model estimations, it is not statistically signifi cant (cf. the tables in the appendix). The next step of the analysis looks at the life satisfaction of parents depending on the household income (Table 3). Since the psychological costs of parenthood Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 93 can be intensifi ed by the fi nancial burdens related to having children (Bird 1997), we can assume that low-income parents will report a comparatively low life satisfac- tion. In order to check this, separate analyses for four income groups are conducted. As can be recognized in the fi rst model, there is no signifi cant effect of parenthood on life satisfaction among people living in poverty or precarious prosperity, thereby confi rming the assumption of lower life satisfaction among low-income parents. By contrast, among women and men in the medium and higher income ranges there is a signifi cantly positive association between the family situation and life sat- isfaction. Surprisingly, the effect of parenthood on life satisfaction is strongest in the lower to medium income range, whereas this effect is also statistically signifi cant yet less pronounced in the two upper income ranges. Possibly this comparatively weak association between parenthood and life satisfaction among high-income people is due to a higher percentage of dual-income couples among them. Parents in dual- income households experience work–life imbalances between work and family far more frequently than working parents whose partners are non-employed (Winslow 2005). In fact, in the upper income groups dual-income households are overrepre- sented, whereas single earner households are underrepresented. In the group of parents with an above-average household equivalent income, the percentage of du- al-income couples is 20 % and the percentage of single earner households is 36 %. By contrast, among parents with a below-average household equivalent income, Tab. 2: Effect of parenthood on subjective well-being, separate estimates for women and men (ordered logit regression) Satisfaction with leisure time Satisfaction with social contacts Marital satisfaction Life satisfaction Women Mother (vs. childless) -0.2823** 0.0477 -0.2144 * 0.1616** Number of cases 2728 2729 2705 2731 LR Chi2 (Df=30) 174.97** 206.67 ** 257.09 ** 433.77** Men Father (vs. childless) -0.3123** -0.2549 ** 0.1158 0.1360* Number of cases 2196 2196 2173 2197 LR Chi2 (Df=30) 187.12** 239.75 ** 209.55 ** 386.24** Likelihood ratio test: coefficient „mother” vs. coefficient „father” LR Chi2 (Df=1) 1.00 8.83 ** 17.53 ** 0.00 Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Control variables: birth cohort, region, interaction term „birth cohort x region”, wife/part- ner pregnant, migration background, educational level, vocational situation, personality traits, health. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations • Matthias Pollmann-Schult94 both partners are employed full-time in only 13 % of the households, while in 46 % of the households only the man is gainfully employed. We can assume that gainful employment of both partners is more of a burden for mothers than for fathers, since women do most of the family work even when they are employed full-time and are therefore subject to multiple burdens of gainful employment, housework and child- care, whereas the time spent by fathers doing housework hardly increases once they start a family (Haberkern 2007). The results displayed in Table 4 now explicitly account for the employment ar- rangement within the relationship while also controlling for income. The analysis sample is limited to the most common employment arrangement. Since the pairfam dataset contains only a few non-employed fathers (105 persons) as well as fathers in marginal or part-time employment (36 persons), the following analysis is restricted to men who are employed full-time. Due to the number of cases, women with a non- employed or part-time employed partner are also not included. The reference group are women or men in a childless, dual-income relationship. As the calculations for women show (Table 4), non-employed mothers report a signifi cantly greater life satisfaction than the reference group (full-time employed Fig. 1: Effect of the age of the youngest child on life satisfaction (ordered logit regression, coeffi cients and 95 % confi dence interval) -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0 1 2 3 4 year of life = p<0,05 = p<0,1 9-11 7-8 5-6 12-18 Reference group: Childless women/men. Control variables: birth cohort, region, interaction term „birth cohort*region”, wife/partner pregnant, migration background, educational level, vocational situation, personality traits, health. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 95 Tab. 3: Effect of parenthood on life satisfaction differentiated according to the household income (ordered logit regression) Max. precarious prosperitya Lower to medium income rangeb Medium to upper income rangec Higher income ranged Father/mother (vs. childless) 0.0878 0.2877** 0.2791* 0.2302* Number of cases 1332 928 737 966 Chi2 (Df=31) 276.94** 206.23** 160.75** 226.32** Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. a equivalent net income between 0 and lower than 75 %; b equivalent net income 75-100 %; c equivalent net income 101-125 %; d equivalent net income >125 % Control variables: gender, birth cohort, region, interaction term „birth cohort*region”, wife/partner pregnant, migration background, educational level, vocational situation, per- sonality traits, health. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations Tab. 4: Effect of parenthood on life satisfaction differentiated according to employment arrangement (ordered logit regression) Women Men Likelihood ratio test „women” vs. „men” No children, man full-time, woman non-employed 0.1648 -0.0296 0.17 No children, man full-time, woman part-time -0.0237 -0.1815 0.10 No children, man full-time, woman full-time (ref.) - - Children, man full-time, woman non-employed 0.4220** 0.0346 11.10** Children, man full-time, woman part-time 0.2359** 0.1069 1.03 Children, man full-time, woman full-time 0.1449 -0.0207 0.02 Number of cases 1921 1427 Chi2 (Df=28) 398.74** 258.06** Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Control variables: birth cohort, region, interaction term „birth cohort*region”, wife/partner pregnant, income situation, migration background, educational level, personality traits, health. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations • Matthias Pollmann-Schult96 childless women). Mothers in part-time employment also report a signifi cantly higher level of satisfaction; however the effect size is distinctly lesser. By contrast, full-time working mothers are not signifi cantly more satisfi ed than full-time working childless women. All in all, the assumption that mothers in dual-income relation- ships experience a comparatively low level of satisfaction is affi rmed. Apparently, only non-employed and part-time employed women experience an increase in life satisfaction as a result of parenthood. The fi nding that mothers in dual-income re- lationships are less satisfi ed than mothers in traditional relationships with a male single earner concurs with earlier fi ndings by van Schoor and Seyda (2011). The corresponding analyses for men, by contrast, show that the employment ar- rangement within the relationship does not infl uence the life satisfaction of fathers. The comparatively high level of satisfaction of fathers in dual-income relationships can be explained by the fact that they are less often subjected to a dual burden of paid and unpaid work than their employed female partners. Finally, we will look at the life satisfaction of parents depending on their type of kinship relation to the child and on family planning (Table 5). In the upper model of Table 5, mothers and fathers with exclusively biological children are the reference group. As we can see, these parents are signifi cantly more satisfi ed than childless women and men. However, parents who live in a household with stepchildren are not signifi cantly less happy than parents with exclusively biological children. Al- though stepfamilies suffer more from familial confl icts, it seems that the type of kin- ship relationship to the child does not essentially infl uence the general life satisfac- tion of the parents. However, women who live with a stepchild and men who bring a biological child into the relationship exhibit a comparatively low life satisfaction. This is not the case for men with a stepchild or women with a biological child from an earlier relationship. Possibly there are greater confl icts and lesser life satisfaction for both partners when the man brings a child from an earlier relationship into the new family. The lower model of Table 5 examines the extent to which family planning has an infl uence on the life satisfaction of parents. Fathers and mothers who presumably planned to start a family exhibit a signifi cantly greater life satisfaction than child- less parents. By contrast, fathers with a presumed unplanned family are not more satisfi ed than childless men. These results concur with the expectations. However, mothers who we can assume did not plan their family also exhibit a signifi cantly greater life satisfaction than childless women. Possibly, an unplanned family only has a negative effect on the life satisfaction of fathers, but not of mothers. This gender difference could be due to the fact that compared to men, women less often perceive unplanned families as unwanted. Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 97 5 Correlation or Causality: Methodological Problems of the Analysis The analyses are based on cross-sectional data, so that the causal direction of the observed association cannot be determined empirically. In concrete terms, the anal- yses presented here have two serious problems that prevent a causal interpretation of the results. The fi rst is the problem of reverse causality. The fi ndings presented here might not be a result of parenthood having a causal affect on the life satisfac- tion, but an increase in life satisfaction might rather infl uence the decision to start a family. The second is that the results may be biased by unobserved heterogeneity, in that unobserved personality traits mark both the level of satisfaction as well as affect the probability of transition to parenthood, although in fact there is no causal association between parenthood and life satisfaction. The methodological problems outlined here can be met by the use of suitable longitudinal analysis methods. Using fi xed effects regressions practically eliminates biases caused by time-constant unobserved heterogeneity. A comparison of the results of cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses therefore indicates to which ex- tent the results of cross-sectional analyses are able to refl ect the causal effect of Tab. 5: Effect of the type of kinship relation and family planning on life satisfaction (ordered logit regression) Women Men Likelihood ratio test „women” vs. „men” Type of relationship to the children No children -0.1665** -0.1555** 0.03 Only biological children (ref.) - - At least 1 stepchild: respondent -0.2249 -0.0345 0.63 At least 1 stepchild: partner -0.0041 -0.3263 2.93+ Number of cases 2708 2151 Chi2 (Df=32) 441.34** 366.89** Family planning No children (ref.) - - „Planned” family 0.1474** 0.1661* 0.29 „Unplanned” family 0.2733* 0.0278 3.24+ Number of cases 2708 2151 Chi2 (Df=31) 453.62** 370.57** Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Control variables: birth cohort, region, interaction term “birth cohort*region”, wife/partner pregnant, migration background, educational level, vocational situation, personality traits, health. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations • Matthias Pollmann-Schult98 parenthood on life satisfaction. Both analysis techniques produce similar results. The studies by Frijters et al. (2011) for Australia as well as by Myrkylä and Margolis (2012) for Germany and Great Britain observe an increase in life satisfaction at the time of the birth of a child and a decrease after the child’s fi rst birthday for OLS as well as fi xed effects estimates. Furthermore, for the longitudinal panel regressions for Germany, Myrskylä and Margolis (2012) report greater positive effects than for the cross-sectional OLS regressions, which indicates that cross-sectional analyses for Germany do not overestimate, but underestimate a positive effect of parent- hood on life satisfaction. Hansen (2012: 40) discusses these fi ndings and states, “It seems unlikely that reverse causation or unobserved third factors (e.g., personality traits) are accounting for cross-sectional associations between parental status and well-being.” The results of longitudinal studies therefore indicate that the fi ndings in this ar- ticle demonstrate a causal effect of parenthood on life satisfaction. However, the coeffi cients for small children shown here are far greater than the coeffi cients re- ported in earlier longitudinal studies. There are at least two reasons for this. Firstly, we cannot exclude that the effect size of the coeffi cients shown here may have been overestimated due to insuffi cient control for unobserved heterogeneity. Secondly, the analyses conducted here only include parents in a relationship, whereas earlier longitudinal studies did not make any such restriction and also included single, di- vorced and widowed parents. Having children may well have a far lesser positive effect on the subjective well-being of this group of people than on coupled people (Hansen 2012). Finally, I would like to point out again that due to the restriction of the sample to people between the ages of about 25 and 35 years in this study, primarily parents with young children are observed. Thus, almost half of the mothers and fathers in- cluded in the analyses have a child of a maximum of 2 years of age. The presented results therefore primarily allow for conclusions about the life satisfaction of par- ents of young children in a relationship. 6 Conclusions Most family sociology studies indicate that starting a family can have both positive as well as negative effects on the lives of the parents. While relevant studies from the 1980s and 1990s mainly focus on the negative effects of parenthood – in particu- lar the drop in relationship satisfaction (cf. Nomaguchi/Milkie 2003; Twenge et al. 2003) – more recent studies give more attention to the positive effect of parenthood on the subjective well-being. The analyses also reveal a positive association between parenthood and life satisfaction. Nonetheless, the life satisfaction of parents depends on a variety of contextual factors. For instance, unlike the predictions of the „value of children” approach, children only appear to signifi cantly infl uence the life satisfaction during their fi rst years of life. This result affi rms the assumptions of the set-point theory, Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 99 whereby incisive life events only increase or reduce the level of satisfaction tempo- rarily. Other contextual factors taken into account were the income situation, the em- ployment arrangements, the type of kinship relation as well as family planning. On the one hand, parental life satisfaction varies distinctly with the available household income. Parents living in poverty or in precarious prosperity are not more satisfi ed than their childless peers, whereas in the medium and higher income ranges we can observe a distinct association between parenthood and life satisfaction. However, in the upper income group there is a weaker association between parenthood and the level of satisfaction than in the medium income groups. This fi nding is appar- ently due to the fact that an over-proportional number of high-income mothers and fathers live in dual-income households and therefore suffer from work–life imbal- ances to a greater extent. This association between work strain and life satisfaction is observed more frequently among mothers. While non-employed mothers are dis- tinctly more satisfi ed than childless women, full-time working mothers experience no higher level of satisfaction than women without children. Furthermore, the analyses revealed that familial factors such as the type of kin- ship relation between parents and children or family planning only slightly infl u- ence the life satisfaction of parents. Hence, biological parents report no signifi cantly greater life satisfaction than parents living in a household with stepchildren. Further- more, mothers whose families were presumably unplanned are not less satisfi ed than mothers who consciously planned to start a family. However, fathers whose families were presumably unplanned report a comparatively low life satisfaction. Finally, these fi ndings illustrate that the data from the German Family Panel are very well suited for the analysis of the psychological consequences of parenthood. This study not only recorded subjective well-being more precisely than many other data surveys, but also familial processes and contexts. Although the data surveyed so far do not allow for any reliable causal analyses, corresponding longitudinal anal- yses ought to be conducted once information is available from a suffi cient number of survey waves. References Aassve, Arnstein; Goisis, Alice; Sironi, Maria 2011: Happiness and childbearing across Europe. In: Social Indicators Research, im Druck [doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9866-x]. Abdel-Khalek, Ahmed M. 2006: Measuring happiness with a single-item scale. In: Social Behavior and Personality 34,2: 139-150 [doi: 10.2224/sbp.2006.34.2.139]. Andreß, Hans-Jürgen; Bröckel, Miriam 2007: Income and life satisfaction after mari- tal disruption in Germany. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 69,2: 500-512 [doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00379.x]. Angeles, Luis 2010: Adaptation and anticipation effects to life events in the United King- dom. SIRE-DP-2010-01 Glasgow: Scottish Institute for Research in Economics. Barber, Jennifer S.; Axinn, William G.; Thornton, Arland 1999: Unwanted childbearing, health, and mother-child relationships. In: Journal of Health and Social Behavior 40,3: 231-257 [doi: 10.2307/2676350]. • Matthias Pollmann-Schult100 Bird, Chloe E. 1997: Gender differences in the social and economic burdens of parenting and psychological distress. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 59,4: 809-823 [doi: 10.2307/353784]. Brickman, Philip; Campell, Donald T. 1971: Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In: Appley, Mortimer H. (Eds.): Adaptation level theory: a symposium. New York: Academic Press: 287-302. Brüderl, Josef et al. 2010: pairfam Data Manual. Wave 1. Mannheim: MZES. Clark, Andrew E.; Georgellis, Yannis 2012: Back to baseline in Britain: Adaptation in the BHPS. Discussion Paper No. 6426 Bonn: IZA. Clark, Andrew E.; Diener, Ed; Georgellis, Yannis; Lucas, Richard E. 2008: Lags and leads in life satisfaction: a test of the baseline hypothesis. In: Economic Journal 118,529: F222-F243 [doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02150.x]. Claxton, Amy; Perry-Jenkins, Maureen 2008: No fun anymore: leisure and marital qual- ity across the transition to parenthood. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 70,1: 28-43 [doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00459.x]. Cox, Martha J.; Paley, Blair; Burchinal, Margaret; Payne, C. Chris 1999: Marital percep- tions and interactions across the transition to parenthood. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 61,3: 611-625 [doi: 10.2307/353564]. Diener, Ed; Lucas, Richard E. 1999: Personality and subjective well-being. In: Kahneman, Daniel; Diener, Ed; Schwarz, Norbert (Eds.): Well-being. The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russel Sage Foundation: 213-229. Diener, Ed; Suh, Eunkhook M.; Lucas, Richard E.; Smith, Heidi L. 1999: Subjective well-being: three decades of progress. In: Psychological Bulletin 125,2: 276-302 [doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.125.2.276]. Eggebeen, David J.; Knoester, Chris 2001: Does fatherhood matter for men? In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 63,2: 381-393 [doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00381.x]. Evenson, Ranae J.; Simon, Robin W. 2005: Clarifying the relationship between parent- hood and depression. In: Journal of Health and Social Behavior 46,4: 341-358 [doi: 10.1177/002214650504600403]. Frey, Bruno S.; Stutzer, Alois 2000: Happiness, economy and institutions. In: Economic Journal 110,466: 918-938 [doi: 10.1111/1468-0297.00570]. Frijters, Paul; Johnston, David W.; Shields, Michael A. 2011: Life satisfaction dynamics with quarterly life event data. In: Scandinavian Journal of Economics 113,1: 190-211 [doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9442.2010.01638.x]. Grunow, Daniela; Schulz, Florian; Blossfeld, Hans-Peter 2007: Was erklärt die Traditio- nalisierungsprozesse häuslicher Arbeitsteilung im Eheverlauf: soziale Normen oder ökonomische Ressourcen? In: Zeitschrift für Soziologie 36,3: 162-181. Haberkern, Klaus 2007: Zeitverwendung und Arbeitsteilung in Paarhaushalten. In: Zeit- schrift für Familienforschung 19,2: 159-185. Hansen, Thomas 2012: Parenthood and happiness: a review of folk theories versus em- pirical evidence. In: Social Indicators Research 108,1: 26-64 [doi: 10.1007/s11205-011- 9865-y]. Headey, Bruce; Wearing, Alex 1989: Personality, life events, and subjective well-being: toward a dynamic equilibrium model. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57,4: 731-739 [doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.731]. Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 101 Huinink, Johannes et al. 2011: Panel Analysis of Intimate Relationships and Family Dy- namics (pairfam): Conceptual framework and design. In: Zeitschrift für Familienfor- schung 22,1: 77-100. Keizer, Renske; Dykstra, Pearl A.; Poortman, Anne-Rigt 2010: The transition to parent- hood and well-being: the impact of partner status and work hour transitions. In: Jour- nal of Family Psychology 24,4: 492-438 [doi: 10.5559/di.21.2.03]. Knoester, Chris; Eggebeen, David J. 2006: The effects of the transition to parenthood and subsequent children on men’s well-being and social participation. In: Journal of Family Issues 27,11: 1532-1560 [doi: 10.1177/0192513X06290802]. Kohler, Hans-Peter; Behrman, Jere R.; Skytthe, Alex 2005: Partner + children=happiness? The effects of partnerships and fertility on well-being. In: Population and Develop- ment Review 31,3: 407-445 [doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2005.00078.x]. Leathers, Sonya J.; Kelley, Michele A. 2000: Unintended pregnancy and depressive symptoms among fi rst-time mothers and fathers. In: American Journal of Orthopsy- chiatry 70,4: 523-531 [doi: 10.1037/h0087671]. Long, J. Scott; Freese, Jeremy 2003: Regression models for categorial dependent vari- ables using stata. College Station: Stata Press. Lucas, Richard E.; Clark, Andrew E.; Georgellis, Yannis; Diener, Ed 2003: Reexamin- ing adaptation and the set point model of happiness: reactions to changes in mari- tal status. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84,3: 527-539 [doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.527]. Lucas, Richard E.; Donnellan, M. Brent 2012: Estimating the reliability of single-item life satisfaction measures: Results from four national panel studies. In: Social Indicators Research 105,3: 323-331 [doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9783-z]. Myrskylä, Mikko; Margolis, Rachel 2012: Happiness: Before and after the kids. MPIDR Working Paper WP2012-013. Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Re- search. Nauck, Bernhard 2001: Der Wert von Kindern für ihre Eltern. „Value of Children“ als spe- zielle Handlungsstrategie des generativen Verhaltens und von Generationenbeziehun- gen im interkulturellen Vergleich. In: Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsy- chologie 53,3: 407-435 [doi: 10.1007/s11577-001-0073-7]. Nomaguchi, Kei M.; Milkie, Melissa A. 2003: Costs and rewards of children: the effects of becoming a parent on adult’s lives. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 65,2: 356-374 [doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00356.x]. Ormel, Johan; Lindenberg, Siegwart; Steverink, Nardi; Verbrugge, Lois M. 1999: Sub- jective well-being and social production functions. In: Social Indicators Research 46,1: 61-90 [doi: 10.1023/A:1006907811502]. Pollmann-Schult, Matthias 2010: Auswirkungen der Vaterschaft auf die Lebenszufrie- denheit, Freizeitaktivitäten und familiäre Beziehungen. In: Zeitschrift für Familienfor- schung 22,3: 350-369. Rogers, Stacy J.; White, Lynn K. 1998: Satisfaction with parenting: the role of marital happiness, family structure, and parents’ gender. In: Journal of Marriage and the Fam- ily 60,2: 293-308 [doi: 10.2307/353849]. Ross, Catherine E.; van Willigen, Marieke 1996: Gender, parenthood, and anger. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 58,3: 572-584 [doi: 10.2307/353718]. Schlomer, Gabriel L.; Ellis, Bruce J.; Garber, Judy 2010: Mother-child confl ict and sibling relatedness: a test of hypotheses from parent-offspring confl ict theory. In: Journal of Research on Adolescence 20,2: 287-306 [doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00641.x]. • Matthias Pollmann-Schult102 Statistisches Bundesamt 2011: Datenreport 2011. Zahlen und Fakten über die Bundesre- publik Deutschland. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Stutzer, Alois; Frey, Bruno S. 2006: Does marriage make people happy, or do happy people get married? In: Journal of Socio-Economics 35,2: 326-347 [doi: 10.1016/j. socec.2005.11.043]. Twenge, Jean M.; Campell, W. Keith; Foster, Craig A. 2003: Parenthood and marital sat- isfaction: a meta-analytic review. In: Journal of Marriage and the Family 65,3: 574-583 [doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00574.x]. Umberson, Debra; Grove, Walter R. 1989: Parenthood and psychological well-being: theory, measurement, and stage in the family life course. In: Journal of Family Issues 10,4: 440-462 [doi: 10.1177/019251389010004002]. van Schoor, Berta; Seyda, Susanne 2011: Die individuelle Perspektive: Die Zufriedenheit von Männern und Frauen mit Familie und Beruf. In: Althammer, Jörg et al. (Eds.): Wie viel Familie verträgt die moderne Gesellschaft? München: Roman Herzog Institut e.V.: 23-42. Walper, Sabine et al. 2010: pairfam Skalenhandbuch. Ankerpersonen-CAPI Welle 1. Ver- sion 1.0 vom 15.03.2010. Williams, Richard 2009: Using heterogeneous choice models to compare logit and pro- bit coeffi cients across groups. In: Sociological Methods & Research 37,4: 531-559 [doi: 10.1177/0049124109335735]. Winslow, Sarah 2005: Work-family confl ict, gender, and parenthood, 1977-1997. In: Jour- nal of Family Issues 26,6: 727-755 [doi: 10.1177/0192513X05277522]. Translated from the original text by the Federal Institute for Population Research, for information only. The reviewed and author’s authorised original article in German is available under the title „Elternschaft und Lebenszufriedenheit in Deutschland”, DOI 10.4232/10.CPoS-2013-05de or URN urn:nbn:de:bib-cpos-2013-05de6, at http://www.comparativepopulationstudies.de. Date of submission: 02.02.2012 Date of Acceptance: 20.09.2012 PD Dr. Matthias Pollmann-Schult ( ). Wissenschaftszenrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), 10785 Berlin, Deutschland. E-Mail: matthias.pollmann-schult@wzb.eu URL: http://www.wzb.eu/de/personen/matthias-pollmann-schult Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 103 S ig n ifi c an ce le v e l: * * = p < 0 .0 1 ; * = p < 0 .0 5 ; + = p < 0 .1 . R e fe re n ce g ro u p s: a c h ild le ss ; b b ir th c o h o rt 1 9 8 0 -8 3 ; c n o m ig ra ti o n b ac kg ro u n d ; d u p p e r se rv ic e r an k; e h e al th : v e ry g o o d ; f u n iv e rs it y d e g re e . S o u rc e : p ai rf am , au th o r’ s ca lc u la ti o n s T a b . A 1: E ff e c t o f p a re n th o o d o n s u b je c ti v e w e ll- b e in g ( o rd e re d lo g it r e g re ss io n ) S at is fa ct io n w it h le is u re ti m e S at is fa ct io n w it h s o ci al co n ta ct s M ar it al s at is fa ct io n Li fe s at is fa ct io n W o m e n M e n W o m e n M e n W o m e n M e n W o m e n M e n F at h e r/ m o th e ra -0 .2 8 2 3 ** -0 .3 1 2 3 ** -0 .0 4 7 7 -0 .2 5 4 9 ** -0 .2 1 4 4 ** -0 .1 1 5 8 0 .1 6 1 7 ** 0 .1 3 6 0 * W o m an /p ar tn e r p re g n an t -0 .2 0 2 7 -0 .0 7 2 5 0 .0 6 7 8 -0 .1 2 4 7 0 .1 0 4 2 0 .2 2 3 0 + 0 .0 3 2 1 0 .1 2 5 1 E as te rn G e rm an y 0 .1 1 5 1 0 .1 0 5 0 0 .0 5 2 8 0 .0 8 3 2 -0 .0 3 3 1 0 .0 3 5 1 0 .0 7 6 3 0 .1 6 8 7 + B ir th c o h o rt : 1 9 7 0 -1 9 7 3 b 0 .0 9 5 1 -0 .0 4 7 5 -0 .1 0 7 7 -0 .2 2 0 8 + -0 .0 7 2 7 0 .2 8 4 7 * -0 .1 5 1 7 -0 .2 0 9 9 + B ir th c o h o rt *E . G e rm an y 0 .0 3 3 9 -0 .0 2 3 4 0 .0 4 0 6 0 .0 2 6 2 -0 .0 3 5 2 -0 .1 4 7 9 0 .1 5 6 2 0 .2 6 1 8 * 1 st im m ig ra n t g e n e ra ti o n c -0 .1 8 2 2 ** -0 .1 0 2 3 -0 .1 8 1 5 * 0 .0 0 8 0 0 .0 5 1 8 0 .3 1 5 1 ** 0 .0 1 7 8 0 .0 6 9 8 2 n d im m ig ra n t g e n e ra ti o n c -0 .0 2 3 0 0 .0 8 4 2 -0 .0 5 9 0 -0 .0 4 2 6 0 .0 3 3 3 0 .1 4 8 4 0 .0 8 8 6 -0 .0 0 3 3 Lo w e r se rv ic e r an kd 0 .1 2 1 5 0 .0 9 7 2 0 .1 6 8 7 + 0 .1 2 5 5 -0 .0 3 4 4 -0 .0 5 8 8 -0 .0 1 0 2 -0 .1 6 1 3 * N o n -m an u al r o u ti n e w o rk d 0 .0 6 4 9 0 .2 0 6 0 + 0 .2 0 5 8 * 0 .2 1 9 8 + 0 .1 5 1 2 -0 .1 4 1 9 0 .0 3 8 1 -0 .1 6 3 5 S e lf -e m p lo y e d d -0 .1 1 7 1 -0 .0 0 6 5 0 .2 3 1 6 -0 .0 7 5 6 -0 .0 7 4 1 -0 .2 6 6 4 + -0 .2 4 1 0 -0 .1 8 7 3 T e ch n ic ia n , su p e rv is o rd 0 .1 5 4 7 0 .0 0 9 8 0 .2 4 3 8 -0 .0 1 3 4 -0 .2 4 3 3 0 .0 4 3 1 0 .0 0 2 0 -0 .1 9 9 4 S ki lle d w o rk e rd 0 .1 1 9 2 0 .2 9 5 1 ** 0 .3 0 9 1 0 .2 9 3 1 ** 0 .1 9 2 2 0 .0 3 0 6 -0 .1 9 4 1 -0 .1 5 8 9 + U n sk ill e d a n d s e m i- sk ill e d w o rk e rd 0 .0 1 7 2 0 .1 7 0 9 + 0 .3 1 2 4 ** 0 .1 4 8 4 0 .0 5 0 5 0 .1 4 3 1 -0 .1 4 7 2 -0 .2 0 4 6 * P re se n tl y in t ra in in g d 0 .1 9 5 3 0 .0 4 6 8 0 .1 4 8 8 0 .1 7 3 3 -0 .1 1 8 3 -0 .0 7 1 4 -0 .0 0 0 5 -0 .2 4 6 5 * U n e m p lo y e d d 0 .1 2 6 6 0 .1 9 9 5 0 .2 0 5 5 0 .2 3 5 3 0 .1 9 5 4 0 .2 5 2 3 -0 .2 0 8 0 -0 .6 4 1 3 ** N o n -e m p lo y e d d 0 .1 0 5 0 0 .4 0 2 3 0 .1 6 6 0 + 0 .1 7 1 3 0 .2 3 7 9 * 0 .2 2 6 5 0 .1 9 0 4 * -0 .6 7 3 3 ** H e al th : p o o re 0 .0 5 1 4 -0 .1 3 7 2 0 .0 5 3 0 -0 .0 0 5 0 0 .2 1 2 4 -0 .4 0 3 3 + -0 .7 0 8 0 ** -0 .4 9 2 5 + H e al th : n o t g o o d e -0 .3 0 8 0 ** -0 .3 3 9 6 ** -0 .1 9 2 2 * -0 .0 1 8 0 -0 .3 5 9 9 ** -0 .1 7 0 2 -0 .4 9 1 8 ** -0 .4 7 5 6 ** H e al th : sa ti sf ac to ry e -0 .4 3 3 0 ** -0 .3 6 8 8 ** -0 .2 6 1 8 ** -0 .1 9 3 5 * -0 .2 4 0 1 ** -0 .3 5 6 6 ** -0 .5 3 7 4 ** -0 .6 2 2 7 ** H e al th : g o o d e -0 .2 5 8 4 ** -0 .2 0 0 6 ** -0 .1 3 0 1 * -0 .0 4 7 3 -0 .2 5 2 9 ** -0 .1 9 3 2 ** -0 .2 8 4 4 ** -0 .3 5 9 8 ** E d u ca ti o n : in t ra in in g f 0 .0 5 2 2 0 .1 2 6 9 0 .1 5 2 9 -0 .1 0 3 1 0 .1 8 2 2 -0 .1 0 8 8 0 .0 9 5 7 0 .0 5 4 6 E d u ca ti o n : n o c e rt if ic at io n f 0 .1 6 9 5 + 0 .0 6 4 9 0 .1 8 5 9 + 0 .1 8 8 7 0 .0 2 6 8 0 .1 9 9 7 -0 .0 4 3 6 0 .1 0 5 3 E d u ca ti o n : ap p re n ti ce c e rt if ic at e f 0 .0 9 5 3 0 .1 7 4 6 * 0 .1 3 2 6 + 0 .1 2 0 1 -0 .1 5 2 3 * 0 .0 8 2 6 -0 .0 9 0 1 0 .0 4 9 8 E d u ca ti o n : se co n d ar y e d u ca ti o n f 0 .1 1 8 0 0 .0 7 6 6 0 .1 2 6 0 0 .0 7 6 2 -0 .1 9 0 0 * -0 .0 9 0 6 -0 .0 9 6 6 -0 .0 4 1 7 E d u ca ti o n : v o ca ti o n al s ch o o lf -0 .0 2 6 3 0 .1 4 9 9 0 .1 0 5 8 0 .1 5 6 2 -0 .0 8 8 3 -0 .0 7 1 3 -0 .0 0 1 5 0 .0 6 0 8 E d u ca ti o n : u n iv . o f ap p lie d s ci e n ce f 0 .1 0 6 7 0 .0 7 9 3 -0 .0 0 5 3 0 .0 2 0 6 -0 .1 0 6 6 -0 .0 6 5 4 -0 .0 4 3 8 0 .1 4 5 5 P e rs o n al it y : e x p lo si v e n e ss -0 .0 1 3 6 + 0 .0 0 0 4 -0 .0 2 7 3 ** -0 .0 2 6 0 * -0 .0 5 7 9 ** -0 .0 5 5 8 ** -0 .0 3 9 2 ** -0 .0 5 1 5 ** P e rs o n al it y : e m o ti o n al a u to n o m y 0 .0 0 6 7 0 .0 4 2 2 ** 0 .0 1 7 3 0 .0 3 4 6 * 0 .0 1 4 2 0 .0 4 8 0 ** -0 .0 0 4 0 0 .0 3 5 7 ** P e rs o n al it y : se lf -w o rt h 0 .0 5 3 8 ** 0 .0 4 1 3 ** 0 .0 6 0 9 ** 0 .0 5 8 2 ** 0 .0 9 8 1 ** 0 .0 6 5 6 ** 0 .1 4 8 5 ** 0 .1 4 1 0 ** P e rs o n al it y : sh y n e ss -0 .0 2 3 6 * -0 .0 3 5 4 -0 .0 6 4 1 ** -0 .0 7 8 8 ** -0 .0 1 4 3 -0 .0 2 2 3 + -0 .0 3 9 9 ** -0 .0 1 3 4 Appendix • Matthias Pollmann-Schult104 Tab. A2: Effect of the age of the youngest child on life satisfaction (ordered logit regression) Women and Men Up to 1 year olda 0.2731** 1 to 2 years olda 0.1573* 2 to 3 years olda 0.0498 3 to 4 years olda 0.2034* 4 to 6 years olda 0.1345+ 6 to 8 years olda 0.1151 8 to 11 years olda 0.1040 11 to 18 years olda 0.0775 Man -0.1786** Woman/partner pregnant 0.0974 Eastern Germany 0.0968 Birth cohort: 1970-1973b -0.1819* Birth cohort*E. Germany 0.2288* 1st immigrant generationc 0.0627 2nd immigrant generationc 0.0601 Lower service rankd -0.0996+ Non-manual routine workd -0.0668 Self-employedd -0.2017* Technician, supervisord -0.1055 Skilled workerd -0.1139 Unskilled and semi-skilled workerd -0.1857* Presently in trainingd -0.1321 Unemployedd -0.4235** Non-employedd 0.0252 Health: poore -0.6107** Health: not goode -0.4897** Health: satisfactorye -0.5792** Health: goode -0.3166** Education: in trainingf 0.0635 Education: no certificationf 0.0335 Education: apprentice certificatef -0.0091 Education: secondary educationf -0.0514 Education: vocational schoolf 0.0398 Education: univ. of applied sciencef 0.0593 Personality: explosiveness -0.0429** Personality: emotional autonomy 0.0124 Personality: self-worth 0.1424** Personality: shyness -0.0283** Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Reference groups: a childless; b birth cohort 1980-83; c no migration background; d upper service rank; e health: very good; f university degree. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 105 Tab. A3: Effect of parenthood on life satisfaction differentiated according to household income (ordered logit regression) Max. precarious prosperity1 Lower to medium income range2 Medium to upper income range3 Higher income range4 Father/mothera 0.0878 0.2877** 0.2791* 0.2302* Man -0.1685* -0.1470 -0.1287 -0.1416+ Woman/partner pregnant -0.0373 0.1732 -0.2637 0.2606 Eastern Germany 0.0381 -0.1608 0.1191 0.2126 Birth cohort: 1970-1973b -0.1938 -0.3666* -0.2039 0.0294 Birth cohort*E. Germany 0.3483* 0.5070** -0.0178 -0.0517 1st immigrant generationc 0.0537 0.1372 -0.0349 -0.0479 2nd immigrant generationc 0.0515 0.1821 0.0475 0.0449 Lower service rankd -0.3344 0.1841 -0.0350 -0.0119 Non-manual routine workd -0.1710 -0.0592 -0.1265 0.2202 Self-employedd -0.6622** -0.1764 0.0663 -0.1623 Technician, supervisord -0.4890+ -0.0455 -0.3379 0.4016 Skilled workerd -0.2678 -0.0713 0.0126 -0.1426 Unskilled and semi-skilled workerd -0.3884+ 0.0546 -0.3770+ 0.1438 Presently in trainingd -0.4256* 0.3250 -0.2846 0.2881 Unemployedd -0.6569** 0.3103 -0.6137 0.0272 Non-employedd -0.1158 0.2130 0.1588 0.1856 Health: poore -0.5202+ -0.5885* -0.1565 -0.5693* Health: not goode -0.4336** -0.6381** -0.5319** -0.1390 Health: satisfactorye -0.6397** -0.7081** -0.4431** -0.4843** Health: goode -0.2960** -0.4342** -0.1632 -0.1506 Education: in trainingf 0.1449 0.3295 0.3812 -0.5257* Education: no certificationf 0.0237 0.0660 0.2783 -0.3275 Education: apprentice certificatef -0.0580 0.0977 0.2211 -0.2728* Education: secondary educationf -0.0117 -0.0808 -0.0419 -0.1660 Education: vocational schoolf 0.1476 0.1175 0.0094 -0.1148 Education: univ. of applied sciencef 0.0892 0.1080 -0.0054 -0.0924 Personality: explosiveness -0.0461** -0.0235 -0.0689** -0.0460** Personality: emotional autonomy 0.0042 -0.0180 0.0220 0.0729** Personality: self-worth 0.1348** 0.1534** 0.1753** 0.1888** Personality: shyness -0.0090 -0.0465* 0.0037 -0.0382* Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Reference groups: a childless; b birth cohort 1980-83; c no migration background; d upper service rank; e health: very good; f university degree. 1 equivalent net income between 0 and lower than 75%; 2 equivalent net income 75-100%; 3 equivalent net income 101-125%; 4 equivalent net income >125% Source: pairfam, author’s calculations • Matthias Pollmann-Schult106 Tab. A4: Effect of employment constellation on life satisfaction differentiated according to employment arrangement (ordered logit regression) Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Reference groups: a No children, man full-time, woman full-time; b birth cohort 1980-83; c max. precarious prosperity; d no migration background; e health: very good; f university degree. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations Women Men No children, man full-time, woman non-employeda 0.1648 -0.0296 No children, man full-time. woman part-timea -0.0237 -0.1815 Children, man full-time. woman non-employeda 0.4220** 0.0346 Children, man full-time. woman part-timea 0.2359** 0.1069 Children, man full-time. woman full-timea 0.1449 -0.0207 Woman/partner pregnant -0.1608 0.2961 + Eastern Germany 0.1949+ -0.0974 Birth cohort: 1970-1973b -0.0578 -0.3320 * Birth cohort*E. Germany 0.0781 0.4658 ** Lower to medium income rangec -0.0293 0.1008 Medium to upper income rangec 0.0278 0.2232 * Upper income rangec 0.2332** 0.2280 * 1st immigrant generationd 0.0593 0.0716 2nd immigrant generationd 0.0878 -0.0023 Health: poore -0.6753** -0.8002 ** Health: not goode -0.5033** -0.4314 ** Health: satisfactorye -0.5709** -0.5368 ** Health: goode -0.2237** -0.3165 ** Education: in trainingf 0.1052 -0.1515 Education: no certificationf -0.1376 -0.0366 Education: apprentice certificatef -0.0721 -0.0626 Education: secondary educationf -0.0724 -0.1435 Education: vocational schoolf 0.0140 -0.0147 Education: univ. of applied sciencef -0.0404 0.0629 Personality: explosiveness -0.0423** -0.0499 ** Personality: emotional autonomy -0.0034 0.0536 ** Personality: self-worth 0.1785** 0.1431 ** Personality: shyness -0.0222+ -0.0058 Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Germany • 107 Tab. A5: Effect of the type of kinship relation to the child on life satisfaction (ordered logit regression) Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Reference groups: a Only biological children; b birth cohort 1980-83; c no migration background; d upper service rank; e health: very good; f university degree. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations Women Men No childrena -0.1665** -0.1555** At least 1 stepchild: respondenta -0.2249 -0.0345 At least 1 stepchild: partnera -0.0041 -0.3263 Woman/partner pregnant 0.0726 0.1703+ Eastern Germany 0.1430 0.2357+ Birth cohort: 1970-1973b -0.1383 -0.1879 Birth cohort*E. Germany 0.0310 0.0574 1st immigrant generationc 0.0859 -0.0021 2nd immigrant generationc 0.0326 0.1287 Lower service rankd -0.0208 -0.1663* Non-manual routine workd 0.0301 -0.1702 Self-employedd -0.2562+ -0.2060 Technician, supervisord -0.0143 -0.1490 Skilled workerd -0.1948 -0.1580 Unskilled and semi-skilled workerd -0.1444 -0.2171* Presently in trainingd -0.0035 -0.2452* Unemployed d -0.2037 -0.6218** Non-employedd 0.1779+ -0.6814** Health: poore -0.7510** -0.5049+ Health: not goode -0.4883** -0.4620** Health: satisfactorye -0.5558** -0.5986** Health: goode -0.2894** -0.3484** Education: in trainingf 0.0997 0.0582 Education: no certificationf -0.0619 0.1035 Education: apprentice certificatef -0.0837 0.0553 Education: secondary educationf -0.0905 -0.0377 Education: vocational schoolf 0.0057 0.0608 Education: univ. of applied sciencef -0.0386 0.1469 Personality: explosiveness -0.0388** -0.0525** Personality: emotional autonomy -0.0029 0.0340* Personality: self-worth 0.1512** 0.1412** Personality: shyness -0.0402** -0.0122 • Matthias Pollmann-Schult108 Tab. A6: Effect of family planning on life satisfaction (ordered logit regression) Signifi cance level: ** = p<0.01; * = p<0.05; + = p<0.1. Reference groups: a No children; b birth cohort 1980-83; c no migration background; d upper service rank; e health: very good; f university degree. Source: pairfam, author’s calculations Women Men „Planned” familya 0.1474* 0.1661* „Unplanned” familya 0.2733* 0.0278 Woman/partner pregnant 0.0315 0.1294 Eastern Germany 0.0717 0.1690+ Birth cohort: 1970-1973b -0.1367 -0.2059+ Birth cohort*E. Germany 0.1442 0.2459* 1st immigrant generationc 0.0340 0.0539 2nd immigrant generationc 0.0862 -0.0055 Lower service rankd -0.0262 -0.1695* Non-manual routine workd 0.0275 -0.1670 Self-employedd -0.2639+ -0.2151 Technician, supervisord -0.0304 -0.1442 Skilled workerd -0.1996 -0.1506 Unskilled and semi-skilled workerd -0.1542 -0.2128* Presently in trainingd -0.0115 -0.2501* Unemployedd -0.2018 -0.6279** Non-employedd 0.1778+ -0.6622** Health: poore -0.7758** -0.5132* Health: not goode -0.4917** -0.4499** Health: satisfactorye -0.5571** -0.6016** Health: goode -0.2938** -0.3492** Education: in trainingf 0.0999 0.0574 Education: no certificationf -0.0614 0.1092 Education: apprentice certificatef -0.0857 0.0559 Education: secondary educationf -0.0931 -0.0485 Education: vocational schoolf 0.0103 0.0643 Education: univ. of applied sciencef -0.0385 0.1418 Personality: explosiveness -0.0388** -0.0524** Personality: emotional autonomy -0.0036 0.0354** Personality: self-worth 0.1518** 0.1403** Personality: shyness -0.0404** -0.0125 © Federal Institute for Population Research 2013 – All rights reserved Published by / Herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. Norbert F. Schneider Federal Institute for Population Research D-65180 Wiesbaden / Germany Managing Editor / Verantwortlicher Redakteur Frank Swiaczny Assistant Managing Editor / Stellvertretende Redakteurin Katrin Schiefer Language & Copy Editor (English) / Lektorat & Übersetzungen (englisch) Amelie Franke Copy Editor (German) / Lektorat (deutsch) Dr. Evelyn Grünheid Layout / Satz Beatriz Feiler-Fuchs E-mail: cpos@bib.bund.de Scientifi c Advisory Board / Wissenschaftlicher Beirat Jürgen Dorbritz (Wiesbaden) Paul Gans (Mannheim) Johannes Huinink (Bremen) Marc Luy (Wien) Clara H. Mulder (Groningen) Notburga Ott (Bochum) Peter Preisendörfer (Mainz) Board of Reviewers / Gutachterbeirat Martin Abraham (Erlangen) Laura Bernardi (Lausanne) Hansjörg Bucher (Bonn) Claudia Diehl (Göttingen) Andreas Diekmann (Zürich) Gabriele Doblhammer-Reiter (Rostock) Henriette Engelhardt-Wölfl er (Bamberg) E.-Jürgen Flöthmann (Bielefeld) Alexia Fürnkranz-Prskawetz (Wien) Beat Fux (Zürich) Joshua Goldstein (Rostock) Karsten Hank (Köln) Sonja Haug (Regensburg) Franz-Josef Kemper (Berlin) † Michaela Kreyenfeld (Rostock) Aart C. Liefbroer (Den Haag) Kurt Lüscher (Konstanz) Dimiter Philipov (Wien) Tomáš Sobotka (Wien) Heike Trappe (Rostock) Comparative Population Studies – Zeitschrift für Bevölkerungswissenschaft www.comparativepopulationstudies.de ISSN: 1869-8980 (Print) – 1869-8999 (Internet)