Preference theory

Preference theory is a multidisciplinary (mainly sociological) theory developed by Catherine Hakim.[1] It seeks both to explain and predict women's choices regarding investment in productive or reproductive contributions to society.[2]

The theory sets out five socio-economic conditions which it posits jointly create a new scenario for women:[3]

  1. The contraceptive revolution gives women reliable control over their own fertility for the first time in history.
  2. The equal opportunities revolution gives women genuine access to all positions and occupations for the first time in history
  3. The expansion of white-collar occupations, which are more attractive to women.
  4. The creation of jobs for secondary earners, such as part-time jobs, working at home, teleworking, and annual hours contracts.
  5. The increasing importance of attitudes and values in affluent modern societies, which gives everyone the freedom to choose their lifestyle.

The theory posits that women fall into three main groups: women who prefer a work-centred lifestyle and often remain childless by choice (about 20%); women who prefer a home-centred lifestyle, often have many children and little paid work (about 20%); and the remaining majority of women who can be labelled adaptive, who seek to combine paid work with family life and raising children.[2] Catherine Hakim carried out two national surveys, in Britain and Spain, to test the theory, and showed that questions eliciting personal preferences can strongly predict women's employment decisions and fertility. In contrast, women's behaviour did not predict their attitudes, showing that lifestyle preferences are not post hoc rationalisations.[4] This study also showed that other sex-role attitudes do not have the same impact on women's behaviour; notably, the patriarchal values measured by most social surveys, including the European Social Survey, have virtually no impact on women's personal choices and behaviour.[4][5][6]

Hakim’s preference theory has attracted great interest in the literature, but also considerable criticism. The main criticism being that it does not demonstrate causality, that the observed preferences causes changes in fertility patterns, and that it has been suggested that actual fertility may change values and preferences. It has also been suggested that the observed effect of lifestyle preferences on achieved fertility may absorbed by other factors when controlled for.[7] A follow up study "found that Hakim’s typology does not work well in the Czech Republic", that there were no important differences in fertility between the three groups in that country.[1] A second follow up study, surveying eleven European countries, found support for the theory in only two countries (Britain and Denmark).[7]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Rabusic, L. & Manea, B-E., Hakim's preference theory in the Czech context. Czech Demography, 2008, 48(2), pp 46-55.
  2. ^ a b "Preference Theory", in Scott, John; Marshall, Gordon (2009). A Dictionary of Sociology. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199533008. 
  3. ^ Hakim, Catherine (2000). Work-Lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199242097. 
  4. ^ a b Hakim, Catherine (2004). Models of the Family in Modern Societies. Aldershot: Ashgate. ISBN 0754644065. 
  5. ^ Hakim, Catherine `Lifestyle preferences versus patriarchal values: causal and non-causal attitudes', in Giele, Janet (2004). Changing Life Patterns in Western Industrial Societies. Amsterdam: Elsevier/JAI. pp. 69–91. ISBN 0762310200. 
  6. ^ Catherine Hakim `Public morality versus personal choice: the failure of social attitude surveys', British Journal of Sociology, 54: 339-45, September 2003.
  7. ^ a b Vitali A, Billari F C, Prskawetz A and Testa M R, Preference Theory and Low Fertility: A Comparative Perspective, European Journal of Population, 25: 413-438, November 2009.