| Literature DB >> 33946141 |
Pengcheng Liu1, Jingjing Cao2, Wenjie Nie3, Xiaojie Wang3, Yani Tian4, Cheng Ma2.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to verify the influence of internet usage frequency on women's fertility intentions and to examine the mediating effects of gender role attitudes, under the influence of internet usage frequency that affects women's fertility intentions, combined with the specific Chinese cultural context. A cross-sectional secondary data analysis was conducted using a sample of 3113 women of childbearing age in the Chinese General Social Survey in 2017 (CGSS2017). The results of the negative binomial regression model showed that, under the premise of controlling individual characteristic variables, the higher the frequency of internet usage, the lower the fertility intention (p < 0.01). The results of the mediating effect model show that the more frequently women use the internet, the lower their fertility intentions, and the less they agree with Chinese traditional gender roles, which are "men work outside to support the family while women stay at home to take care of the family". These findings have implications in formulating public policies aimed at increasing the fertility rate; that is, it is not enough to increase women's fertility intentions under China's universal two-child policy. Moreover, public policy formulators need to consider gender role attitudes and the influence of the internet as a method for dissemination of information.Entities:
Keywords: China; fertility intention; gender role attitudes; internet usage
Year: 2021 PMID: 33946141 PMCID: PMC8124929 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18094784
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Demographic characteristics and outcome variables of the participants (n = 3113).
| Variable | Categories | Mean ± SD or |
|---|---|---|
| Fertility intention | 0 | 80 (2.57) |
| 1 | 680 (21.84) | |
| 2 | 2087 (67.04) | |
| 3–10 | 266 (8.54) | |
| The frequency of internet usage | Infrequently | 934 (30.00) |
| Frequently | 2179 (70.00) | |
| Age | 36.61 ± 9.10 | |
| Marital status | Unmarried | 630 (20.24) |
| Married | 2483 (79.76) | |
| Health condition | Badly healthy | 54 (1.73) |
| Less healthy | 241 (7.74) | |
| Normal | 733 (23.55) | |
| Fairly healthy | 1285 (41.28) | |
| Extremely healthy | 800 (25.70) | |
| Education level | Middle school and below | 1587 (50.98) |
| High school/Vocational school | 546 (17.54) | |
| College and above | 980 (31.48) | |
| Household income level | Far below average | 165 (5.30) |
| Below average | 1038 (33.34) | |
| Average | 1693 (54.38) | |
| Above average | 210 (6.75) | |
| Much above average | 7 (0.22) | |
| Social contact | Never | 264 (8.48) |
| Rarely | 1016 (32.64) | |
| Sometimes | 1089 (34.98) | |
| Often | 636 (20.43) | |
| Frequently | 108 (3.47) | |
| Gender role attitudes 1 | Absolutely disagree | 546 (17.56) |
| Relatively disagree | 1071 (34.44) | |
| Neutral | 187 (6.01) | |
| Relatively agree | 946 (30.42) | |
| Absolutely agree | 360 (11.58) | |
| Gender role attitudes 2 | Absolutely disagree | 289 (28.00) |
| Relatively disagree | 269 (26.07) | |
| Neutral | 94 (9.11) | |
| Relatively agree | 328 (31.78) | |
| Absolutely agree | 52 (5.04) |
Negative binomial regression analysis of internet usage frequency influencing fertility intention.
| Variables | Coefficient | 95% CI | SE |
|---|---|---|---|
| The frequency of internet usage (reference: infrequently) | −0.0385 * | −0.0680 to −0.0091 | 0.0150 |
| Age | −0.0161 * | −0.0299 to −0.0022 | 0.0070 |
| Age*age | 0.0002 * | 0.0001 to 0.0004 | 0.0001 |
| Marital status(reference: unmarried) | 0.1183 *** | 0.0714 to 0.1651 | 0.0238 |
| Health condition(reference: badly healthy) | |||
| Less healthy | 0.0420 | −0.0612 to 0.1453 | 0.0527 |
| Normal | 0.0245 | −0.0755 to 0.1246 | 0.0510 |
| Fairly healthy | 0.0164 | −0.0834 to 0.1163 | 0.0509 |
| Extremely healthy | 0.0346 | −0.0668 to 0.1361 | 0.0517 |
| Education level (reference: Middle school and below) | |||
| High school/Vocational school | −0.0693 *** | −0.1048 to −0.0338 | 0.0181 |
| College and above | −0.0613 *** | −0.0942 to −0.0285 | 0.0167 |
| Household income level (reference: far below average) | |||
| Below average | 0.0457 | −0.0171 to 0.1086 | 0.0320 |
| Average | 0.0735 * | 0.0109 to 0.1361 | 0.0319 |
| Above average | 0.0791 * | 0.0006 to 0.1575 | 0.0400 |
| Much above average | −0.0258 | −0.2559 to 0.2042 | 0.1173 |
| Social contact (reference: never) | |||
| Rarely | 0.0085 | −0.0393 to 0.0565 | 0.0244 |
| Sometimes | 0.0229 | −0.0247 to 0.0706 | 0.0243 |
| Often | 0.0431 | −0.0072 to 0.0936 | 0.0257 |
| Frequently | 0.0046 | −0.0681 to 0.0775 | 0.0371 |
| Constant | 0.7031 *** | 0.4483 to 0.9580 | 0.1300 |
| Sample size | 3113 | ||
Note: CI, confidence interval; *** Significant at p < 0.001. * Significant at p < 0.05.
Endogeneity test of the influence of internet usage frequency on female fertility intention.
| Variables | Coefficient | 95% CI | SE |
|---|---|---|---|
| The frequency of internet usage (reference: infrequently) | −0.7223 *** | −1.0376 to 0.4069 | 0.1608 |
| Age | −0.0092 | −0.0368 to 0.0182 | 0.0140 |
| Age*age | 0.00001 | −0.0003 to 0.0004 | 0.0002 |
| Marital status (reference: unmarried) | 0.2163 *** | 0.1356 to 0.2971 | 0.0412 |
| Health condition (reference: badly healthy) | |||
| Less healthy | 0.0042 | −0.2184 to 0.2269 | 0.1136 |
| Normal | 0.0300 | −0.1797 to 0.2398 | 0.1070 |
| Fairly healthy | 0.0579 | −0.1503 to 0.2662 | 0.1062 |
| Extremely healthy | 0.1071 | −0.1042 to 0.3185 | 0.1078 |
| Education level (reference: Middle school and below) | |||
| High school/Vocational school | 0.0787 | −0.0376 to 0.1950 | 0.0593 |
| College and above | 0.1313 * | 0.0019 to 0.2606 | 0.0659 |
| Household income level (reference: far below average) | |||
| Below average | 0.1320 * | 0.0124 to 0.2517 | 0.0610 |
| Average | 0.2145 ** | 0.0900 to 0.3389 | 0.0634 |
| Above average | 0.2323 ** | 0.0775 to 0.3870 | 0.0789 |
| Much above average | 0.0162 | −0.3486 to 0.3811 | 0.1861 |
| Social contact (reference: never) | |||
| Rarely | 0.0253 | −0.0647 to 0.1155 | 0.0459 |
| Sometimes | 0.0486 | −0.0415 to 0.1388 | 0.0460 |
| Often | 0.1381 ** | 0.0396 to 0.2366 | 0.0502 |
| Frequently | −0.0247 | −0.1676 to 0.1180 | 0.0728 |
| The average internet usage rate of the province | 0.1507 *** | 0.0000 | |
| Instrument variable T-value | 10.67 | Wald-test | 110.35 |
| F-value of the first stage | 113.77 | R-squared | 0.1059 |
Note: CI, confidence interval; *** Significant at p < 0.001. ** Significant at p < 0.01. * Significant at p < 0.05.
Test of intermediary effect of internet usage frequency influencing fertility intention.
| VARIABLES | (1) GRA1 | 95% CI | SE | (2) FI | 95% CI | SE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The frequency of internet usage (reference: infrequently) | −0.3270 *** | −0.4281 to −0.2259 | 0.0515 | −0.0280 | −0.0576 to −0.0016 | 0.0151 |
| GRA1 | 0.0288 *** | 0.0190 to 0.0386 | 0.0050 | |||
| Constant | 0.6140 *** | 0.3596 to 0.8684 | 0.1297 | |||
| Observations | 3110 | 3110 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The frequency of internet usage (reference: infrequently) | −0.2734 ** | −0.4545 to −0.0923 | 0.0923 | 0.0006 | −0.0567 to 0.0579 | 0.0292 |
| GRA2 | 0.0253 ** | 0.0110 to 0.0396 | 0.0073 | |||
| Constant | 0.5005 * | 0.0231 to 0.9780 | 0.2435 | |||
| Observations | 1032 | 1032 |
CI, confidence interval; *** Significant at p < 0.001. ** Significant at p < 0.01. * Significant at p < 0.05. In order to get the standard error for the mediator variable in the regression model, we regard variables GRA1 and GRA2 as ordered variables. Z-test values for variables GRA1 and GRA2 are −4.2374 and −2.1994, respectively. Mediating test regressions were adjusted for age, Age *age, marital status, health condition, household income level, and social contact.