Volume 49 - Article 19 | Pages 493–512
By Gert Stulp
Balbo, N. and Barban, N. (2014). Does fertility behavior spread among friends? American Sociological Review 79(3): 412–431.
Balbo, N., Billari, F.C., and Mills, M. (2013). Fertility in advanced societies: A review of research. European Journal of Population 29(1): 1–38.
Balbo, N. and Mills, M. (2011). The influence of the family network on the realisation of fertility intentions. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 9: 179–206.
Bernardi, L. (2003). Channels of social influence on reproduction. Population Research and Policy Review 22: 527–555.
Bernardi, L., Keim, S., and Lippe, H. (2007). Social influences on fertility: A comparative mixed methods study in eastern and western Germany. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1): 23–47.
Bernardi, L. and Klaerner, A. (2014). Social networks and fertility. Demographic Research 30(22): 641–670.
Bhrolcháin, M.N. and Beaujouan, É. (2019). Do people have reproductive goals? Constructive preferences and the discovery of desired family size. In: Schoen, R. (ed.). Analytical family demography. Cham: Springer International Publishing: 27–56.
Bidart, C. and Lavenu, D. (2005). Evolutions of personal networks and life events. Social Networks 27(4): 359–376.
Bongaarts, J. and Watkins, S.C. (1996). Social interactions and contemporary fertility transitions. Population and Development Review 22(4): 639–682.
Buijs, V.L. and Stulp, G. (2022). Friends, family, and family friends: Predicting friendships of Dutch women. Social Networks 70: 25–35.
Buyukkececi, Z., Leopold, T., Gaalen, R., and Engelhardt, H. (2020). Family, firms, and fertility: A study of social interaction effects. Demography 57(1): 243–266.
Colleran, H. (2020). Market integration reduces kin density in women’s ego-networks in rural Poland. Nature Communications 11(1): 266.
Csardi, G. and Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal Complex Systems 1695(5): 1–9.
Duvander, A.Z., Fahlén, S., Brandén, M., and Ohlsson-Wijk, S. (2020). Who makes the decision to have children? Couples’ childbearing intentions and actual childbearing. Advances in Life Course Research 43: 100286.
Dykstra, P.A., Bühler, C., Fokkema, T., Petrič, G., Platinovšek, R., Kogovšek, T., and Hlebec, V. (2016). Social network indices in the Generations and Gender Survey: An appraisal. Demographic Research 34(35): 995–1036.
Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–1380.
Hin, S., Gauthier, A., Goldstein, J., and Bühler, C. (2011). Fertility preferences: What measuring second choices teaches us. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 9: 131–156.
Kavas, S. and Jong, J. (2020). Exploring the mechanisms through which social ties affect fertility decisions in Turkey. Journal of Marriage and Family 82(4): 1250–1269.
Keim, S., Klarner, A., and Bernardi, L. (2009). Qualifying social influence on fertility intentions: Composition, structure and meaning of fertility-relevant social networks in western Germany. Current Sociology 57(6): 888–907.
Knoef, M. and Vos, K. (2009). The representativeness of LISS, an online probability panel. Tilburg: CentERdata.
Kohler, H., Behrman, J., and Watkins, S.C. (2001). The density of social networks and fertility decisions: Evidence from south Nyanza district, Kenya. Demography 38(1): 43–58.
Liu, W.T. and Duff, R.W. (1972). The strength in weak ties. The Public Opinion Quarterly 36(3): 361–366.
Malter, F. and Börsch-Supan, A. (eds.) (2013). SHARE Wave 4: Innovations and methodology. Munich: MEA, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
McCarty, C. (2002). Structure in personal networks. Journal of Social Structure 3(1).
McCarty, C. and Govindaramanujam, S. (2005). A modified elicitation of personal networks using dynamic visualization. Connections 26(2): 9–17.
McCarty, C., Killworth, P.D., and Rennell, J. (2007). Impact of methods for reducing respondent burden on personal network structural measures. Social Networks 29(2): 300–315.
McCarty, C., Lubbers, M.J., Vacca, R., and Molina, J.L. (2019). Conducting personal network research: A practical guide. New York City: The Guilford Press.
McCarty, C., Molina, J.L., Aguilar, C., and Rota, L. (2007). A comparison of social network mapping and personal network visualization. Field Methods 19(2): 145–162.
Montgomery, M. and Casterline, J. (1996). Social learning, social influence, and new models of fertility. Population and Development Review 22(1996): 151–175.
Newson, L., Postmes, T., Lea, S.E.G., and Webley, P. (2005). Why are modern families small? Toward an evolutionary and cultural explanation for the demographic transition. Personality and social psychology review 9(4): 360–375.
Pedersen, T.L. (2021). Ggraph: An implementation of grammar of graphics for graphs and networks.
Pedersen, T.L. (2022). Tidygraph: A tidy API for graph manipulation.
Pink, S., Leopold, T., and Engelhardt, H. (2014). Fertility and social interaction at the workplace: Does childbearing spread among colleagues? Advances in Life Course Research 21: 113–122.
R. Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Scherpenzeel, A. (2009). Start of the LISS panel: Sample and recruitment of a probability-based Internet panel. Tilburg: CentERdata.
Scherpenzeel, A.C. and Bethlehem, J.G. (2011). How representative are online panels? Problems of coverage and selection and possible solutions. In: Das, P., Ester, P., and Kaczmirek, L. (eds.). Social and behavioral research and the internet. Advances in applied methods and research strategies. New York: Routledge.
Schoumaker, B. (2019). Male fertility around the world and over time: How different is it from female fertility? Population and Development Review 45(3): 459–487.
Stadel, M. and Stulp, G. (2022). Balancing bias and burden in personal network studies. Social Networks 70: 16–24.
Stark, T.H. and Krosnick, J.A. (2017). GENSI: A new graphical tool to collect ego-centered network data. Social Networks 48: 36–45.
Stulp, G. (2021). Collecting large personal networks in a representative sample of Dutch women. Social Networks 64: 63–71.
Stulp, G. (2023). FertNet: Process data from the Social networks and fertility survey.
Stulp, G. (2023). Materials for describing the Dutch social networks and fertility study and how to process it. DataverseNL .
Stulp, G. (2020). Methods and materials of the Social networks and fertility survey (Sociale relaties en kinderkeuzes. DataverseNL .
Stulp, G. and Barrett, L. (2021). Do data from large personal networks support cultural evolutionary ideas about kin and fertility? Social Sciences 10(5): 177.
Testa, M.R. (2012). Couple disagreement about short-term fertility desires in Austria: Effects on intentions and contraceptive behaviour. Demographic Research 26(3): 63–98.
Toepoel, V., Das, M., and Van Soest, A. (2008). Effects of design in web surveys: Comparing trained and fresh respondents. The Public Opinion Quarterly 72(5): 985–1007.
Toepoel, V., Das, M., and Van Soest, A. (2009). Relating question type to panel conditioning: Comparing trained and fresh respondents. Survey Research Methods 3(2): 73–80.
Watts, D.J. and Strogatz, S.H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393(6684): 440–442.