The difference in monthly and annual gross incomes of males and females in the unselected and selected cases was not statistically significant. Gross incomes were reported for 809 males and 795 females within the full sample (both selected and unselected cases) of 1,708 households. Subtracting the 414 cases selected in the selected sample, 395 males remained in the unselected sample, with a mean monthly gross income of $4,490. 57 (SD = $8,284. 98) which was not statistically different from the selected study sample mean of $3,677, (SD = $2,753), t (807) = 1. 855, p>.
05. The remaining 381 females in the unselected sample, had a mean monthly gross income of $2,338. 18 (SD = $2,328. 13) which was not statistically different from the mean of $2,567 for the selected study sample (SD = $4,400), t (807)= -. 905,/? >05. Total annual gross income (M =$81,815, SD = $66,004) was determined for 174 cases remaining in the unselected sample, who had incomes reported for both the males and females. Total yearly gross income for the unselected sample was not statistically different (M = $81,815) from the selected sample (M = $74,835), t (586)= 1.
194, p>Q5. The ages at divorce, and length of marriage were not significantly different in the unselected and selected samples. There were significant differences between th unselected and selected samples with regards to primary physical custody %2 (4, N = 1708)= 79. 360, p< . 001 and the number of cases collected in each of the ten counties, X2(9,iV= 1708) = 35. 672, p< . 001. In the unselected sample, 58. 3% of females and 7. 3% of males had primary physical custody, 27. 1% of the cases had joint physical custody, 2.
8% were split custody cases, (3. 8% were other designations, and . 7% were missing). Within the selected sample 80. 2% of the mothers and 8 % of the fathers had primary physical custody, 11. 1% of the cases had joint physical custody, and . 7% were other. Since cases were not included in the selected sample when a primary residence could not be determined, or when joint physical custody was awarded, it was expected that the samples would be significantly different with regard to physical custody.
Although there was a significant difference between the samples for the number of cases collected in each county, all counties were represented in the selected study sample (see Table 1). The largest discrepancies between the unselected and selected study sample were the 10% increase in the ford pinto ethical dilemma from Hennepin county and the 5. 5% decrease in the number of cases from St. Louis county for the study sample. When comparing the percent of cases in rural versus urban counties there was a 9% difference. The unselected sample was a little lower with respect to urban cases (71%) and a little higher with respect to rural cases (28.
5%) when compared to the selected study sample (80. 6% urban and 19. 2% rural). It was difficult to determine if the unselected cases differed from the study sample, when considering income. Gross income was not reported in the court records for all cases. Some cases had only net income, others had no income, and some had income reported for one parent. Income-to-needs ratios, a measure of income sufficiency based on total income compared to poverty level guidelines, were calculated for each post-divorce household using gross income.
The selection criteria for the study sample took all the cases in which income-to-needs ratios could be calculated using gross incomes. It was difficult to compare the incomes in the unselected cases with the selected study sample because the income-to-needs ratios could not be calculated in a comparable way using gross income for the unselected cases. Therefore, it was not possible to determine how the selected study sample's income-to-needs ratios compared to the unselected sample.
No comments:
Post a Comment