Omogamia o complementarietà? Analisi delle scelte coniugali in Italia

Journal title SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE
Author/s Gabriella D’Ambrosio, Veronica Pastori
Publishing Year 2017 Issue 2017/113 Language Italian
Pages 13 P. 143-155 File size 169 KB
DOI 10.3280/SR2017-113007
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

  1. L. Arosio (2004), Gli opposti si respingono? Scelte di coppia e stabilità coniugale in Italia, Roma, Aracne.
  2. L. Arosio (2006), «La diversità crea fragilità? Un approfondimento sulle cause dell’instabilità coniugale», Rassegna italiana di sociologia, 3, pp. 441-63, DOI: 10.1423/22781
  3. L. Arosio (2008), Sociologia del matrimonio, Roma, Carocci.
  4. U. Beck, E. Beck-Gernsheim (1995), The Normal Chaos of Love, Cambridge, Polity Press; tr. it., Il normale caos dell’amore, Torino, Bollati Boringhieri, 1996.
  5. R. Bendix, S.M. Lipset (eds.) (1966), Class, Status and Power: Social Stratification in Comparative Perspective, New York, Free Press.
  6. F. Bernardi (2002), La scelta del coniuge, in A. Schizzerotto (a c. di), Vite ineguali. Disuguaglianze e corsi di vita nell’Italia contemporanea, Bologna, il Mulino.
  7. P.M. Blau, O.D. Duncan (1967), The American Occupational Structure, New York, Wiley.
  8. J.A. Blazer (1963), «Complementary Needs and Marital Happiness», Marriage and Family Living, 25, pp. 89-95, DOI: 10.2307/2089096
  9. H.P. Blossfeld, A. Timm, F. Dasko (1998), «The Education System as a Marriage Market: A Longitudinal Analysis of Marriage in the Life Course», Sonderforchungsbereich 186, Working Paper n. 46.
  10. M. Bonolis (1999), Struttura e mutamento della famiglia, Roma, Meltemi.
  11. E.W. Burgess, P. Wallin (1943), «Homogamy in Social Characteristics», American Journal of Sociology, IL, 2, pp. 109-24, DOI: 10.1086/219346
  12. W.R. Burr, G.K. Leigh, R.D. Day, J. Constantine (1979), Symbolic Interaction and the Family, in W.R. Burr (ed.), Contemporary Theories about the Family, New York-London, The Free Press.
  13. A. Cobalti (1995), Lo studio della mobilità sociale, Roma, Nuova Italia Scientifica.
  14. A. De Lillo, A. Schizzerotto (1985), La valutazione sociale delle occupazioni, Bologna, il Mulino.
  15. F. De Singly (2004), «Intimité conjugale et intimité personelle. À la recherche d’un équilibre entre deux exigences dans les sociétés modernes avancées», Sociologie et sociétés, XXXV, 2, pp. 79-96,
  16. O.D. Duncan, D.L. Freatherman, B. Duncan (1972), Socioeconomic Background and Achievement, New York, Seminar.
  17. J. Elster (1989), Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; tr. it., Come si studia la società. Una «cassetta degli attrezzi» per le scienze sociali, Bologna, il Mulino, 1993.
  18. R. Erikson, J.H. Goldthorpe (1992), The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
  19. A. Giddens (1992), The Transformation of Intimacy. Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies, Cambridge, Polity Press; tr. it., La trasformazione dell’intimità. Sessualità, amore ed erotismo nelle società moderne, Bologna, il Mulino, 1995.
  20. W.J. Goode (1959), After Divorce, Glincoe, Free Press.
  21. W.J. Goode (1966), Family and Mobility, in R. Bendix, S.M. Lipset (eds.), Class, Status and Power: Social Stratification in Comparative Perspective, New York, Free Press.
  22. J.A. Harris (1912), «Assortative Mating in Man», Popular Science Monthly, 80, pp. 476-92.
  23. Istat (2014), Generazioni a confronto. Come cambiano i percorsi verso la vita adulta, Roma.
  24. Istat (2015), Annuario statistico italiano 2015, Roma.
  25. J.P.G. Janssen (2001), Do Opposites attract Divorce? Dimensions of Mixed Marriages and the Risk of Divorce in the Netherlands, Thela Thesis, Ics Dissertation Series.
  26. C. Jencks (1972), Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America, New York, Basic.
  27. H.E. Jones (1929), «Homogamy in Intellectual Abilities», American Journal of Sociology, 35, pp. 369-382, DOI: 10.1086/215050
  28. M. Kalmijn (1991), «Status Homogamy in the United States», American Journal of Sociology, 97, pp. 496-523, DOI: 10.1086/229786
  29. J. C. Kaufmann (1993), Sociologie du couple, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France; tr. it., La vita a due. Sociologia della coppia, Bologna, il Mulino, 1996.
  30. W. Kernodle (1959), «Some Implications of the Homogamy-complementary Needs Theories of Mate Selection for Sociological Research», Social Forces, 38, pp. 145-52, DOI: 10.2307/2573935
  31. R.D. Mare (1991), «Five Decades of Educational Assortative Mating», American Sociological Review, 56, pp. 15-32, DOI: 10.2307/2095670
  32. R.K. Merton (1941), «Intermarriage and the Social Structure: Fact and Theory», Psychiatry, 4, pp. 361-74.
  33. R.K. Merton (1968), Social Theory and Social Structure, New York, Free Press of Glencoe; tr. it., Teoria e struttura sociale, Bologna, il Mulino, 1970.
  34. T. Parsons, R.F. Bales (1955), Family, Socialization and Interaction Process, Glencoe Hill., The Free Press; tr. it., Famiglia e socializzazione, Milano, Mondadori, 1974.
  35. M. Pisati (2000), La mobilità sociale, Bologna, il Mulino.
  36. H.M. Richardson (1939), «Studies of Mental Resemblance between Husbands and Wives and between Friends», Psychological Bullettin, 36, pp. 104-20,
  37. R.C. Rockwell (1976), «Historical Trends and Variations in Educational Homogamy», Journal of Marriage and Family, 38, pp. 83-95, DOI: 10.2307/350552
  38. G. Rossi (2012), Legami e percorsi di coppia: le trasformazioni della coniugalità in Europa, in G. Pollini, A. Pretto, G. Rovati (a c. di), L’Italia nell’Europa: i valori tra persistenze e trasformazioni, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  39. C. Santoni (2009), Scelte e percorsi dei giovani tra scuola, lavoro, famiglia e genere, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  40. F. Sartori (2009), Differenze e disuguaglianze di genere, Bologna, il Mulino.
  41. A. Schizzerotto (a c. di) (2002), Vite ineguali. Disuguaglianze e corsi di vita nell’Italia contemporanea, Bologna, il Mulino.
  42. A. Schizzerotto, C. Barone (2006), Sociologia dell’educazione, Bologna, il Mulino.
  43. J. Smiths, W. Ultee, J. Lammers (1998), «Educational Homogamy in 65 Countries: An Explanation of Differences in Openness using Country-level Explanatory Variables», American Sociological Review, 63, pp. 264-85.
  44. W.C. Ultee, R. Luijkx (1990), «Educational Heterogamy and Father-so-son Occupational Mobility in 23 Industrial Nations: General Societal Openness or Compensatory Strategies of Reproduction», European Sociological Review, 6, pp. 125-49.
  45. R.F. Winch, T. Ktsanes, V. Ktsanes (1954), «The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mateselection: An Analytic and Descriptive Study», American Sociological Review, 19, pp. 241-9, DOI: 10.2307/2087753
  46. R.F. Winch (1958), Mate-Selection, New York, Harper & Bros.
  47. C. Zimmerman (1956), The Present Crisis, in C. Zimmerman, F. Cervantes (eds.) (1956).
  48. C. Zimmerman, F. Cervantes (eds.) (1956), Marriage and the Family, Chicago, Henry Regnery Co.

  • „Nie wyszłabym za jakiegoś malarza ściennego, prawda?” Klasowe mechanizmy wyboru małżonka w polskiej klasie wyższej Gabriela Kamecka, in Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej /2023 pp.228
    DOI: 10.18778/1733-8069.19.4.10

Gabriella D’Ambrosio, Veronica Pastori, Omogamia o complementarietà? Analisi delle scelte coniugali in Italia in "SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE " 113/2017, pp 143-155, DOI: 10.3280/SR2017-113007