need answer asap

2 article 

so i need you to analysis two article and 1 paragraph per one article and 250 words per one paragraph 

COHABITATION AND FAMILY FORMATION IN JAPAN

Efforts to understand the role of cohabitation and how it may differ across countries or population subgroups have focused on linkages between cohabitation and marriage and childbearing. Studies in the United States have found an association between cohabitation and nonmarital conception (Brien, Lillard, and Waite 1999; Manning and Landale 1996) and demonstrated that first births are increasingly likely to occur within cohabiting unions (Carlson, McLanahan, and England 2004; Kennedy and Bumpass 2008). The fact that nonmarital conceptions are less likely to lead to marriage among black and Hispanic women suggests that cohabitation more closely resembles an alternative to marriage among racial and ethnic minorities (Manning 2001; Manning and Landale 1996). Similar differences with respect to economic well-being have been interpreted as further evidence that the role of cohabitation as an alternative to marriage is more pronounced among those in less stable economic circumstances, whereas nonmarital unions more closely resemble a stage in the marriage process for those with higher socioeconomic status (e.g., Loomis and Landale 1994).

In Japan, the implications of delayed marriage and very low fertility for population aging and population decline are the subject of great social and political concern and have motivated several high-profile policy efforts to promote marriage and increase fertility rates. It is thus surprising that little scholarly or political attention has been devoted to premarital cohabitation and its potential impact on marriage and fertility. In the only previous study to address these relationships, Tsuya (2006) found that cohabitation is associated with higher rates of marriage and bridal pregnancy. In this article, we extend Tsuya’s (2006) research by using life table methods to simultaneously describe differences in marriage and childbearing patterns with respect to cohabitation experience and to examine how these relationships differ by educational attainment.

Research on the role of cohabitation in the family-formation process in the United States and elsewhere, in conjunction with recent work on marriage and childbearing in Japan, suggests several ways in which family-formation trajectories may differ by cohabitation experience. Of particular importance is the strong relationship between marriage and childbearing in Japan. Recent vital statistics data indicate that only 2% of births are registered to unmarried mothers, while approximately one in four first marriages is preceded by pregnancy (Raymo and Iwasawa 2008). It may be that cohabitation hastens marriage by increasing the risk of pregnancy via more-frequent sexual activity (Bachrach 1987) or lessvigilant contraception. Alternatively, it may be that unanticipated pregnancy increases the likelihood of forming a cohabiting union prior to marriage and childbirth. The concentration of bridal pregnancy at the lower end of the educational spectrum (Raymo and Iwasawa 2008) suggests that early marriage via cohabitation and premarital pregnancy should be more common among these women.

At the other end of the socioeconomic spectrum, distaste for the highly asymmetric gender division of labor and the associated opportunity costs of marriage have been linked to later marriage among women with higher education and higher earnings (Raymo 2003; Raymo and Ono 2007). This suggests that cohabitation may be associated with later marriage and fertility among these women to the extent that nonmarital unions are perceived as relatively egalitarian arrangements (South and Spitze 1994) that offer many of the benefits of marriage (e.g., coresidential intimacy, sexual access, and economies of scale) without either the normative assumptions of long-term emotional and financial commitment or the legal barriers to dissolution that accompany marriage.

Documenting differences in the family-formation patterns of those who have and those who have not cohabited is straightforward, but it is very difficult to evaluate causal effects of cohabitation on marriage and childbearing. This difficulty reflects both the complexity of the family-formation process and the fact that men and women who form cohabiting unions differ systematically from those who do not with respect to characteristics such as religiosity, family attitudes, and relationship skills that are not typically ascertained in surveys (e.g., Clarkberg, Stolzenberg, and Waite 1995). Recognizing that cohabitation, marriage, and childbearing are interrelated components of an increasingly complex and heterogeneous family-formation process in the United States and Europe, recent studies have modeled the three processes simultaneously (Baizán, Aassve, and Billari 2003, 2004; Brien et al. 1999; Musick 2006). These studies have found that observed relationships between cohabitation, marriage, and childbearing partly reflect unobserved factors, with those who are more likely to cohabit also more likely to bear children and to marry. Data limitations prevent us from adopting a similar approach, but we evaluate results with these possibilities in mind.

Title

COHABITATION AND FAMILY FORMATION IN JAPAN*

Author

Raymo, James M

;

Iwasawa, Miho

;

Bumpass, Larry

Publication title

Demography (pre-2011)

Publication year

2009

Publication date

Nov 2009

Year

2009

Publisher

Population Association of America

Face-Off: Cohabitation vs. Marriage

IN THE GAME OF LOVE, WHICH ARRANGEMENT WINS?

WITH THE RATE of marriage at a record low, more and more couples are getting down with one key instead of down on one knee. Does it matter which you choose to do? “The boundaries of marriage and cohabitation continue to blur, with the norms around marriage getting weaker, and those around cohabitation getting stronger,” says

Cornell

sociologist Kelly Musick, coauthor of a recent study reported in the Journal of Marriage and Family. Where there are differences, marriage doesn’t always come out on top- it all depends on your priorities. -Alison DeNisco

ROUND 1

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING

In a survey of 2,737 Americans, cohabitors reported higher levels of happiness and self-esteem than their married counterparts, though both relationships improved general well-being. Without the rigidity of marriage and the kids that are often part of that package, couples may have more room for flexibility, independence, and personal growth, Musick says.

WINNER Cohabitation

ROUND 2

PHYSICAL HEALTH

Married people gave higher marks to their own health than did those who were just living together- possibly due to marriage’s legal benefits, like joint health insurance. Men especially seem to get a healthy kick from tying the knot. But even though there’s a notable gain in health, Musick’s study indicates for the first time that it may be short-lived, fading after just a few years.

WINNER Marriage

ROUND 3

SOCIAL LIFE

Lovers who live together- married or not- spend less time with friends than single people. “There are only so many hours in a day, and the formation of a romantic relationship draws time away from others,” Musick says. When experiencing the mood-boosting benefits of a relationship, connections to friends and family don’t feel as essential, and social ties can fray.

WINNER Tie

Word count: 297

Copyright Sussex Publishers, LLC May/Jun

2012

Title
Face-Off: Cohabitation vs. Marriage
Author

DeNisco, Alison

Publication title

Psychology Today

Publication year
2012
Publication date

May/Jun 2012

Year
2012