The preceding analysis of descriptive statistics points to a set of testable hypotheses. Hypothesis 1: The widespread in Kyrgyzstan marriage practices affects satisfaction of women with life as a whole as well as their satisfaction with a family life. Hypothesis 2: There exists an association between degree of freedom enjoyed by women in the process of family formation and levels of life satisfaction for women in the KR. Thus, the paper hypothesizes that marital practices has a significant impact on subjective well-being in Kyrgyzstan.
The study begins by examining individual-level data from wave 2 of the "Life in Kyrgyzstan" (LIK) panel survey data over a period of three years (2010-2012). ...view middle of the document...
g., arranged and forced ones);
Li: legal status of the respondent’s marriage;
Ri: residual move, experienced by the respondent;
Vi: self-perception of probability to become a victim;
Ii: number of days missed by the respondent from work\study\usual activities due to illness;
Xi: a set of socioeconomic control variables, influencing happiness (such as age, employment status, number of children, etc.) ;
εi: an error term.
The same logic will be used for estimation of important for the research domain satisfaction – satisfaction with the family life (FS):
FSi = α + βMi + γLi + δRi + ζVi + ηIi + θXi + εi (2)
As in most research on life satisfaction, the ordered probit (OP) method will be used to examine hypothesized associations between subjective well-being and a range of marriage practices. This method is perfectly suitable to exploit the ranking information in the originally scaled dependent variable. For this purpose, it is additionally assumed that LS is ordinal. The models were estimated also by means of the ordinary least squares (OLS) method, which treats life satisfaction scale as cardinal.
As regards the extent of endogeneity arising from simultaneity, affecting all happiness researches, it seems impossible to correct the model for it because of the absence of credible instruments.
Table 6: Variable definitions.
1. Anderson, Kathryn H., Becker, Charles M. (2008), “Religious affiliation and family formation in post-soviet Central Asia”. Report, National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, 2008.
2. Angner, Erik (2010) “Subjective well-being”, The Journal of Socio-Economics, Volume 39, Issue 3.
3. Applbaum, K.D. (1995) “Marriage with the proper stranger: arranged marriage in metropolitan Japan”, Ethnology 34.
4. Argyle, Michael (1999) “Psychology and Religion: An Introduction”, Routledge.
5. Auboyer, Jeannine (1965) “Daily life in ancient India: from approximately 200 BC to AD 700”, IndiaMacmillan Press, New York, NY, USA.
6. Batabyal, Amitrajeet A. (2001) “On the Likelihood of Finding the Right Partner in an Arranged Marriage”, Journal of Socio-Economics, 30.
7. Batabyal, Amitrajeet A., and Beladi, Hamid (2002), “Arranged or Love Marriage? That is the Question”, Applied Economics Letters, 9, 893-897.
8. Bartolini, Stefano (2012) “Sociability predicts happiness in nations: Evidence from Macro and Micro Data”, forthcoming in: Stefano Bartolini (ed.), Policies for Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
9. Bauer, Armin, Green, David and Kuehnast, Kathleen (1998) “Women and Gender Relations: The Kyrgyz Republic in Transition”, Asian Development Bank.
10. Becchetti, Leonardo, Pelloni, Alessandra and Rossetti, Fiammetta (2008) “Relational goods, sociability, and happiness”, Kyklos, 61(3).
11. Becker, Gary S. (1973) “A Theory of Marriage: Part I”. The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 81, No. 4.
12. Bengtson, Vern L. And Martin, Peter (2001)...