ArticlePopulation studies2022
The illusion of stable fertility preferences.
Article in Population studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Only Children and Low Family Size Ideals: Did the One-Child Policy Create a "Low-Fertility Trap" in China?European journal of population = Revue europeenne de demographie · 2025Article
- Dynamic Family Size Preferences During the COVID-19 Mortality Crisis: A Research Note.Demography · 2025Article
- Fertility preferences adjusted: reimagining parenthood in response to the uncertainty of infertility.Genus · 2025Article
- Female friendship and the cultural transmission of low-fertility values: Evidence from rural Poland.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Fertility intentions in the era of the new three-child policy in China: a cross-sectional survey of married adults of reproductive age.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Fertility Desires and Contraceptive Transition.Population and development review · 2024Article
- Youth's Political Identity and Fertility Desires.Journal of marriage and the family · 2024Article
- How genuine are sub-replacement ideal family sizes in urban China?Population studies · 2024Article
- Fertility Intentions During the Covid-19 Pandemic: An Analysis of Individual- and Municipality-Level Determinants.Population and development review · 2024Article
- Explaining uncertainty in women's fertility preferences.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Reproductive autonomy and the experience of later-than-desired pregnancy: results from a cross-sectional survey of reproductive-aged women in Uganda.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Unmet need and intention to use as predictors of adoption of contraception in 10 Performance Monitoring for Action geographies.SSM - population health · 2023Article
- Measuring Fertility Intentions During Times of Crisis: An Example Using Survey Data Amid the Covid-19 Pandemic.Studies in family planning · 2023Article
- Measurement of Unmet Need for Contraception: A Counterfactual Approach.Studies in family planning · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fertility preferences have long played a key role in models of fertility differentials and change. We examine the stability of preferences over time using rich panel data on Kenyan women's fertility desires, expectations, actual fertility, and recall of desires in three waves over a nine-year period, when respondents were in their 20s. We find that although desired fertility is quite unstable, most women perceive their desires to be stable. Under hypothetical future scenarios, few expect their desired fertility to increase over time but, in fact, such increases in fertility desires are common. Moreover, when asked to recall past desires, most respondents report previously wanting exactly as many children as they desire today. These patterns of bias are consistent with the emerging view that fertility desires are contextual, emotionally laden, and structured by identity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.