ArticleThe history of the family : an international quarterly2025
Identifying Matrilineal Kin Networks in the United States 1900-1940.
Article in The history of the family : an international quarterly, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
National-level analysis of historical women's life courses and kinship networks is understudied due to data limitations. Previous analysis of patrilineal kin propinquity in the United States relied on surnames to identify the probability of non-random isonymy (same surname) as a proxy for nearby kin. One limitation of this approach is losing matrilineal kinship networks due to women's changing surnames upon marriage. Using linked census data from IPUMS MLP, LIFE-M, and Census Tree for 1900-1940, this project aims to identify birth surnames for married women to better measure matrilineal kinship networks in the United States. Results using linked census suggest non-coresidential matrilineal kinship networks underwent a similar decline as proximate patrilineal kinship networks in this time period, but nuances suggest that we should not treat these declines similarly. Matrilineal and patrilineal kin propinquity differed in the life course patterns for currently married women, and accounting for both matrilineal and patrilineal kin propinquity are important to assess the full kinship network. The rates differ in some cases between the three linked datasets, suggesting that underlying biases in the data explain some of the differences. However, the trends are similar in all geographies and methods suggesting that the identified trends are not due to random chance. While this analysis does not directly identify kin, the data produced here allows other research to identify relations from other censuses with data quality flags indicating how relationships are determined. This marks a revolutionary improvement in national-level analyses for women's life course research in the early twentieth century.
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.