Uncertainty, doubts, and delays: Economic circumstances and childbearing expectations among emerging adults
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The financial uncertainty mechanism aligns with research linking work precarity to fertility and family formation.
“This mechanism is consistent with findings on the association between work precarity and fertility and family formation (Brauner-Otto and Geist 2018; Lim 2017; Modena and Sabatini 2012; Piotrowski, Kalleberg, and Rindfuss 2015; White and Rogers 2000; Yu and Sun 2018).”
From Beyond the Great Recession: Labor Market Polarization and Ongoing Fertility Decline in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Brauner-Otto and Geist 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 63 · Cited by 80
- Authors
- Brauner-Otto, S. R., & Geist, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Utah (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Family and Economic Issues
- Published
- 2017-10-10
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 88-102
- ISSN
- 1058-0476 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-3475
- OpenAlex
- W2763802588
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 9.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Family and Economic Issues (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Keywords
- fertility expectations, emerging adults, economic conditions, financial stress, delayed childbearing, earnings, employment prospects, gender differences, racial differences
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
