The DOI matches its Crossref record.
In Search of Gender Bias in Household Resource Allocation in Rural China
Open accessAbstract
This paper tests three hypotheses concerning intra-household resource allocation in rural China. First, whether increasing the women's bargaining power alters household expenditure patterns. Second, whether households allocate fewer resources to daughters than to sons. Third, whether increasing the bargaining power of women reduces pro-boy discrimination. We find that expenditure patterns do vary with proxies for women's bargaining power. Pro-boy discrimination is suggested by: lower female outlay equivalent ratios for adult goods; greater sensitivity of household health spending to young boys than to young girls; and high male sex ratios. No evidence is found to support the third hypothesis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Consequently, in traditional Chinese society, there is a preference for sons. Only sons are considered permanent members of the family and the source of care. As a result of this, girls receive much less from the family in terms of resources and investment (Song 2008; Li and Wu 2011).”
From Why women own less housing assets in China? The role of intergenerational transfers (2019) · cites this paper as Song 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Why women own less housing assets in China? The role of intergenerational transfers
Deng, W. J., Hoekstra, J. S. C. M., & Elsinga, M. G. (2019) · Journal of Housing and the Built Environment · doi:10.1007/s10901-018-9619-0 · Cited by 54
Metadata
- Authors
- Song, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Song, Lina
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1890704733
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
- Munich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
- OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) (submittedVersion)
- Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
- Keywords
- gender bias, household resource allocation, women's bargaining power, son preference, gender discrimination, household expenditure, health spending, male sex ratio, rural China
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In Search of Gender Bias in Household Resource Allocation in Rural China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2139/ssrn.1136265
- The paper
- Song, L. (2008). In Search of Gender Bias in Household Resource Allocation in Rural China. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1136265
