Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions
Using data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, we show that women who report that religion is “very important” in their everyday life have both higher fertility and higher intended fertility than those saying religion is “somewhat important” or “not important” Factors such as unwanted fe...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Social forces 2008-03, Vol.86 (3), p.1163-1188 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1188 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 1163 |
| container_title | Social forces |
| container_volume | 86 |
| creator | Hayford, Sarah R. Morgan, S. Philip |
| description | Using data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, we show that women who report that religion is “very important” in their everyday life have both higher fertility and higher intended fertility than those saying religion is “somewhat important” or “not important” Factors such as unwanted fertility, age at childbearing or degree of fertility postponement seem not to contribute to religiosity differentials in fertility. This answer prompts more fundamental questions: what is the nature of this greater religiosity? And why do the more religious want more children? We show that those saying religion is more important have more traditional gender and family attitudes and that these attitudinal differences account for a substantial part of the fertility differential. We speculate regarding other contributing causes. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1353/sof.0.0000 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2723861</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A177828255</galeid><ericid>EJ790255</ericid><jstor_id>20430791</jstor_id><oup_id>10.1353/sof.0.0000</oup_id><sourcerecordid>A177828255</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c993t-d0d4e5f4b0e34c388b620b5ec8e4bbedd65ac3dd93491e2ed40a88fe9fbd851d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN1Ftv0zAUAOAIgdgYvPAMKAKBAKnFju88IE3Trgw27YImXiwnOelc0njEDmL_HketuhZNW5OHKPbnyzm-JMlzjIaYMPLJu2qIhig-D5J1zAgdCI7Yw2QdISIGQpBsLXni_TgCTKl8nKxhxUVGsFhPjk-gtiPrvA3XqWnKdAfaYOv-zzZpuIT0vLEByvQ0mAD-c3oWi05cDamrFux-E6AJ1jX-afKoMrWHZ7PvRnK-s322tTc4PNrd39o8HBRKkTAoUUmBVTRHQGhBpMx5hnIGhQSa51CWnJmClKUiVGHIoKTISFmBqvJSMlySjeTLtN-rLp9AWcThW1Prq9ZOTHutnbF6uaaxl3rk_ugsRi45jh28m3XQut8d-KAn1hdQ16YB13nNMZcqi_m9FyJKI-UrwCyGI8m9kCmh4hT7Ob6_E2LJOWeIcroCJYzRGLqI9PV_dOy6tomrpbNMqQxzgSJ6M0UjU4O2TeViFou-T72JhZCZzFifm8EtagQNxJS7Biobi5f88BYf3xImtri1wYelBtEE-BtGpvNe759-X90e_VjZyt3Du4Kc2cLVNYxAx229dbTsP0590TrvW6jmuxIj3Z9YHU-sRro_sRG_WtzHN3R2RCN4OwPGF6auWtMU1s9dhjKuMJPRvZg6aG0xr94-EApNJ0Xniz6GIkw6DwvrTnjcHfq0vz36ywNJEi8LdHEzuuuu7g7j5dSNfXDtwuwoQULhmxxaH3M3rzftL80FEUzvXfzUeweEop9fv-lj8g-NrIA9</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>229921670</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Education Source</source><creator>Hayford, Sarah R. ; Morgan, S. Philip</creator><creatorcontrib>Hayford, Sarah R. ; Morgan, S. Philip</creatorcontrib><description>Using data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, we show that women who report that religion is “very important” in their everyday life have both higher fertility and higher intended fertility than those saying religion is “somewhat important” or “not important” Factors such as unwanted fertility, age at childbearing or degree of fertility postponement seem not to contribute to religiosity differentials in fertility. This answer prompts more fundamental questions: what is the nature of this greater religiosity? And why do the more religious want more children? We show that those saying religion is more important have more traditional gender and family attitudes and that these attitudinal differences account for a substantial part of the fertility differential. We speculate regarding other contributing causes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0037-7732</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-7605</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/sof.0.0000</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19672317</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SOFOAP</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press</publisher><subject>Attitudes ; Behavior ; Beliefs ; Birth Rate ; Catholic Schools ; Catholicism ; Catholics ; Causality ; Childbirth & labor ; Children ; Christianity ; Churches ; Cognitive Structures ; Comparative analysis ; Demographics ; Demography ; Everyday life ; Families & family life ; Family Attitudes ; Family Size ; Female fertility ; Females ; Fertility ; Fertility rates ; Gender equality ; Gender Issues ; Identity ; Marriage ; National Surveys ; Parent Child Relationship ; Politics ; Population Growth ; Pregnancy ; Presidential elections ; Protestants ; Religion ; Religiosity ; Religious organizations ; Reproductive health ; Roman Catholics ; Sexuality. Marriage. Family relations ; Social Behavior ; Social Differences ; Social Influences ; Sociology ; Sociology of religion ; Sociology of the family. Age groups ; State Surveys ; Traditionalism ; Two on Family ; United STates ; United States of America</subject><ispartof>Social forces, 2008-03, Vol.86 (3), p.1163-1188</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2008 The University of North Carolina Press</rights><rights>Copyright © 2008 The University of North Carolina Press 2008</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2008 Oxford University Press</rights><rights>Copyright University of North Carolina Press Mar 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c993t-d0d4e5f4b0e34c388b620b5ec8e4bbedd65ac3dd93491e2ed40a88fe9fbd851d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20430791$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20430791$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,799,881,12825,27323,27903,27904,33753,33754,57995,58228</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ790255$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20269158$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19672317$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hayford, Sarah R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morgan, S. Philip</creatorcontrib><title>Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions</title><title>Social forces</title><addtitle>Social Forces</addtitle><addtitle>Social Forces</addtitle><description>Using data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, we show that women who report that religion is “very important” in their everyday life have both higher fertility and higher intended fertility than those saying religion is “somewhat important” or “not important” Factors such as unwanted fertility, age at childbearing or degree of fertility postponement seem not to contribute to religiosity differentials in fertility. This answer prompts more fundamental questions: what is the nature of this greater religiosity? And why do the more religious want more children? We show that those saying religion is more important have more traditional gender and family attitudes and that these attitudinal differences account for a substantial part of the fertility differential. We speculate regarding other contributing causes.</description><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>Birth Rate</subject><subject>Catholic Schools</subject><subject>Catholicism</subject><subject>Catholics</subject><subject>Causality</subject><subject>Childbirth & labor</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Christianity</subject><subject>Churches</subject><subject>Cognitive Structures</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Demographics</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Everyday life</subject><subject>Families & family life</subject><subject>Family Attitudes</subject><subject>Family Size</subject><subject>Female fertility</subject><subject>Females</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Fertility rates</subject><subject>Gender equality</subject><subject>Gender Issues</subject><subject>Identity</subject><subject>Marriage</subject><subject>National Surveys</subject><subject>Parent Child Relationship</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Population Growth</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Presidential elections</subject><subject>Protestants</subject><subject>Religion</subject><subject>Religiosity</subject><subject>Religious organizations</subject><subject>Reproductive health</subject><subject>Roman Catholics</subject><subject>Sexuality. Marriage. Family relations</subject><subject>Social Behavior</subject><subject>Social Differences</subject><subject>Social Influences</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Sociology of religion</subject><subject>Sociology of the family. Age groups</subject><subject>State Surveys</subject><subject>Traditionalism</subject><subject>Two on Family</subject><subject>United STates</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><issn>0037-7732</issn><issn>1534-7605</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqN1Ftv0zAUAOAIgdgYvPAMKAKBAKnFju88IE3Trgw27YImXiwnOelc0njEDmL_HketuhZNW5OHKPbnyzm-JMlzjIaYMPLJu2qIhig-D5J1zAgdCI7Yw2QdISIGQpBsLXni_TgCTKl8nKxhxUVGsFhPjk-gtiPrvA3XqWnKdAfaYOv-zzZpuIT0vLEByvQ0mAD-c3oWi05cDamrFux-E6AJ1jX-afKoMrWHZ7PvRnK-s322tTc4PNrd39o8HBRKkTAoUUmBVTRHQGhBpMx5hnIGhQSa51CWnJmClKUiVGHIoKTISFmBqvJSMlySjeTLtN-rLp9AWcThW1Prq9ZOTHutnbF6uaaxl3rk_ugsRi45jh28m3XQut8d-KAn1hdQ16YB13nNMZcqi_m9FyJKI-UrwCyGI8m9kCmh4hT7Ob6_E2LJOWeIcroCJYzRGLqI9PV_dOy6tomrpbNMqQxzgSJ6M0UjU4O2TeViFou-T72JhZCZzFifm8EtagQNxJS7Biobi5f88BYf3xImtri1wYelBtEE-BtGpvNe759-X90e_VjZyt3Du4Kc2cLVNYxAx229dbTsP0590TrvW6jmuxIj3Z9YHU-sRro_sRG_WtzHN3R2RCN4OwPGF6auWtMU1s9dhjKuMJPRvZg6aG0xr94-EApNJ0Xniz6GIkw6DwvrTnjcHfq0vz36ywNJEi8LdHEzuuuu7g7j5dSNfXDtwuwoQULhmxxaH3M3rzftL80FEUzvXfzUeweEop9fv-lj8g-NrIA9</recordid><startdate>20080301</startdate><enddate>20080301</enddate><creator>Hayford, Sarah R.</creator><creator>Morgan, S. Philip</creator><general>The University of North Carolina Press</general><general>University of North Carolina Press</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080301</creationdate><title>Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions</title><author>Hayford, Sarah R. ; Morgan, S. Philip</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c993t-d0d4e5f4b0e34c388b620b5ec8e4bbedd65ac3dd93491e2ed40a88fe9fbd851d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>Birth Rate</topic><topic>Catholic Schools</topic><topic>Catholicism</topic><topic>Catholics</topic><topic>Causality</topic><topic>Childbirth & labor</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Christianity</topic><topic>Churches</topic><topic>Cognitive Structures</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Demographics</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Everyday life</topic><topic>Families & family life</topic><topic>Family Attitudes</topic><topic>Family Size</topic><topic>Female fertility</topic><topic>Females</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Fertility rates</topic><topic>Gender equality</topic><topic>Gender Issues</topic><topic>Identity</topic><topic>Marriage</topic><topic>National Surveys</topic><topic>Parent Child Relationship</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Population Growth</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Presidential elections</topic><topic>Protestants</topic><topic>Religion</topic><topic>Religiosity</topic><topic>Religious organizations</topic><topic>Reproductive health</topic><topic>Roman Catholics</topic><topic>Sexuality. Marriage. Family relations</topic><topic>Social Behavior</topic><topic>Social Differences</topic><topic>Social Influences</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Sociology of religion</topic><topic>Sociology of the family. Age groups</topic><topic>State Surveys</topic><topic>Traditionalism</topic><topic>Two on Family</topic><topic>United STates</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hayford, Sarah R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morgan, S. Philip</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Social forces</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hayford, Sarah R.</au><au>Morgan, S. Philip</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ790255</ericid><atitle>Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions</atitle><jtitle>Social forces</jtitle><stitle>Social Forces</stitle><addtitle>Social Forces</addtitle><date>2008-03-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>86</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1163</spage><epage>1188</epage><pages>1163-1188</pages><issn>0037-7732</issn><eissn>1534-7605</eissn><coden>SOFOAP</coden><abstract>Using data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, we show that women who report that religion is “very important” in their everyday life have both higher fertility and higher intended fertility than those saying religion is “somewhat important” or “not important” Factors such as unwanted fertility, age at childbearing or degree of fertility postponement seem not to contribute to religiosity differentials in fertility. This answer prompts more fundamental questions: what is the nature of this greater religiosity? And why do the more religious want more children? We show that those saying religion is more important have more traditional gender and family attitudes and that these attitudinal differences account for a substantial part of the fertility differential. We speculate regarding other contributing causes.</abstract><cop>Chapel Hill, NC</cop><pub>The University of North Carolina Press</pub><pmid>19672317</pmid><doi>10.1353/sof.0.0000</doi><tpages>26</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0037-7732 |
| ispartof | Social forces, 2008-03, Vol.86 (3), p.1163-1188 |
| issn | 0037-7732 1534-7605 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2723861 |
| source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Sociological Abstracts; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Jstor Complete Legacy; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Education Source |
| subjects | Attitudes Behavior Beliefs Birth Rate Catholic Schools Catholicism Catholics Causality Childbirth & labor Children Christianity Churches Cognitive Structures Comparative analysis Demographics Demography Everyday life Families & family life Family Attitudes Family Size Female fertility Females Fertility Fertility rates Gender equality Gender Issues Identity Marriage National Surveys Parent Child Relationship Politics Population Growth Pregnancy Presidential elections Protestants Religion Religiosity Religious organizations Reproductive health Roman Catholics Sexuality. Marriage. Family relations Social Behavior Social Differences Social Influences Sociology Sociology of religion Sociology of the family. Age groups State Surveys Traditionalism Two on Family United STates United States of America |
| title | Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T15%3A58%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Religiosity%20and%20Fertility%20in%20the%20United%20States:%20The%20Role%20of%20Fertility%20Intentions&rft.jtitle=Social%20forces&rft.au=Hayford,%20Sarah%20R.&rft.date=2008-03-01&rft.volume=86&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1163&rft.epage=1188&rft.pages=1163-1188&rft.issn=0037-7732&rft.eissn=1534-7605&rft.coden=SOFOAP&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/sof.0.0000&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA177828255%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=229921670&rft_id=info:pmid/19672317&rft_galeid=A177828255&rft_ericid=EJ790255&rft_jstor_id=20430791&rft_oup_id=10.1353/sof.0.0000&rfr_iscdi=true |