Fatter attraction: anthropometric and socioeconomic matching ... - Ivie
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Table 9: SUR Regressions of Wife’s Characteristics on Husb<strong>and</strong>’s Characteristics.<br />
Full sample.<br />
Wife’s BMI<br />
Wife’s Education<br />
A. Index’s coefficients on<br />
Husb<strong>and</strong>’s Log Wage<br />
−0.543***<br />
(0.094)<br />
0.852***<br />
(0.073)<br />
Husb<strong>and</strong>’s BMI 0.086***<br />
(0.026)<br />
Wife’s Age 0.034***<br />
(0.008)<br />
−0.079***<br />
(0.019)<br />
−0.016***<br />
(0.006)<br />
R 2 0.05 0.14<br />
Sample size 4,251<br />
B. MRS = ratio of coefficients<br />
Husb<strong>and</strong>’s Log Wage<br />
Husb<strong>and</strong>’s BMI<br />
−6.31***<br />
−10.78***<br />
(2.18)<br />
(2.76)<br />
Equality of ratios test Chi 2 (1) = 1.86<br />
(p-value = 0.1726)<br />
Note: We consider individuals who are in the normal-overweight range, BMI [18.5, 30).<br />
Wife’s age is in the range [20, 50]. Bootstrapped st<strong>and</strong>ard errors (1,000 replications based on<br />
1,749 clusters in household head id) are reported in parentheses. All regressions include state<br />
<strong>and</strong> year fixed effects.<br />
*** p-value < 0.01, ** p-value < 0.05, * p-value < 0.1<br />
33
Change language