Fatter attraction: anthropometric and socioeconomic matching ... - Ivie

Table 20: SUR Regressions of Husband’s Characteristics on Wife’s Characteristics.
Full sample broken down by Wife’s Height (below and above the median).
I. Short Wives Husband’s BMI Husband’s Log Wage
A. Index’s coefficients on
Wife’s Education −0.050
(0.044)
0.079***
(0.010)
Wife’s BMI 0.053*
(0.032)
Husband’s Age 0.027***
(0.009)
−0.020***
(0.006)
0.017***
(0.002)
R 2 0.06 0.22
Sample size 1,798
B. MRS = ratio of coefficients
Wife’s Education
Wife’s BMI
−0.938
(1.05)
Equality of ratios test Chi 2 (1) = 2.72
(p-value = 0.0992)
−3.96***
(1.45)
II. Tall Wives Husband’s BMI Husband’s Log Wage
A. Index’s coefficients on
Wife’s Education
−0.138***
(0.040)
0.067***
(0.009)
Wife’s BMI 0.054**
(0.023)
Husband’s Age 0.021***
(0.008)
−0.017***
(0.006)
0.018***
(0.002)
R 2 0.07 0.22
Sample size 2,453
B. MRS = ratio of coefficients
Wife’s Education
Wife’s BMI
−2.55*
−3.99***
(1.36)
(1.54)
Equality of ratios test Chi 2 (1) = 0.47
(p-value = 0.4953)
Note: We consider individuals who are in the normal-overweight range, BMI [18.5, 30).
Wife’s age is in the range [20, 50]. Bootstrapped standard errors (1,000 replications based on
801 (short wives) and 1,084 (tall wives) clusters in household head id) are reported in
parentheses. All regressions include state and year fixed effects.
*** p-value < 0.01, ** p-value < 0.05, * p-value < 0.1
44