Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
Research Article

Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census

Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund
  1. *Department of Economics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10025; and
  2. †National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS April 15, 2008 105 (15) 5681-5682; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800703105
Douglas Almond
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lena Edlund
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: le93@columbia.edu
  1. Edited by Ronald Lee, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved March 3, 2008 (received for review January 24, 2008)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

We document male-biased sex ratios among U.S.-born children of Chinese, Korean, and Asian Indian parents in the 2000 U.S. Census. This male bias is particularly evident for third children: If there was no previous son, sons outnumbered daughters by 50%. By contrast, the sex ratios of eldest and younger children with an older brother were both within the range of the biologically normal, as were White offspring sex ratios (irrespective of the elder siblings' sex). We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

  • sex-selective abortion
  • son preference

The ratio of male to female births exceeds the biological norm of 1.05 (1) in a number of Asian countries, notably India (2, 3), China (4, 5), and South Korea (6, 7). Availability of prenatal sex determination and induced abortion have been identified as important factors (3, 8), to the point of the former being (ineffectively) banned in India and China. Sex selection is no less controversial outside Asian countries, but so far there has been little evidence of prenatal diagnostics being used to that end (an exception being ref. 9).

We document male-biased sex ratios among U.S.-born children to Chinese, Koreans, and Asian Indians in the U.S. The male bias is particularly evident for higher parities, echoing patterns in the corresponding Asian countries (4, 6, 10). At third parity, sons outnumbered daughters 1.51:1 if there was no previous son. As a comparison, for India, the corresponding figure was found to be 1.39:1 in a recent large-scale survey (2) and 2.25:1 for China in the 1990 Census (3).

Results

Using the 2000 U.S. Census, we find that the sex ratio of the oldest child to be normal, but that of subsequent children to be heavily male if there was no previous son. The sex ratio of the second child was 1.17 if the first child was a girl. At third parity, boys outnumbered girls by 1.51:1 if the two previous children were girls (Fig. 1 Lower).

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Sex ratio by parity and sex of previous child(ren).

By comparison, White offspring sex ratios varied only slightly with parity and sex composition of previous children, and the tendency was for repetition of the previous sex (Fig. 1 Upper).

Robustness.

Similar results were obtained if we linked children to only mothers or only fathers. The found male bias at higher parity was true irrespective of the mother's citizenship status (a possible marker of cultural assimilation and expectations regarding future dependence on children for old age support). If anything, mothers with citizenship had more male-biased offspring sex ratios, but the difference was not statistically significant.

Discussion

We document son-biased sex ratios at higher parities in a contemporary Western society. We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage. Since 2005, sexing through a blood test as early as 5 weeks after conception has been marketed directly to consumers in the U.S., raising the prospect of sex selection becoming more widely practiced in the near future.

Son-biased sex ratios were found despite the absence of many of the factors advanced to rationalize son bias in India, China, and Korea, such as China's one-child policy, high dowry payments (India), patrilocal marriage patterns (all three countries) (11), or reliance on children for old age support and physical security.

Although the magnitude of the deviations we find for second and third children is comparable to that documented for India, China, and South Korea, the marriage market consequences for the U.S. are likely limited. Low fertility in the U.S. means that births are concentrated at lower parities, where sex ratios are closer to the biological norm. In addition, because Indians, Chinese, and Koreans make up <2% of the U.S. population, the effect on the breeding population sex ratio is small.

Finally, the male bias we find in the U.S. appears to be recent. In the 1990 U.S. Census, the tendency for males to follow females among Indians, Chinese, and Koreans is substantially muted.

Materials and Methods

We used the 2000 U.S. Census, 5% public use sample. We restricted the sample to families where both the mother's and the father's race was given as Chinese, Korean, or Indian, where either parent headed the household, and where all children were born in the United States (to ensure that the offspring sex composition was not the result of, for example, China's one-child policy). We excluded families with adopted or step-children. To reduce the probability that there was an eldest child not in the household, we also restricted our sample to families where the oldest child was 12 years or younger. Focusing on parity one through three yielded an analysis sample of 18,557 children in 11,553 families.

We investigated the sex ratio of children by parity (as calculated by the age of children reported in the household) and sex of previous children. In the absence of manipulation, we expected the sex ratio at each parity and sex composition of older siblings to be random, with a mean of 1.05 at birth. Lower parity children were older, but were born to younger mothers, two factors known to exert small and roughly offsetting effects on the sex ratio. As for sex of previous children, there may have been a small tendency toward repeating the same sex (1, 12).

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Mac Brown, Janet Currie, Ronald Lee, and two anonymous referees for their comments. We also thank the Institute for Social and Economic Policy Research (ISERP) at Columbia University for financial support.

Footnotes

  • ‡To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: le93{at}columbia.edu
  • Author contributions: D.A. and L.E. designed research, performed research, contributed new reagents/analytic tools, analyzed data, and wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.

  • © 2008 by The National Academy of Sciences of the USA

References

  1. ↵
    1. Chahnazarian A
    (1988) Determinants of the sex ratio at birth: Review of recent literature. Soc Biol 35:214–235.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Jha P ,
    2. et al.
    (2006) Low female-to-male sex ratio of children born in India: National survey of 1.1 million households. Lancet 367:211–218.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Bhat PNM ,
    2. Zavier Francis AJ
    1. Attane I ,
    2. Guilmoto CZ
    (2007) in Watering the Neighbour's Garden, Factors influencing the use of prenatal diagnostic techniques and sex ratio at birth in India, eds Attane I , Guilmoto CZ (Committee for International Cooperation in National Research in Demography, Paris), pp 131–160.
  4. ↵
    1. Zeng Y ,
    2. et al.
    (1993) Causes and implications of the recent increase in the reported sex ratio at birth in China. Population Dev Rev 19:283–302.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. Tuljapurkar S ,
    2. Li N ,
    3. Feldman MW
    (1995) High sex ratios in China's future. Science 267:874–876.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Park CB ,
    2. Cho NH
    (1995) Consequences of son preferences in a low-fertility society: Imbalance of the sex ratio at birth in Korea. Population Dev Rev 21:59–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. Chung W ,
    2. Das Gupta M
    (2007) Why is son preference declining in South Korea? The role of development and public policy, and the implications for China and India (World Bank, Washington, DC) The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper no. 4373.
  8. ↵
    1. Hesketh T ,
    2. Xing ZW
    (2006) Abnormal sex ratios in human populations: Causes and consequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:13271–13275.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Abrevaya J
    (2007) Are there missing girls in the United States? Evidence on gender preference and gender selection. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=824266. Accessed February 16, 2008.
  10. ↵
    1. Das Gupta M
    (1987) Selective discrimination against female children in rural Punjab, India. Population Dev Rev 13:77–100.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. Das Gupta M ,
    2. et al.
    (2003) Why is son preference so persistent in East and South Asia? A cross-country study of China, India and the Republic of Korea. J Dev Studies 40:153–187.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. ↵
    1. Renkonen KO ,
    2. Makela O ,
    3. Lehtovaara R
    (1962) Factors affecting the human sex ratio. Nature 194:308–309.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census
Douglas Almond, Lena Edlund
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Apr 2008, 105 (15) 5681-5682; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0800703105

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census
Douglas Almond, Lena Edlund
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Apr 2008, 105 (15) 5681-5682; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0800703105
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 105 (15)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Materials and Methods
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Water from a faucet fills a glass.
News Feature: How “forever chemicals” might impair the immune system
Researchers are exploring whether these ubiquitous fluorinated molecules might worsen infections or hamper vaccine effectiveness.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Dmitry Naumov.
Reflection of clouds in the still waters of Mono Lake in California.
Inner Workings: Making headway with the mysteries of life’s origins
Recent experiments and simulations are starting to answer some fundamental questions about how life came to be.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Radoslaw Lecyk.
Cave in coastal Kenya with tree growing in the middle.
Journal Club: Small, sharp blades mark shift from Middle to Later Stone Age in coastal Kenya
Archaeologists have long tried to define the transition between the two time periods.
Image credit: Ceri Shipton.
Mouse fibroblast cells. Electron bifurcation reactions keep mammalian cells alive.
Exploring electron bifurcation
Jonathon Yuly, David Beratan, and Peng Zhang investigate how electron bifurcation reactions work.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Panda bear hanging in a tree
How horse manure helps giant pandas tolerate cold
A study finds that giant pandas roll in horse manure to increase their cold tolerance.
Image credit: Fuwen Wei.

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Cozzarelli Prize
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490