DOI: 10.3886/icpsr02692
title: Survey on Russian Marriages, 1996
title: Archival Version

description: This survey was designed to provide information on the
Russian family in terms of the economic and social change experienced
during the process of democratization. The survey covered urban and
rural areas of Russia. The Moscow data were collected between February
and November 1996, while respondents from the rural regions of Saratov
and Pskov were interviewed February-March 1996 and February-April
1996, respectively. Adults aged 18 to 60 years were asked through
face-to-face interviews for their views on their relationship with
their spouse or cohabitating partner, including relative status,
perceived marital/relationship quality, and perceived verbal and
physical abuse, as well as generational differences with respect to
gender attitudes and marital relationships. Cohabitating respondents
were asked the same questions as married respondents, in these cases,
reference was made to the partner instead of the spouse and to their
relationship rather than marriage. Respondents were asked to describe
their views, as well as those of their spouse or partner and of
society in general, regarding women working outside the home, marital
decision-making, and gender traits. Those queried also commented on
their satisfaction with the division of labor in their marriage or
cohabitating relationship, included housekeeping, managing family
finances, earning income, raising children, and caring for
parents. Married and previously married respondents were asked about
their marital history, including age at first marriage, while
separated, divorced, and widowed respondents were asked when and for
what reason(s) their union ended. Additional topics covered attitudes
towards divorce and alcohol use, the amount of conflict present in the
marriage or relationship, the presence of verbal and/or physical
abuse, verbal and/or physical abuse experienced from parents, family
background, and description of the residence. The spouses or
cohabitating partners of primary respondents were also interviewed, as
well as one adult child of each primary respondent with adult children
in the Moscow area sample. Only female respondents answered questions
regarding domestic violence in their marriage or cohabitating
relationship. Demographic variables included age, sex, marital status,
number of children, employment status, religious affiliation,
household income, education level, health status, alcohol usage, and
occupation, as well as the sex and age of the respondent's children
and household members.
description: The data contain two weight variables (WGHT1 AND WGHT2) that
 should be used in analyzing the data. The survey contained three types
 of respondents (primary, spouse/partner, and adult child) and the
 weights only relate to the selection of the primary respondents. WGHT1
 is calculated for each primary respondent and is based on the inverse
 probability of selection. WGHT1 weights the data to reflect the
 population size for the adult population in each of the three sample
 locations. WGHT2 is a normalized version of WGHT1, the percentage
 distributions will reflect the population characteristics, though the
 weighted sample size will not. For couple analyses, data users should
 create a dataset in which the unit of analysis is the couple based on
 the family identification code (V003) and the marital/relationship
variable (MARSTAT), either WGHT1 or WGHT2 may be used.
description: Data were collected through a multi-stage cluster
 probability sample of adults over 18 in the Moscow metropolitan area
 and in the rural areas surrounding the cities of Pskov and
 Saratov. For the Moscow sample, one municipality was randomly selected
 from all prefectures in the city except Zelenograd. One voter
 registration list was randomly selected from each municipality and
 potential respondents were then randomly selected from this list. A
 set of villages was randomly selected from the two rural areas of
 Pskov and Saratov and the voter registration lists in each village
 were randomly sampled for potential respondents. In Moscow, initial
 contacts to screen respondents were made by telephone, but were made
 in person in the areas of Pskov and Saratov. Since different sampling
 frames were used in each of the three locations, it is not advisable
to combine these samples when analyzing the data.
description: Datasets: 
DS1: Survey on Russian Marriages, 1996
description: Adults between the ages of 18 and 60 living in the areas
surrounding the Russian cities of Moscow, Pskov, and Saratov.
description: face-to-face interviewThe data available for download are not weighted,
and users will need to weight the data prior to analysis.Additional information about sampling, interviewing, sampling error,
and constructed variables may be found in the codebook.Value
labels for unknown/missing codes were added in several variables.For confidentiality reasons, variables containing exact birth dates
were blanked and recoded into the variables V030CAT, V037CAT, V044CAT,
V051CAT, V406CAT, V413CAT, V420CAT, V427CAT, and V434CAT. Variables
containing the exact ages of household members were also blanked and
recoded into age categories in variables V058CAT, V063CAT, V068CAT,
V073CAT, V078CAT, V083CAT, V453CAT, V458CAT, V463CAT, V468CAT,
V473CAT, and V478CAT.The formats of variables V023, V108, V317,
V327, V452, FAMINC1, FAMINC2, FAMINC3, I_INC1, PDVLAB1, ALCMONEY, and
DECSMAK2 were adjusted to fit the width of the values present in these
variables.According to the project research associate, the
variable ALCMONEY referred to the amount respondents spent on alcohol
in the month prior to the interview reported in rubles based on 1996
values. The measure is based on the responses to variable V151 in the
dataset.The project research associate suggested that the unknown
codes in variables relating to the respondent's relationship to
household members may have referred to cousins, aunts, uncles,
grandparents, and non-relatives.According to the project research
associate, the unknown variable HASCHLD may have referred to whether
respondents had a child 18 or younger in the household.The CASEID
variable was created for use with online analysis.