1. The interview guide (pdf)
2. The review of the interviews
Couple number
and categorization | Interview number
and order
| Longer
transcript | More coded
segments |
| 1. traditional | 1. woman 2. man | Y | Y |
2. egalitarian | 3. woman 4. man | Y | Y |
3. transitional | 5. man 6. woman | Y | Y |
4. traditional | 7. woman 8. man | Y | Y |
5. egalitarian | 9. woman 10. man | Y | Y |
6. traditional | 11. man 12. woman | Y | Y |
7. egalitarian | 13. woman 14. man | Y | Y |
8. transitional | 15. man 16. woman | Y | Y |
9. traditional | 17. woman 18. man | Y | Y |
10. traditional | 19. man 20. woman | Y | Y |
11. traditional | 21. woman 22. man | Y | Y |
12. egalitarian | 23. man 24. woman | Y | Y |
13. traditional | 25. woman 26. man | Y | Y |
14. egalitarian | 27. man 28. woman | Y | Y |
3. The transcription guide (pdf)
4. Letter to participants for transcription review (pdf)
5. Alternative matrices
Separating the grooms and brides into two matrices shows the patterns more clearly compared to the original matrix presented in the 2008 conference presentation and 2009 Journal of Divorce & Remarriage paper.
Matrix 1 shows that half of the men have little to no involvement in both of their weddings; however, some men (most of those characterized as egalitarian in their second weddings) reported greater involvement in their second weddings, compared to their first weddings. Matrix 2 clearly shows that most of the women had high involvement in both of their weddings.
Matrix 1.
Men’s Involvement in Weddings
| | Most recent wedding |
| | little to no involvement | high
involvement |
First wedding | little to no
involvement | trad (6) trans (1)
trad (9) trans (8)
trad (10)
trad (11)
trad (13) | egal (12)
egal (5)a
egal (2)
egal (7) |
| high involvement | trans (3)b | egal (14)b |
Note: Numbers in parentheses refer to couple number of groom, and couple categorization is from his most recent wedding (trad = traditional, trans = transitional, egal = egalitarian). The groom from couple #4 (traditional) is not included because he was not previously married.
a There was very little preparation needed for the second wedding.
b There was very little preparation needed for the first wedding.
Matrix 2. Women’s Involvement in Weddings
| | Most recent wedding |
| | little to no involvement | high
involvement |
| little to no involvement | | trans (8) egal (12) |
First wedding | high involvement | | trad (4) trans (3) egal (2)
trad (6) egal (5)a
trad (9) egal (7) trad (10) egal (14)trad (11)
trad (13) |
Note: Numbers in parentheses refer to couple number of bride, and couple categorization is from her most recent wedding (trad = traditional, trans = transitional, egal = egalitarian). The bride from couple #1 (transitional) is not included because she was not previously married.
a There was very little preparation needed for the second wedding.