Good Critical Thinking About Social Work: Critical Analysis Of ‘the Effect Of Marital Status On Home Ownership Among Low-Income Households’

The Effect of Marital Status on Home Ownership among Low-Income Households: Critical Review

This paper is written by Michal Grinstein-Weiss, Pajarita Charles, Shenyang Guo, Kim Manturuk and Clinton Key. It is the publication of a research by the same authors and their findings on “whether married low-income renters are more likely to become home owners than comparable single, low-income renters” (Grinstein-Weiss et al., 2011, p.475).
This research has a sociological significance as it focuses on the institution of marriage, examining its implications on economic prosperity, particularly in relation to home ownership. Most importantly, the study also fills a gap in sociological research, which has so far not given much attention to marriage as a predictor for economic progress. This investigation is driven on the premise that home-ownership has major social benefits on individuals. For example, citing a number of literature, the authors note that home-ownership can improve community psychological well-being and involvement. These premises carry some credibility, considering the wide of range literature of previous research on the topic.
The literature review in this paper is quite extensive. This means that the authors’ hypothesis is not without justification.
This paper is a mixed method investigation; that is, it is both a quantitative and qualitative study. On the quantitative perspective, the ‘more likely’ question is a question of numbers. In this regard, the study seeks to find out the number of low-income renters (against unmarried low-income renters) who have acquired homes. The qualitative aspect aims to investigate the relationship between marriage and homeownership; that is, why low-income renters are- if they do- more likely to buy homes than their unmarried colleagues. In other words, the qualitative aspect focuses on finding the cause-effect link. In this respect, the authors seek to investigate key variables and see if marital status has a strong and net correlation with transition from renting to home ownership.
In terms of methodology, the choice to use the data gathered in the Community Advantage Panel Study (CAPS). The study required extensive data, which would have been expensive for the authors. Besides, CAPS had already gathered the data the research required (on low- and moderate-income population), and there was no need to do it again. CAPS data was also important in the way that it tracked home ownership trends among the participants (who had started as renters) since the survey. The data, therefore, provided a good foundation for measuring outcome.
Although the authors say they use of random sampling to select participants (from CAPS) and renters, they seem to have also used purpose sampling in deciding what population to pick their participants from; that is, the participants in the CAPS survey. These had been renters at the time of the survey. Now the study aimed to find out how those who had been married at the time of the survey had done on home ownership compared to those who had not been married. The purposive strategy at the start (choosing CAPS participants) was important as it would help focus on just the data the study required. The random sampling in the next stage was driven by the fact that there had been many participants in the survey and narrowing down to a select few was necessary and, in this respect, random selection would enhance the credibility of the study.
Ultimately, this paper’s strength lies in its internal credibility. On its external credibility, a bigger sample population would have been a better choice. Still, being the first to focus exclusively on marriage and home ownership, this paper paves way for further studies on this issue.

References

Greinstein-Weiss, M., Charles, P., Guo, S., Manturuk, K. & Key, C. (2011). The Effect
of Marital Status on Home Ownership among Low-Income Households. Social Service Review, 475-503