Abstract
Yu Xie has made a valuable contribution by pointing out the biases in the sex preference measures used by Arnold and Liu (1986, Population and Developmental Review 12, 221–246) which are attributable to floor and ceiling effects and by suggesting the use of the BIC test to examine regional variations in sex preference in China. The new measure of sex preference that is recommended, however, does not make much of a substantive difference in the results. Moreover, the alternative measures and methods that the author employs are subject to substantial problems of their own. Most importantly, the conclusions that Xie reaches seem implausible in the Chinese context. We first discuss the methodology used in Xie's article and then the plausibility of his results in the light of other evidence and theoretical considerations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
