Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

How heterosexual couples met in Switzerland, by year of meeting (1995–2018): all contexts (Panel A), specific online contexts (Panel B).

Source: EFG 2018. Weighted data by wecritpers. Lowess regression smoothing with bandwidth = .6 is applied, except for online meeting contexts, where a bandwidth = .3 is applied. Percentages before applying lowess smoothing are reported in S2 Table in S1 File.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Logistic regression coefficients predicting family formation intentions by meeting context.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Predicted probabilities of family formation intentions, by meeting context and gender, 95% CI.

Based on logistic regression models including interactions between meeting context and gender, controlling for whether same-sex couple, type of union, age, tertiary education, whether employed, whether previously married, prior cohabitation, biological children, (common children), religiosity, migration background, work-life conflict, relationship satisfaction, poor health, and partnership duration. Stars indicate probabilities significantly different compared to the offline category: † p < 0.10; * p < .05; ** p < 0.01.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 2.

OLS regression coefficients predicting relationship and life satisfaction by meeting context.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Logistic and multinomial logistic regression coefficients predicting exogamy by meeting context.

More »

Table 3 Expand