By contrast, it is hypothesized that, although divorced men can hardly be characterized as unscathed after a divorce, a greater proportion of adult males that is divorced (MDIV) is likely to have no significant impact on the MVPR, ceteris paribus, i.e., the null hypothesis, [H.sub.0], arguably applies to divorced adults males in the aggregate.
MVPR = j(MUR, MME, MHS&M, MAGE65&M, MDIV, FGOV), [j.sub.MUR] > 0, [j.sub.MME] > 0, [j.sub.MHS&M] > 0, [j.sub.MAGE65&M] > 0, [j.sub.MDIV] = 0, [j.sub.FGOV] = 0.
FVPR / MVPR = k(FUR/MUR, FME/MME, FHS&M/MHS&M, FAGE65&M/MAGE65&M, FDIV/MDIV, FGOV), (5)
FVPR - MVPR = l(FUR - MUR, FME- MME, FHS&M - MHS&M, FAGE65&M - MAGE65&M, FDIV - MDIV, FGOV).
The source for the variables FVPR and MVPR was the U.S.
Thus, it appears that a higher ratio of FUR to MUR induces an increase in the ratio of the FVPR to the MVPR. The estimated coefficient on the (FME/MME) variable also is positive; after subjecting it to a two-tailed test, it is significant at the 2.5% level.
This study has sought to identify factors that might help to explain the contemporary observed differences in both the ratio of the FVPR to the MVPR and the difference between the FVPR and the MVPR.
Perhaps the most basic of these are explaining why the female and male VPRs differ in response (as shown above) with respect to the UR, ME, HS&M, and AGE65&M variables and explaining why the FVPR began to exceed the MVPR on a consistent basis around 1980.