unit 4: cohabitation

Question 1

according to Fetters (2018), how has the relationship between cohabitation and divorce changed over time? what is a possible reason for this?

Answer 1

1950s-70s: cohabitation was more likely to lead to divorce
after 2000: cohabitation has been associated with lower divorce rate
could be due to normalization

Question 2

according to Fetters (2018), why is it so hard to collect data on cohabitation and divorce rates?

Answer 2

couples that are divorcing now were cohabitating many years ago, at a time when norms surrounding cohabitating were very different

Question 3

what method does Fetters (2018) propose to paint a better picture on the relationship between cohabitation and divorce?

Answer 3

studies should account for the couple’s intentions when they move in together. in the past it was likely more common for couples to move in together for financial reasons, and therefore making it more likely to lead to divorce in the future.

Question 4

why is has cohabitation been so frowned upon in the past?

Answer 4

premarital sexy time = bad

Question 5

how does the podcast on cohabitation define the cohabitation effect?

Answer 5

cohabitation effect: the increased rate of divorce when living together before marriage

Question 6

how have cohabitation trends changed over time, according to the podcast on living together before marriage?

Answer 6

73% of marriages now begin with cohabitation, vs less than 11% in the 1960s. this increase can be attributed to the second sexual revolution, accompanied by availability of birth control and the legalization of abortion.

Question 7

what are the two main theories behind the cohabitation effect?

Answer 7

1. cohabitation causes divorce because commitment of living together makes it harder to break up (social pressure counteracts “weeding out effect” of cohabitation)
2. cohabitation familiarizes a person with the idea that you can leave a relationship when things get hard, and then couples bring that individualistic attitude into marriage, leading to divorce

Question 8

what are the methodological flaws behind the cohabitation effect?

Answer 8

• there are all kinds of reasons why people might cohabit, and treating cohabitors as a homogenous unit is misleading
• most studies don’t account for the differences in cohabitation and marriage, where people are more likely to buy a home and have kids after getting married and gender roles are more likely to be adopted later on
• most studies don’t take age into account

Question 9

what is the main question Huang et al seek to answer?

Answer 9

what are the motivations and meanings associated with cohabitation? how are they gendered?

Question 10

according to Huang et al, why has previous research on cohabitation been limiting?

Answer 10

previous research has been based off statistics and altitudinal surveys, which don’t explain why people cohabit

Question 11

according to Huang et al, what are the advantages of cohabitation?

Answer 11

1. easier access (for women, this means love, for men it means sex)
2. lessen financial burden
3. more time together

Question 12

did Huang et al’s findings show a greater influence of gender or race on motivational differences for cohabitation?

Answer 12

gender

Question 13

how do men and women view cohabitation differently, according to Huang et al?

Answer 13

• men and women have different end goals: for women, cohabitation represents greater relationship commitment and they expect it to lead to marriage. for men, they see cohabitation more as having a temporary wife.
• there is a sexual double standard in terms of social disapproval of cohabitation.
• men and women have a different conceptualization of ‘costs’ of cohabitation: for men, it’s a social cost (give up bachelor lifestyle), for women, it does not exist

Question 14

according to Huang et al, what are the disadvantages of cohabitation?

Answer 14

1. sexual double standard for women
2. “why buy the cow when the milk is free” - delays in relationship commitment for men
3. men view it as a loss of social freedom

Question 15

True or false: according to Huang et al, cohabitation is more egalitarian than marriage

Answer 15

true, because both parties have more control

Question 16

true or false: according to Huang et al, men tend to believe that the costs of cohabitation outweigh the benefits

Answer 16

false. generally, men and women believe the benefits outweigh the cost, even if they are weighed differently

Question 17

according to Fetters (2018), what’s the best way to measure the effects of cohabitation on divorce rates?

Answer 17

a longitudinal study

Question 18

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), approx how many couples have cohabitated by age 25?

Answer 18

half

Question 19

what proposed theory do Kroeger and Smock (2014) bring up to suggest why cohabitation is becoming more common among older couples ?

Answer 19

older generations are ‘learning’ cohabitation from their children

Question 20

true or false: according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), despite the increase in popularity of cohabiting with kids, married households are still far more likely to include children than cohabiting households

Answer 20

false. cohabiting households are just ask likely to include children as married households

Question 21

what is “serial cohabitation”? how have the patterns of serial cohabitation evolved in recent years, according to Kroeger and Smock (2014)?

Answer 21

serial cohabitation means having multiple cohabiting unions in one’s lifetime. the number of cohabiting unions that individuals experience in their lifetime has increased dramatically over the past decades, though it still mains most prevalent among younger couples.

Question 22

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), what is the average length of a cohabiting union?

Answer 22

short-lived, lasting approx 2 years, ending in either marriage or dissolution.

Question 23

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), do most cohabiting unions end in marriage or break-up?

Answer 23

break-up

Question 24

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), which three social groups are most likely to cohabit?

Answer 24

1. those of lower socioeconomic status
2. those of lower education
3. those who are less religious

Question 25

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), how is the prevalence of cohabitation reflective of/motivated by national context?

Answer 25

• more common in industrialized nations
• reflective of cultural factors, religious traditions, and politics, greatly influenced by social networks
• countries in which cohabitation is more normalized, or viewed as more akin to marriage, tend to show higher relationship success rates (eg. Sweden, much of Latin America)
• cultural taboos against premarital sex tend to keep cohabitation low in certain countries (eg. many Asian countries)

Question 26

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), why is it still so difficult to get accurate census info on the number of cohabiting households?

Answer 26

• individuals in couples may provide different responses about whether or not they are cohabiting, mainly due to the fluid nature of cohabitation.
• also, the longer the gap between the interview date and when the cohabitation occurred, the less accurate the information given

Question 27

what does general research suggest the negative outcomes of cohabitation on children are? what do Kroeger and Smock (2014) suggest as an explanation of these outcomes?

Answer 27

• cohabitation is linked to poorer education outcomes, behavioural problems, poorer health and well-being, earlier sexual initiation, and teen pregnancy.
• they suggest that this is due most likely to socioeconomic influences and national attitudes toward cohabitation

Question 28

according to Kroeger and Smock (2014), why, for a long time, did people think that cohabitation decreases marital stability?

Answer 28

• cohabitation was thought to change people in ways that led them to be more likely to end a marriage, eg. learning that relationships can be temporary and that there are alternatives to marriage
• those more prone to divorce were thought to be more likely to cohabit in the first place, because they differ from those who do not cohabit on the basis of values, attitudes, and relationship skills

Question 29

what does Manning et al (2021) hypothesize about US cohabitation rates in the near future and how they may compare to those of Western Europe?

Answer 29

though it was thought that the rising levels of cohabitation in the US would in time catch up to those of Western Europe, Manning notes a plateau in US cohabitation rates. he suggests that fewer American women are forming any type of union, rather than simply using cohabitation as an alternative to marriage

Question 30

what are common law unions, and how do they differ from marriage unions or cohabitation unions?

Answer 30

non-married couples can claim common law status in order to have access to various privileges that regular cohabiting couples, such as for health and insurance purposes. it doesn’t have the same legal obligations of marriage, in the sense that diffusions of common law unions do not have to be settled in court like divorces do (whatever you brought into the relationship is yours when you leave)

Question 31

what social and historical factors caused Quebec’s super high cohabitation rates relative to other provinces?

Answer 31

1. quiet revolution: push for secularization in the 60s caused a cultural shift away from traditional marriage doctrines
2. feminist movement: shifts in gender ideologies and practices

Question 32

why do some consider Quebec to be a “post-marriage” society?

Answer 32

compared to other provinces, quebec has insanely high rates of cohabitation due to a popular abandon of the value of marriage as an institution

Question 33

why do financial pressures drive cohabitation trends?

Answer 33

most people view financial stability as a prerequisite for marriage, meaning younger people, those with lower education, and those of lower socioeconomic status are more likely to cohabit

Question 34

what are some common reasons for why a couple might choose to cohabit and never intend on getting married?

Answer 34

• opting out of institutional formalities of marriage, or don’t agree with the legal aspect of commitment
• ideological or religious opposition
• post-divorce union instead of remarriage, less risk and less hassle

Question 35

do children act as a stabilizing force in a cohabitating union?

Answer 35

only if they come after the establishment of the union, rather than being the reason for cohabitation in the first place (shotgun cohabitation = less stability)

Question 36

what is the experiential vs selection effect when it comes to explaining the relationship between divorce and cohabitation?

Answer 36

experiential effect: there is something that cohabitating couples realize over the course of cohabitation that makes them less committed
selection effect: there must be something about the people who cohabit that make them more likely to divorce later on
research shows more support for selection effect