Currently cohabiting: relationship attitudes and intentions in the BHPS.

Ernestina Coast

Cohabitation Fuzzy

Heterogeneous, includes: Post-marriage (pre- and post-divorce) Pre-marriage Post widowhood

Evolving “a moving target” 1980s “alternative lifestyle”

All women in sample12,969

Never in union3,520

Married6,351

Dissolve #11784

Remain married4567

Cohabit #13,098

Dissolve #1

808

Remain cohab1132

Marry #11158

Marry # 2273

Cohabit # 1648

Remain unpartnered

863

Marry # 1111

Cohabit #2 382

Remain unpartnered

315

Dissolve#1389

Remain married

760

Remain married

152

Dissolve # 2121

Remain cohabit

124

Marry #2393

Dissolve # 2131

Dissolve #231

Remain married

80

Dissolve # 2147

Remain cohabit

114

Marry # 1121

Marry #2

Cohabit#2

Remain unpartnered

139

Marry # 3

Cohabitation#1

Remain unpartnered

72

Marry # 2

Cohab#2

Remain unpartnered

59

Dissolve#2

Remainmarried

Marry#2

Cohabit#2

Remain unpartnered

14

Dissolve # 235

Remain married

85

Remain unpartne

red68

Cohabit #367

Marry#1

Dissolve#2

Stay married

23

Marry#2

Dissolve#2

Stay cohab

64

Dissolve#3

Stay married

12

Stay cohabit

5

Marry#3

Dissolve#3

Dissolve#3

Stay married

7

Marry#2

Dissolve#3

Stay cohab

17

Marry#3

Remain unpartnered

56

Cohabit#2

Dissolve#3

Stay married

2

Dissolve#3

Stay cohabit

6

Marry#2

Dissolve#3

Stay married

4

StayCohabit

Dissolve#3

Marry#1

RemainUnpartnered

Cohabit#2

StayMarried

Dissolve#2

Marry#2

Cohabit#3

Remain unpartnered

25

Relationship pathways, all women, BHPS (2005)

Good large-scale descriptive data on incidence and trends

Representative attitudinal surveys

Empirical gap: cohabitees US research emerging qualitative research survey data relationship intentions and attitudes

longitudinal data – collected while subjective state exists systematic empirical investigation of social change

Normative attitudes

• Changing social norms around marriage

– Deinstitutionalisation of marriage – (Cherlin, 1994)

– Démariage – (Thery, 1994),

– Disestablishment of marriage – (Coontz, 2004, quoting Cott).

BHPS normative attitudes

• “Living together outside of marriage is always wrong” – 1992, 1994, 1996

• “It is alright for people to live together even if they have no interest in considering marriage” – 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004

Percentage distribution of attitudes towards, and experience of, cohabitation, by birth cohort and sex, BHPS, 2004

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970Birth cohort

Perc

enta

ge (s

tron

gly)

agr

ee re

pson

se to

th

e st

atem

ent "

It is

alri

ght f

or p

eopl

e to

liv

e to

geth

er e

ven

if th

ey h

ave

no

inte

rest

in c

onsi

derin

g m

arria

ge"

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Percentage ever cohabited

Agree statement maleAgree statement femaleEver cohabited maleEver cohabited female

Percentage distribution of youths aged 11-15 years response to the question statement “Living together outside of marriage is

always wrong”, BHPS 1994-2005

1994 1999 2000 2001 2005

Strongly agree/agree

19.0 12.8 11.9 10.6 13.3

Neither agree nor disagree

21.2 27.9 26.7 23.5 30.8

Strongly disagree / disagree

59.8 59.3 61.4 65.9 55.9

Percentage distribution, by age group, of respondents who disagree, or strongly disagree, with statements about cohabitation and marriage, BSA, 1994-2002.

05

1015202530354045

1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002

18-34 35-54 55+ 18-34 35-54 55+

It is all right for a couple to live together withoutintending to get married

It is a good idea for a couple who intend to getmarried to live together first

%

• Social acceptance of cohabitation well-established

• Moved from deviant to normative behaviour

• Acceptance likely to increase– Cohort replacement– Socialisation– Social diffusion

British Household Panel Survey (BHPS)

Annual since 1991

Approx. 5,000 households

Full interview with new partners

Questions “We are interested in why you and your partner

have chosen to live together rather than being married. Do you think there are any (dis)advantages in living as a couple, rather than being married?”

If “Yes”

“What do you think are the (dis)advantages of living as a couple?”

Question: Future intentions “Obviously you cannot say for certain what will

happen, but could you please look at this card and read out the number of the statement which you feel applies most closely to your current relationship?

1 Planning to marry 2 Probably get married at some point 3 Probably just keep living together without marrying 4 Have not really thought about the future 5 Other (specify) 6 Don’t know

Supplementary Question “Even though you have no plans to

marry at the moment, can you please look at this card and tell me how likely it is that you will ever get married to anyone in the future?”

1 Very likely 2 Likely 3 Unlikely 4 Very unlikely 5 Don’t know

Interrogating the questions Grounded in reality

Take account of circumstances rather than an expression of abstract desire

Supplementary question on marriage expectation moves from current relationship to any future hypothetical relationship

Phrased relative to marriage

Percentage distribution of reported advantages of cohabitation relative to marriage, currently cohabiting

respondents, 1998 and 2003.1998 2003

Advantages in living as a couple rather than marriage?

40.0% 32.0%

First mentioned advantageTrial marriage

No legal tiesImproves relationship

Previous bad marriagePersonal independence

Financial advantageCompanionship

Prefer cohabitationOther

30.729.85.21.6

10.016.12.01.43.2

23.624.53.62.7

10.922.23.11.38.2

Parenthood status is significant:

Non-parents = trial marriage. Parents = personal independence + absence of legal ties

Percentage distribution of reported disadvantages of cohabitation relative to

marriage, currently cohabiting respondents, 1998 and 2003.

1998 2003Disadvantages in living as a

couple rather than marriage?26.7 23.6

First mentioned disadvantageFinancial insecurity

No legal statusEffects on children

Lack of commitmentSocial stigma

Other

39.016.65.4

15.616.37.1

30.432.16.29.6

11.310.4

Percentage distribution of responses to the statement “How likely it is that you will ever get married to anyone in the future?”, by

currently cohabiting, never married respondents with no plans to marry their current partner, by sex, 1998 and 2003.

1998n=268

2003n=401

Male Female Male Female

Very likely 4.7 5.8 3.1 3.4

Likely 24.0 28.8 18.9 23.9

Unlikely 25.6 38.8 40.8 42.9

Very unlikely

34.1 18.0 27.0 22.9

Don’t know

11.6 8.6 10.2 6.8

Percentage distribution of future relationship expectations, by duration of current cohabiting

relationship (n=1,015 respondents), 2003Expectation of current cohabiting

relationshipPlan to marry

Probably marry

Live together

Duration of current cohabiting relationship

< 1 year 30.5 38.0 31.6

1-2 years 29.9 44.4 25.7

2-5 years 19.8 48.5 31.7

> 5 years 9.2 33.4 57.4

% distribution of union expectations, by prior live-in relationship, 1998 and 2003

1998(n=1,007)

2003(n=1,343)

No prior live-in union

Prior live-in union

No prior live-in union

Prior live-in union

Expect. of current cohabit union

Plan to marry

24.7 13.3 22.7 16.9

Prob. marry

46.8 37.6 47.2 33.7

Live together

28.5 49.0 30.1 49.4

Do individuals achieve their relationship expectations?

OutcomeExpectation Split up Marry Continue

cohabitPlan to marry 0.9 10.7 4.2

Probably marry

7.0 13.6 20.9

Live together 6.6 4.8 23.9

No thought to future

1.3 0.6 3.7

Do not know 0.1 0.1 1.5

Never-married childless couples interviewed in 1998 – subsequent birth of a child is sig. associated with continuation of cohabitation compared to entry to marriage

Couple concordance / discordance

• Use only couples with full responses to questions– Potential bias for homogeneity of response– Only first-ever live-in relationships

• Interview effect?– 1998 58% of individual interviews record 3rd party

• 89% coded as no influence exerted by the third party

% distribution couple expectations, 1998 and 2003, first unions only

1998 n=137 couples

2003n=196 couples

Women Women

Plan to marry

Prob. marry

Just live tog.

Plan to marry

Prob. marry

Just live tog.

Men

Plan to marry

20.4 8.0 0.7 19.9 5.1 1.0

Prob. marry

3.6 43.8 5.8 3.6 37.8 10.7

Just live tog.

0 5.8 11.7 0 4.6 17.3

Percentage distribution of relationship outcomes by 1998 relationship expectations, cohabiting

couples.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Plan to marry Probably marry Continue cohabit

Agree Disagree

Continue cohabitMarrySplit up

Discussion• Analyses at the relationship level

• Living apart together (LAT)

• Assumption of rational choice– Vague or underspecified goals

• Qualitative insights

• Cohabitation versus marriage or LAT?

Mid-career research training fellowship

• “Multiplier” effect– Research and training skills– Longitudinal data in the developing world– Qualitative longitudinal research– Other datasets– New avenues of research: The Household