Transcript Currently cohabiting: relationship attitudes and intentions in the BHPS.

Currently cohabiting:
relationship attitudes and
intentions in the BHPS.
Ernestina Coast
Cohabitation
 Fuzzy
 Heterogeneous,
 Post-marriage
includes:
(pre- and post-divorce)
 Pre-marriage
 Post
widowhood
 Evolving
 “a
moving target”
 1980s “alternative lifestyle”
Relationship pathways, all women, BHPS (2005)
All women in sample
12,969
Never in union
3,520
Dissolve #1
1784
Remain
unpartnered
863
Remain
married
152
Remain
unpartnered
72
Stay
married
12
Dissolve
#3
Marry
#3
Marry # 2
273
Dissolve # 2
121
Cohabitation
#1
Dissolve # 2
131
Remain
unpartnered
59
Marry
#2
Stay
married
7
Dissolve
#3
Dissolve
#3
Remain
cohab
1132
Remain married
4567
Remain
unpartnered
315
Cohabit # 1
648
Stay
cohabit
5
Marry
#3
Cohabit #1
3,098
Married
6,351
Remain
cohabit
124
Cohab
#2
Stay
cohab
17
Marry
#2
Dissolve
#3
Marry #2
393
Dissolve
#2
Remain
married
Marry # 1
111
Remain
married
80
Remain
unpartnered
14
Dissolve
#2
31
Marry
#2
Cohabit
#2
Dissolve
#3
Marry
#3
Stay
married
2
Remain
unpartnered
56
Dissolve
#1
808
Cohabit
#2
Marry
#2
Dissolve
#2
147
Dissolve Remain
#2
married
35
85
Dissolve
#3
Stay
cohabit
6
Cohabit #2
382
Marry
#1
121
Remain
unpartne
red
68
Dissolve
#3
Stay
married
4
Remain
married
760
Marry #1
1158
Dissolve#1
389
Remain
cohabit
114
Cohabit
Marry
#3
#1
67
Remain
unpartnered
139
Stay
Dissolve
married
#2
23
Stay
Cohabit
Remain
Unpartnered
Dissolve
#3
Cohabit
#2
Marry
#1
Marry
#2
Cohabit
#2
Stay
MarryDissolve
cohab
#2
#2
64
Stay
Married
Dissolve
#2
Remain
unpartnered
25
Marry
#2
Cohabit
#3
 Good
large-scale descriptive data on
incidence and trends
 Representative
 Empirical
attitudinal surveys
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
100
80
Agree statement male
Agree statement female
Ever cohabited male
Ever cohabited female
60
50
70
60
40
50
30
40
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
1920
1930
1940
1950
Birth cohort
1960
1970
Percentage ever cohabited
Percentage (strongly) agree repsonse to
the statement "It is alright for people to
live together even if they have no
interest in considering marriage"
90
70
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.
50
45
40
Percent
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002 1994 2002
18-34
35-54
55+
It is all right for a couple to live
together without intending to
get married
18-34
35-54
55+
It is a good idea for a couple
who intend to get married to
live together first
18-34
35-54
55+
People who want children
ought to get married
• Social acceptance of cohabitation wellestablished
• Moved from deviant to normative behaviour
• Acceptance likely to increase
– Cohort replacement
– Socialisation
– Social diffusion
British Household Panel Survey
(BHPS)
 Annual
since 1991
 Approx.
 Full
5,000 households
interview with new partners
1991: Wave 1
1991: Wave 1
1992: Wave 2 Full marriage &
cohabitation history
1992: Wave 2 Full marriage &
cohabitation history
1991: Wave 1
Annual status updates
Annual status updates
1992: Wave 2 Full marriage &
cohabitation history
1991: Wave 1
1998: Wave 8
Relationship questions
Relationship questions
1998: Wave 8
Annual status updates
1992: Wave 2 Full marriage &
cohabitation history
1991: Wave 1
Annual status updates
Annual status updates
Relationship questions
1998: Wave 8
Annual status updates
1992: Wave 2 Full marriage &
cohabitation history
1991: Wave 1
2003: Wave 13
Relationship questions repeat
Annual status updates
Relationship questions repeat
2003: Wave 13
Annual status updates
Relationship questions
1998: Wave 8
Annual status updates
1992: Wave 2 Full marriage &
cohabitation history
1991: Wave 1
2006 Wave 16
Percentage distribution of marital and cohabiting
status, by birth cohort, women, 2003
100%
90%
Percentage of birth cohort
80%
70%
Ever-married and noncohabiting
60%
Post-marital
cohabitation
Married
50%
40%
Pre-marital
cohabitation
30%
Never-married and
non-cohabiting
20%
10%
0%
1970
1960
1950
1940
Birth cohort
1930
1920
1910
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
2
3
4
5
6
Planning to marry
Probably get married at some point
Probably just keep living together without
marrying
Have not really thought about the future
Other (specify)
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.
Advantages in living as a
couple rather than marriage?
First mentioned advantage
Trial marriage
No legal ties
Improves relationship
Previous bad marriage
Personal independence
Financial advantage
Companionship
Prefer cohabitation
Other
1998
2003
40.0%
32.0%
30.7
29.8
5.2
1.6
10.0
16.1
2.0
1.4
3.2
23.6
24.5
3.6
2.7
10.9
22.2
3.1
1.3
8.2
Percentage distribution of reported
disadvantages of cohabitation relative to
marriage, currently cohabiting respondents, 1998
and 2003.
Disadvantages in living as a
couple rather than marriage?
First mentioned disadvantage
Financial insecurity
No legal status
Effects on children
Lack of commitment
Social stigma
Other
1998
2003
26.7
23.6
39.0
16.6
5.4
15.6
16.3
7.1
30.4
32.1
6.2
9.6
11.3
10.4
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.
1998
n=268
2003
n=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), 2003
Expectation of current cohabiting
relationship
Duration of
current
cohabiting
relationship
Plan to
marry
Probably
marry
Live
together
< 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 livein relationship, 1998 and 2003
1998
(n=1,007)
Expect.
Plan to
of current marry
cohabit
Prob.
union
marry
Live
together
2003
(n=1,343)
No prior
live-in
union
Prior livein union
No prior
live-in
union
Prior livein union
24.7
13.3
22.7
16.9
46.8
37.6
47.2
33.7
28.5
49.0
30.1
49.4
Do individuals achieve their relationship
expectations?
Outcome
Expectation
Split up
Marry
Continue
cohabit
Plan to marry
0.9
10.7
4.2
Probably
marry
Live together
7.0
13.6
20.9
6.6
4.8
23.9
No thought to
future
Do not know
1.3
0.6
3.7
0.1
0.1
1.5
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
Do couples report conflicting relationship
attitudes and expectations?
1998
n=168 couples
Couple
concordant
2003
n=231
couples
Couple
concordant
Advantages to
cohabitation
65.4%
64.9%
Disadvantages
to cohabitation
63.9%
74.0%
% distribution couple expectations, 1998
and 2003, first unions only
Men
1998
n=137 couples
2003
n=196 couples
Women
Women
Plan to
marry
Prob.
marry
Plan to
marry
20.4
8.0
0.7
Prob.
marry
3.6
43.8
0
5.8
Just
live tog.
Just
Plan to
live tog. marry
Prob.
marry
Just
live tog.
19.9
5.1
1.0
5.8
3.6
37.8
10.7
11.7
0
4.6
17.3
Percentage distribution of relationship outcomes
by 1998 relationship expectations, cohabiting
couples.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Continue cohabit
Marry
Split up
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Plan to marry
Probably marry
Agree
Continue cohabit
Disagree
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?