Cohabitation and Marriage: Complexity and Diversity in Union‐Formation Patterns

Abstract

Nonmarital cohabitation and marriage are now fundamentally linked, a fact that is routinely reflected in current research on union formation. Unprecedented changes in the timing, duration, and sequencing of intimate co‐residential relationships have made the study of traditional marriage far more complex today than in the past. It is now clear that a white, middle‐class, American‐centric research template has become increasingly anachronistic. In this review article, we begin by providing an overview of contemporary theory, empirical approaches, and demographic trends in cohabitation and marriage, focusing primarily on the United States, but also distinguishing the U.S. from patterns found in other high‐income societies, including European countries, Canada, Australia, and in East Asia. We place the spotlight on the causes and consequences of union transitions. We identify the commonalities between cohabitation and marriage, but also key differences that are expressed unevenly across different populations and cultural groups. The rise in nonmarital cohabitation has upended conventional theoretical models and measurement approaches to the study of traditional marriage, complicating matters but also reinvigorating family scholarship on union formation and its implications for partners, children, and society.

Parenthood and Well‐Being: A Decade in Review

“…In the United States, where mother–father relationships are fragile while repartnering rates are high, the focus of research has shifted from single parenthood to family instability, or the number of relationship transitions, as a factor that increases parenting strain (Beck, Cooper, McLanahan, & Brooks‐Gunn, ; Halpern‐Meekin & Turney, ). Despite the increases in cohabiting parents (Sassler & Lichter, ), few studies have examined differences in parenting strain and parental well‐being between cohabiting and married parents. In the United States, where cohabitors are more likely than the married to be economically disadvantaged (Sassler & Lichter, ), cohabiting parents' greater parenting strains at the descriptive level appear to be largely accounted for by economic disadvantages and relationship strains (Nomaguchi & Johnson, ).…”

“…Despite the increases in cohabiting parents (Sassler & Lichter, ), few studies have examined differences in parenting strain and parental well‐being between cohabiting and married parents. In the United States, where cohabitors are more likely than the married to be economically disadvantaged (Sassler & Lichter, ), cohabiting parents' greater parenting strains at the descriptive level appear to be largely accounted for by economic disadvantages and relationship strains (Nomaguchi & Johnson, ). In Europe, differences in life satisfaction between cohabiting and married parents vary across countries, depending on social norms regarding childbearing outside of marriage (Stavrova & Fetchenhauer, ).…”

Families in Later Life: A Decade in Review

“…In 2017, 70% of men but only 46% of women aged 65 years and older were currently married; this gap reflects men's lower life expectancy, women's greater likelihood of becoming widowed, and men's greater tendency to marry slightly younger partners and remarry following divorce or widowhood (Brown & Wright, ). Older Blacks are less likely than Whites to be married, reflecting lower rates of marriage and higher rates of marital dissolution at every life course stage (Sassler & Lichter, ; Sweeney & Raley, ). The proportion of older adults who are married declines with age, as rates of widowhood increase.…”

Families Across the Income Spectrum: A Decade in Review

“…In recent decades, standardized life course patterns gave way to more varied life trajectories (Furstenberg, ; Ruggles, ). Today in Western countries, people wait longer to get married, more people never marry, and more people cohabitate either before marriage or as an alternative to it (Kuperberg, ; W. D. Manning, Brown, & Payne, ; Perelli‐Harris & Lyons‐Amos, ; Sassler & Lichter, ). Moreover, the declining job prospects of men with less than a college degree decreased the supply of “marriageable men,” reducing marriage rates (Schneider, Harknett, & Stimpson, ).…”