Kaleidoscopic perspectives on theorizing singlehood

Lavender‐Stott, Erin S.; Guzzo, Karen Benjamin; Brown, Susan L.; Manning, Wendy D.

doi:10.1111/jftr.12532

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with Lavender‐Stott et al's (2021) conceptualization, VS does not equate singlehood with isolation or inherent casualness. Some individuals might be “playing the field” (Brady et al, 2022, p. 1) with a pursuit of pleasure and disinterest in dyadic exclusivity, but this does not reflect the full range of non‐coresidential options.…”

Section: Voluntary Singlehoodmentioning

confidence: 66%

Voluntary and involuntary singlehood: Salience of concepts from four theories

Fitzpatrick

2023

J of Family Theo & Revie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reconfiguring theoretical approaches is needed as growing numbers of adults are experiencing extended periods of singlehood. There is a central distinction in intentionality, which creates a voluntary or involuntary status. Voluntary individuals have chosen to be marriage‐free. Involuntary individuals wish to be cohabited/married but have been unable to do so. The purpose of this paper is to describe the linkages among characteristics of voluntary/involuntary singlehood and concepts from four theories (social exchange, symbolic interactionism, family development, chaos). These theories were chosen because they are commonly addressed in family science teaching and scholarship. They are used as conceptual lenses to guide relational or familial research, but there has been little attention to their potential linkages to singlehood. Given the voluntary‐involuntary distinction, linkages are drawn to each type. This paper highlights how four traditional theories can be bridged with diverse components of singlehood experiences.

show abstract

Section: Voluntary Singlehoodmentioning

confidence: 66%

Voluntary and involuntary singlehood: Salience of concepts from four theories

Fitzpatrick

2023

J of Family Theo & Revie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With recent demographic changes across the world suggesting increases in the single (i.e., unpartnered) population, researchers have started to pay more attention to single individuals' lives (see the special issue in Journal of Family Theory & Review ; Lavender‐Stott et al, in press). As summarized in a recent review (Girme et al, 2023), a growing body of research is advancing our understanding of single peoples' experiences, including intrapersonal, interpersonal, and societal factors related to their well‐being.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Three methodological approaches to studying singlehood

Park,

Girme,

MacDonald

2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the number of single (unpartnered) individuals continues to rise, researchers across various disciplines have started to pay more attention to single individuals' lives. Yet, compared to the accumulated knowledge about experiences within romantic relationships, there is far less known about various experiences within singlehood. For singlehood research to grow in both quantity and quality, it is essential that research findings are critically evaluated both in terms of robustness of the evidence and validity of the inferences. In this paper, we review three broad approaches researchers have taken to understand singlehood that centered on (a) between‐group status (i.e., single vs. in a relationship) differences, (b) within‐person status differences, and (c) within‐group variability among singles. With a focus on well‐being as an outcome, we illustrate how each approach provides unique insights into singlehood and what caveats there are in interpreting results derived from each approach. Finally, we identify questions or methods that have not been extensively explored within each approach and offer suggestions for future research directions.

show abstract