Young Adulthood Relationships in an Era of Uncertainty: A Case for Cohabitation

Manning, Wendy D.

doi:10.1007/s13524-020-00881-9

Cited by 51 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At a minimum, our review reinforces commonplace claims that patterns of union formation have moved from “consensus to complexity” (Furstenberg, ; p. 12), from a shared understanding of the nature of marriage and family formation to a broader acknowledgement of alternative intimate coresidential relationships. This point was reinforced during the past decade of research across disciplines at the core of the family social sciences (Lundberg et al, ; Manning, ). We conclude with a discussion of the substantive and policy implications for theory and research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Sassler

Lichter

2020

J of Marriage and Family

179

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Unprecedented changes in the timing, duration, and sequencing of intimate coresidential relationships have made the study of marriage far more complex today than in the past (Carlson & Meyer, ; Manning, ). The rise in cohabitation is the major reason why.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Sassler

Lichter

2020

J of Marriage and Family

179

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Turning to some ideas for future research, in order to better understand associations between ADHD and intimate unions, future research should consider connections between ADHD and the prevalence, stability and quality of cohabiting unions. Cohabitation has become a normative feature of young adulthood and is now the most common type of first union (Manning, 2020). Though prior research has examined ties between ADHD and nonmarital unions (which include both cohabiting and dating relationships), few studies have considered the impact of ADHD on the prevalence, stability and quality of cohabiting unions, specifically (Bruner et al., 2015; Pollock et al., 2017).…”

Section: Opportunities For Future Research On Childhood Adhd and Adulmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though prior research has examined ties between ADHD and nonmarital unions (which include both cohabiting and dating relationships), few studies have considered the impact of ADHD on the prevalence, stability and quality of cohabiting unions, specifically (Bruner et al., 2015; Pollock et al., 2017). Yet, positive associations between ADHD and romantic relationship turnover suggest more impulsive entries into intimate unions for those with ADHD, which may lead to a greater number of cohabiting partnerships throughout the life course (Eickmeyer & Manning, 2018; Manning, 2020; Margherio et al., 2020). Similarly, more impulsive entries into cohabiting unions might result in poorer quality unions that are shorter in duration and less likely to end in marriage for those with versus without ADHD (Manning & Cohen, 2012).…”

Section: Opportunities For Future Research On Childhood Adhd and Adulmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood mental health and adult family relationships: How ADHD shapes experiences with intimate unions and parenthood

Kroeger

2021

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly recognized as a chronic condition that can endure across the life course, childhood attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with less stable family formation and more strain around intimate unions (dating, cohabitation and marriage) and parenthood. This article reviews and evaluates multidisciplinary research on childhood ADHD, intimate unions and parenthood, with the purpose of motivating future sociological research in this area. The paper is organized into three general sections. First, I provide an overview of information on ADHD including its diagnosis and treatment, cross‐disciplinary etiologies, and sociodemographic correlates. Next, I blend sociological perspectives on labeling and stigma, social stress, and the life course to consider the role of ADHD‐related stigma in shaping associations of childhood ADHD with family formation processes (intimate unions and parenthood) and family functioning (relationship quality and communication) in adulthood. Finally, I discuss opportunities for future sociological research on childhood ADHD and adult family relationships that have the potential to contribute both to empirical research on childhood ADHD and adult family relationships, as well as to sociological research at the intersection of family and health.

show abstract

“…Therefore, we provide a descriptive account of partnership arrangements by origin group based on the largest cross-sectional survey in Germany, the Microcensus. We focus on individuals aged 18-40 years because young adults have more dynamic partnerships (Manning, 2020), and differences in living arrangements decline with increasing age. While the first and second generations of Turkish immigrants are investigated separately, we analyse only first-generation Ethnic German immigrants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partnership Living Arrangements of Immigrants and Natives in Germany

Kuhnt

Krapf

2020

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper compares the partnership arrangements of Turkish and Ethnic German immigrants (i.e., return migrants from Ethnic German communities from predominantly Eastern European countries), the two largest migrant groups in Germany, and native Germans. Most existing analyses of migrants' partnerships focus on intermarriage, marriage formation, or union dissolution. We know only a little, however, about the prevalence of non-marital living arrangements. Given that single person households and cohabitation are widespread phenomena mainly in post-materialist societies, analyzing whether immigrants engage in these behaviors sheds light on potential adaptation processes. The analyses are based on the German Microcensus of the years 2009 and 2013, with a focus on adults in the 18–40 age group. First, we present descriptive findings on the prevalence of partnership arrangements of immigrants and native Germans. Second, we estimate cross-sectional regressions with the partnership arrangement as the outcome variable in order to control for compositional differences between immigrant groups with respect to education. Our results show that while the vast majority of first-generation immigrants are married, the share of married natives is considerably smaller. Living in an independent household without a partner and cohabitation are rare phenomena among immigrants. By contrast, about one in seven natives is cohabiting and more than one quarter is living in an independent household without a partner. The most prevalent partnership living arrangement of the Turkish second generation is living in the parental household without a partner. These results are robust after controlling for education, age, and year in the multiple regression analysis.

show abstract

Young Adulthood Relationships in an Era of Uncertainty: A Case for Cohabitation

Cited by 51 publications

References 65 publications

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

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

Childhood mental health and adult family relationships: How ADHD shapes experiences with intimate unions and parenthood

Partnership Living Arrangements of Immigrants and Natives in Germany

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About