Sliding vs. Deciding in Relationships: Research and Clinical Implications

1. Sliding vs. Deciding in Relationships: Research and Clinical Implications Galena K. Rhoades, Ph.D. University of Denver

2. Grant Support Support for this research was provided by a grant from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01 HD047564). Principal Investigators: Scott Stanley Howard Markman Galena Rhoades

3. Trends in U.S. Relationships • Median age at first marriage: 27.1 for men, 25.3 for women • Divorce rate: 36-60% • Median age at first birth: 24.6 • 60-75% of couples live together before marriage • Children born to unmarried parents: 36.8% Cohabiting couples with children: 40% Bumpass & Lu, 2000; CDC, 2002, 2006; Raley & Bumpass, 2003; Stanley et al., 2004; U.S. Census, 2003

4. Trends in U.S. Beliefs • 60% of Americans disagree that living together before marriage is a good idea • 86.3% of never-married Americans would like to be married someday • 94% of Americans 18 or over agree that divorce is a serious national problem • 97% of married Americans expect to be married for life Glenn, 2005

5. Cognitive Dissonance Theory Festinger (1956): • We are uncomfortable when we hold two contradictory ideas at the same time and so we work to diminish this dissonance by changing our attitudes, beliefs, or behavior so that they are compatible • Beliefs are often easier to change than behaviors

6. What is a Decision? • Selecting an option (a cognition or a course of action) among alternatives • An active process that involves weighing pros and cons and projecting oneself into the future

7. What is Commitment? • Stanley (2002): Commitment means making a choice to give up other choices • Mate selection: choosing among alternatives

8. Dissonance and Commitment • More difficult decisions are associated with greater dissonance reduction and better follow-through • When a decision is made, commitment to that option tends to be stronger • Sliding vs. deciding Harmon-Jones & Harmon-Jones, 2002; Stanley & Rhoades, 2009

9. Satisficing Herbert Simon (1957): • We tend to make choices based on current needs rather than through rational processes • We rarely evaluate all possible choices well enough and instead we choice the one that first fits the most proximal needs

10. “The Cohabitation Effect” Cohan & Kleinbaum, 2002; Forste & Tanfer, 1996; Kamp Dush et al., 2003; Phillips & Sweeney, 2005; Stafford et al., 2004; Stanley et al., 2004; Teachman, 2003 • Couples who cohabit premaritally are 1.26 – 1.86 times more likely to divorce • Premarital cohabitation is associated with: • Lower marital satisfaction • Poorer perceived and observed communication in marriage • More marital conflict • Higher rates of domestic violence • Higher rates of infidelity

11. Explaining the Cohabitation Effect 1) It’s about the people who cohabit. 2) It’s about the experience of cohabitation changing values about marriage. 3) It’s about cohabitation creating inertia that makes it harder to break up.

12. Inertia Rhoades, Stanley, & Markman, 2009; Stanley, Rhoades, & Markman, 2006 Cohabitation may make it harder to break up. Constraints such as sharing debt, having a lease, or making major purchases, increase in cohabitation and are associated with thinking it’s less likely the relationship will end. Some might marry a person they would not have married if that hadn’t been cohabiting.

13. The Pre-engagement Cohabitation Effect Once married, . . . • Those who did not live together until marriage or engagement are at lower risk. • Those who cohabited before clear commitment to the future are at higher risk. • This finding holds across many aspects of marital quality.

14. Who, How, When, and Why? Who cohabits: selection How it begins: sliding or deciding When it begins relative to clarity of commitment Why people cohabit: what are their reasons

15. New National Study • Funded by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) • Random, fairly representative sample of • 1,294 individuals • 18-34 years old • 60% women, 40% men • All unmarried (68% dating, 32% cohabiting) • Longitudinal: mail surveys every 4 to 6 mo.

16. W h o ?

17. Who Cohabits? • Compared to daters with plans to marry, those cohabiting with plans to marry… • Are older • Have less education • Are more likely to already have children • Have had more sexual partners • Are more likely to have divorced parents • Experienced more conflict in their families growing up • Have more favorable attitudes toward divorce and less favorable attitudes toward marriage • Are less religious

18. Religiousness and Cohabitation “My religious beliefs suggest that it is wrong for people to live together without being married”: • 49% of those dating agree (35% strongly) • 30% of those cohabiting agree (16% strongly)

19. H o w ?

20. H o w ? “Her family kicked her out.”   “It just kind of happened. Circumstances created the situation.”  

21. How does it Begin? How did you start living together? “We didn’t think about it or plan it. We slid into it.” “We talked about it, but then it just sort of happened.” “We talked about it, planned it, and then made a decision together to do it.” 1/3 1/3 1/3

22. W h e n ?

23. W h e n ? “He said: To give the relationship a chance at becoming very serious. To see if we can live together.” “She said: He was moving to my city and we already were engaged. And, it made sense financially.”

24. When does it Begin? • Among those cohabiting: • 66% started cohabiting without plans for marriage • 23% started cohabiting with plans, but no engagement • 11% started cohabiting with an engagement • People who were already engaged are more likely to have made a decision about cohabiting.

25. W h y ?

26. W h y ? “I felt it was time to take the next step in my relationship. I feel that if I love him, I need to know if living with him will change anything.”

27. Why Live Together?

28. Summary: Research on Cohabitation • People tend to slide into living together • Other options become constrained, but before a decision to give up those alternatives is made • Living together before marriage is associated with higher risk for marital distress and divorce

29. Traditional Model of Relationship Development Attraction Learn Information Make Decisions Transitions Constraints Build Stanley & Rhoades,2009

31. Contemporary Model of Relationship Development Attraction Sliding Transitions Constraints Build Learn Information Stanley & Rhoades,2009

32. Expanding Sliding vs. Deciding Other relevant developments in relationships that may constrain options? • Beginning a sexual relationship • Having a child, particularly outside of marriage • Obtaining a divorce

33. Sliding vs. Deciding: Children Attitude Behavior 60% of births to women 20-24 are nonmarital; 33% to women 25-29 Children born to unmarried parents experience more financial and social problems Among unmarried couples, 71% of births were unplanned • National survey item: All things being equal, it is better for children to be raised in a household that has a married mother and father • 89% agree Glenn, 2005; Ventura, 2009

34. Sliding vs. Deciding: Divorce Attitude Behavior 36-60% of marriages end in divorce • National survey item: Divorce is a serious national problem • 94% agree Glenn, 2005; Raley & Bumpass, 2003

35. Sliding vs. Deciding: Divorce Belief Belief 62% of divorced Americans said they wished their spouse had worked harder to save their marriage 35% of ex-husbands and 21% of ex-wives said they wished they, themselves, had worked harder. • 97% of married Americans expect to be married for life Glenn, 2005; Raley & Bumpass, 2003

36. Relationship Education Examples • Sliding vs. deciding theme throughout • Learn to identify ‘high-cost slides” • Learn to identify and seek the information needed to make good relationship decisions

37. Contact Information and Additional Resources • www.relationshipeducation.info • Galena Rhoades: • grhoades@du.edu, • www.portfolio.du.edu/grhoades • PREP, Inc. • www.PREPInc.com • www.WithinMyReach.com

38. Sliding vs. Deciding: Army-specific Issues • Reasons for marriage? • Infidelity?