TY - JOUR
T1 - Cohabitation and commitment
T2 - Partnership plans of young men and women
AU - Jamieson, L.
AU - Anderson, M.
AU - McCrone, D.
AU - Bechhofer, F.
AU - Stewart, R.
AU - Li, Y.
N1 - Copyright 2008 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2002/8/1
Y1 - 2002/8/1
N2 - Popular commentators on marriage and the family often interpret the increase in heterosexual couples living together without marrying as reduced willingness to create and honour life-long partnerships. Survey and in-depth interviews with samples of 20-29 year olds living in an urban area of Scotland finds little support for the postulated link between growing cohabitation and a weakened sense of commitment to long-term arrangements. Most of the cohabiting couples strongly stressed their 'commitment'. Socially acceptable vocabularies of motive undoubtedly influenced answers but interviews helped to explore deeper meanings. Many respondents' views were consistent with previous research predictions of a weakening sense of any added value of marriage. At the same time, some respondents continued to stress the social significance of the distinction between marriage and cohabitation, consistent with research interpreting cohabitation as a 'try and see' strategy part-way to the perceived full commitment of marriage. The notion that 'marriage is better for children' continued to have support among respondents. While, on average, cohabiting couples had lower incomes and poorer employment situations than married couples, only very extreme adverse circumstances were presented as making marriage 'too risky'. Pregnancy-provoked cohabitation was not always in this category. Cohabitation was maintained because marriage would 'make no difference' or because they 'had not yet got round to' marriage. Most respondents were more wary of attempting to schedule or plan in their personal life than in other domains and cohabitees' attitudes to partnership, including their generally 'committed' approach, do not explain the known greater vulnerability of this group to dissolution.
AB - Popular commentators on marriage and the family often interpret the increase in heterosexual couples living together without marrying as reduced willingness to create and honour life-long partnerships. Survey and in-depth interviews with samples of 20-29 year olds living in an urban area of Scotland finds little support for the postulated link between growing cohabitation and a weakened sense of commitment to long-term arrangements. Most of the cohabiting couples strongly stressed their 'commitment'. Socially acceptable vocabularies of motive undoubtedly influenced answers but interviews helped to explore deeper meanings. Many respondents' views were consistent with previous research predictions of a weakening sense of any added value of marriage. At the same time, some respondents continued to stress the social significance of the distinction between marriage and cohabitation, consistent with research interpreting cohabitation as a 'try and see' strategy part-way to the perceived full commitment of marriage. The notion that 'marriage is better for children' continued to have support among respondents. While, on average, cohabiting couples had lower incomes and poorer employment situations than married couples, only very extreme adverse circumstances were presented as making marriage 'too risky'. Pregnancy-provoked cohabitation was not always in this category. Cohabitation was maintained because marriage would 'make no difference' or because they 'had not yet got round to' marriage. Most respondents were more wary of attempting to schedule or plan in their personal life than in other domains and cohabitees' attitudes to partnership, including their generally 'committed' approach, do not explain the known greater vulnerability of this group to dissolution.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036702586&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/1467-954X.00387
DO - 10.1111/1467-954X.00387
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0036702586
VL - 50
SP - 356
EP - 377
JO - The Sociological Review
JF - The Sociological Review
SN - 0038-0261
IS - 3
ER -