IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v49y2023i39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Marital plans and partnership transitions among German opposite-sex couples: Couple agreement and gender differences

Author

Listed:
  • Dominika Perdoch Sladká

    (Masarykova Univerzita)

Abstract

Background: Research shows that marital plans influence marital behavior. However, romantic partners may differ in their marital plans, and these differences can affect relationship outcomes. Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between agreement in short-term marital plans and partnership transitions in German opposite-sex couples and to find whether there is a gender difference in the relationship between marital plans and the risk of marriage or dissolution. Methods: The couple-level data from the German Family Panel (pairfam) were analyzed with competing-risks regression. The sample consisted of 1,834 couples. Results: Marital plans were strongly associated with the subsequent transition to marriage; marital plans were not associated with dissolution when controlling for relationship and partner characteristics. The gender of the partner with marital plans was not associated with the probability of marriage or dissolution. Conclusions: Contrary to expectations, there were no gender differences in the relationship between marital plans and partnership transitions. Despite the important role of marriage in Germany, disagreements in marital plans did not increase the risk of dissolution. However, agreement in marital plans plays an important role in subsequent marriage. The transition to marriage is also strongly influenced by relationship characteristics and life course factors. Contribution: This research emphasizes the importance of using couple data in studying the marital intention–outcome link. Using recent data from a long panel study, the findings contrast with previous research on the gendered effect of marital plans in the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominika Perdoch Sladká, 2023. "Marital plans and partnership transitions among German opposite-sex couples: Couple agreement and gender differences," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 49(39), pages 1087-1116.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:49:y:2023:i:39
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2023.49.39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol49/39/49-39.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2023.49.39?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emily Parker, 2021. "Gender Differences in the Marital Plans and Union Transitions of First Cohabitations," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 40(4), pages 673-694, August.
    2. Maria Rita Testa & Danilo Bolano, 2021. "When partners’ disagreement prevents childbearing: A couple-level analysis in Australia," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(33), pages 811-838.
    3. Janet Chen-Lan Kuo & R. Kelly Raley, 2016. "Diverging Patterns of Union Transition Among Cohabitors by Race/Ethnicity and Education: Trends and Marital Intentions in the United States," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(4), pages 921-935, August.
    4. Anne Reneflot, 2006. "A gender perspective on preferences for marriage among cohabitating couples," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 15(10), pages 311-328.
    5. Matthijs Kalmijn, 2013. "The Educational Gradient in Marriage: A Comparison of 25 European Countries," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 50(4), pages 1499-1520, August.
    6. Bettina Müller & Laura Castiglioni, 2020. "Do Temporary Dropouts Improve the Composition of Panel Data? An Analysis of “Gap Interviews†in the German Family Panel pairfam," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(1), pages 193-215, February.
    7. Nicole Hiekel & Aart C. Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2015. "Marriage and separation risks among German cohabiters: Differences between types of cohabiter," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(2), pages 237-251, July.
    8. Wendy D. Manning & Pamela J. Smock & Marshal Neal Fettro, 2019. "Cohabitation and Marital Expectations Among Single Millennials in the U.S," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(3), pages 327-346, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liat Raz-Yurovich & Barbara S. Okun, 2024. "Are highly educated partners really more gender egalitarian? A couple-level analysis of social class differentials in attitudes and behaviors," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 50(34), pages 1005-1038.
    2. Wendy D. Manning, 2020. "Young Adulthood Relationships in an Era of Uncertainty: A Case for Cohabitation," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(3), pages 799-819, June.
    3. Emily Parker, 2021. "Gender Differences in the Marital Plans and Union Transitions of First Cohabitations," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 40(4), pages 673-694, August.
    4. Deirdre Bloome & Shannon Ang, 2020. "Marriage and Union Formation in the United States: Recent Trends Across Racial Groups and Economic Backgrounds," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(5), pages 1753-1786, October.
    5. Marcel Raab & Emanuela Struffolino, 2020. "The Heterogeneity of Partnership Trajectories to Childlessness in Germany," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 36(1), pages 53-70, March.
    6. Julia Mikolai & Ann Berrington & Brienna Perelli-Harris, 2018. "The role of education in the intersection of partnership transitions and motherhood in Europe and the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(27), pages 753-794.
    7. Premchand Dommaraju & Shawn Wong, 2023. "Transition to first marriage in Thailand: cohort and educational changes," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Nolan, Brian & Azzollini, Leo & Breen, Richard, 2022. "From Gender Equality to Household Earnings Equality: the role of Women's Labour Market Outcomes across OECD Countries," INET Oxford Working Papers 2022-13, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    9. Albert Esteve & David S. Reher, 2021. "Rising Global Levels of Intergenerational Coresidence Among Young Adults," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 47(3), pages 691-717, September.
    10. Agnese Vitali & Bruno Arpino, 2016. "Who brings home the bacon? The influence of context on partners' contributions to the household income," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 35(41), pages 1213-1244.
    11. Gillian Hamilton & Aloysius Siow, 2007. "Class, Gender and Marriage," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(4), pages 549-575, October.
    12. Sam Hyun Yoo, 2016. "Postponement and recuperation in cohort marriage: The experience of South Korea," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 35(35), pages 1045-1078.
    13. Jepsen, Christopher & Jepsen, Lisa, 2022. "Convergence over time or not? U.S. wages by sexual orientation, 2000–2019," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    14. Wang, Jia, 2022. "Mothers’ Nonstandard Work Schedules and Children’s Behavior Problems: Divergent Patterns by Maternal Education," OSF Preprints a48rj, Center for Open Science.
    15. Harkness, Susan, 2022. "The accumulation of disadvantage: how motherhood and relationship breakdown influence married and single mothers’ economic outcomes," ISER Working Paper Series 2022-03, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    16. Uwe Jirjahn & Cornelia Chadi, 2020. "Out-of-partnership births in East and West Germany," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 853-881, September.
    17. Øystein Kravdal & Emily Grundy & Katherine Lisa Keenan, 2018. "The increasing mortality advantage of the married: The role played by education," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 38(20), pages 471-512.
    18. Martin Kreidl & Zuzana Žilinčíková, 2023. "Adult children’s union type and contact with mothers: A replication," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(23), pages 641-680.
    19. Somayeh Parvazian & Judith Gill & Belinda Chiera, 2017. "Higher Education, Women, and Sociocultural Change: A Closer Look at the Statistics," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, May.
    20. Daniela Bellani & Gøsta Esping-Andersen & Lesia Nedoluzhko, 2017. "Never partnered: A multilevel analysis of lifelong singlehood," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 37(4), pages 53-100.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    marital intentions; German Family Panel pairfam (Panel Analysis of Intimate Relationships and Family Dynamics); gender roles; transition to marriage; relationship dissolution;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:49:y:2023:i:39. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.