IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dem/wpaper/wp-2024-012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Subjective biology: how perceived fecundity influences relationship satisfaction and stability

Author

Listed:
  • Zafer Büyükkeçeci

    (Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany)

  • Mine Kühn

    (Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany)

  • Siri E. Håberg
  • Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen
  • Mikko Myrskylä

    (Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany)

Abstract

Objective: This study investigates how perceived own fecundity and that of the partner are related to life satisfaction, relationship satisfaction, and union dissolution. Background: Across many high-income countries, fertility has been gradually moving to ages at which fecundity starts to decline. This delay in reproductive timing can have profound implications for individuals' fertility outcomes, increasing the risk of either voluntary or involuntary childlessness. In a context that is characterized by late childbearing, perceived fecundity, both one’s own and that of the partner, may emerge as an important determinant of individuals' overall satisfaction and the dynamics of their romantic relationships. Method: Using 13 waves of longitudinal data from the German Family Panel (pairfam), we employ individual fixed-effects models to examine within-person changes in perceived fecundity, both one’s own and that of the partner, and their consequences for satisfaction and relationship outcomes. Results: Declines in perceived fecundity, for both oneself and one's partner, were associated with reductions in life and relationship satisfaction. A key finding is that the partner's perceived fecundity, as rated by the anchor, had a stronger impact on relationship outcomes than the anchor’s own perceived fecundity. Additionally, an increase in the risk of union dissolution was observed with a decline in the partner's perceived fecundity, while such an association was not found with one's own perceived fecundity. Our analysis revealed no significant gender differences in these associations. Additional analyses, in which we interacted perceived fecundity with parental status and age, showed that the relationship between perceived fecundity and outcomes was weaker among parents than among childless individuals, and decreased with age. Conclusion: The study contributes to the literature on fertility dynamics and their social implications by highlighting the role of subjective perceptions of one’s own fecundity and that of the partner in shaping life satisfaction and relationship resilience.

Suggested Citation

  • Zafer Büyükkeçeci & Mine Kühn & Siri E. Håberg & Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen & Mikko Myrskylä, 2024. "Subjective biology: how perceived fecundity influences relationship satisfaction and stability," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2024-012, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:wpaper:wp-2024-012
    DOI: 10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2024-012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/papers/working/wp-2024-012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2024-012?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. Lawrence Wu, 2008. "Cohort estimates of nonmarital fertility for U.S. Women," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 45(1), pages 193-207, February.
    2. Eva Beaujouan & Caroline Berghammer, 2019. "The Gap Between Lifetime Fertility Intentions and Completed Fertility in Europe and the United States: A Cohort Approach," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(4), pages 507-535, August.
    3. Debra Friedman & Michael Hechter & Satoshi Kanazawa, 1994. "A theory of the value of children," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 31(3), pages 375-401, August.
    4. Rachel Margolis & Mikko Myrskylä, 2011. "A Global Perspective on Happiness and Fertility," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 37(1), pages 29-56, March.
    5. Arnstein Aassve & Alice Goisis & Maria Sironi, 2012. "Happiness and Childbearing Across Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 65-86, August.
    6. Ulrich Schimmack & Jürgen Schupp & Gert Wagner, 2008. "The Influence of Environment and Personality on the Affective and Cognitive Component of Subjective Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 41-60, October.
    7. Eva M. Berger, 2013. "Happy Working Mothers? Investigating the Effect of Maternal Employment on Life Satisfaction," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(317), pages 23-43, January.
    8. S. Philip Morgan & Rosalind Berkowitz King, 2001. "Why Have Children in the 21st Century? Biological Predisposition, Social Coercion, Rational Choice," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 3-20, March.
    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. Mikko Myrskylä & Rachel Margolis, 2012. "Happiness: before and after the kids," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2012-013, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    2. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    3. Rachel Margolis & Mikko Myrskyla, 2016. "Children’s Sex and the Happiness of Parents," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 403-420, August.
    4. Jan Priebe, 2020. "Quasi-experimental evidence for the causal link between fertility and subjective well-being," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 839-882, July.
    5. Mikko Myrskylä & Rachel Margolis, 2014. "Happiness: Before and After the Kids," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 51(5), pages 1843-1866, October.
    6. Nicoletta Balbo & Bruno Arpino, 2016. "The Role of Family Orientations in Shaping the Effect of Fertility on Subjective Well-being: A Propensity Score Matching Approach," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(4), pages 955-978, August.
    7. Zeynep B. Ugur, 2020. "Does Having Children Bring Life Satisfaction in Europe?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1385-1406, April.
    8. Letizia Mencarini & Daniele Vignoli & Tugba Zeydanli & Jungho Kim, 2018. "Life satisfaction favors reproduction. The universal positive effect of life satisfaction on childbearing in contemporary low fertility countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Yu, Shuye & Postepska, Agnieszka, 2020. "Flexible Jobs Make Parents Happier: Evidence from Australia," IZA Discussion Papers 13700, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Anna Matysiak & Letizia Mencarini & Daniele Vignoli, 2016. "Work–Family Conflict Moderates the Relationship Between Childbearing and Subjective Well-Being," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 355-379, August.
    11. Sophie Cetre & Andrew E. Clark & Claudia Senik, 2016. "Happy People Have Children: Choice and Self-Selection into Parenthood," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 445-473, August.
    12. Matthew Andersson & Jennifer Glass & Robin Simon, 2014. "Users Beware: Variable Effects of Parenthood on Happiness Within and Across International Datasets," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 945-961, February.
    13. David G. Blanchflower & Andrew E. Clark, 2021. "Children, unhappiness and family finances," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 625-653, April.
    14. Karen Benjamin Guzzo, 2014. "New Partners, More Kids," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 654(1), pages 66-86, July.
    15. Jona Schellekens, 2019. "Does the association between children and happiness vary by level of religiosity? The evidence from Israel," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 41(5), pages 103-124.
    16. Nikolett Somogyi & Wim Van Lancker & Rossella Ciccia & Sarah Van de Velde, 2021. "The Relationship between Familizing and Individualizing Policies and Mental Health in Parents in Europe," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Gimenez-Nadal, Jose Ignacio & Sevilla, Almudena, 2016. "Intensive Mothering and Well-being: The Role of Education and Child Care Activity," MPRA Paper 74249, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Fabrizio Bernardi & Marco Cozzani, 2021. "Soccer Scores, Short-Term Mood and Fertility," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 37(3), pages 625-641, July.
    19. Matthias Pollmann-Schult, 2018. "Parenthood and Life Satisfaction in Europe: The Role of Family Policies and Working Time Flexibility," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 34(3), pages 387-411, August.
    20. Pierluigi Conzo & Giulia Fuochi & Letizia Mencarini, 2017. "Fertility and Life Satisfaction in Rural Ethiopia," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 54(4), pages 1331-1351, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    fecundity; fertility; interspouse relationships; satisfaction; separation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

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

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wpaper:wp-2024-012. 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: Peter Wilhelm (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.