Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 2445–2469 | Cite as

Together is Better: Higher Committed Relationships Increase Life Satisfaction and Reduce Loneliness

  • Alica BucherEmail author
  • Andreas B. Neubauer
  • Andreas Voss
  • Carolin Oetzbach
Research Paper


Recently, the term mingle was introduced for persons with an intimate relationship who do not define themselves as romantic partners. This study examines differences between single, mingle and partnered adults in terms of life satisfaction and loneliness. Furthermore, need fulfillment is investigated as a mediator concerning the link between relationship status with life satisfaction and emotional loneliness. Lastly, a longitudinal analysis examined whether increases in commitment lead to higher well-being. A total of 764 participants completed an online questionnaire. Mingles fell in between singles and partnered adults regarding emotional loneliness and life satisfaction. With regard to female participants, relatedness and competence need fulfillment fully mediated the link between relationship status and life satisfaction whereas the association between relationship status and emotional loneliness was specifically mediated by the relatedness and autonomy component. Finally, shifting into more committed forms of relationship increased well-being regarding the longitudinal analysis.


Well-being Mingle relationship Relationship status Basic psychological needs Self-determination 


  1. Adamczyk, K. (2016). An investigation of loneliness and perceived social support among single and partnered young adults. Current Psychology: A Journal For Diverse Perspectives On Diverse Psychological Issues,35(4), 674–689. Scholar
  2. Adamczyk, K., & Segrin, C. (2015). Perceived social support and mental health among single vs. partnered Polish young adults. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues,34(1), 82–96. Scholar
  3. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin,117(3), 497–529. Scholar
  4. Bierman, A., Fazio, E. M., & Milkie, M. A. (2006). A multifaceted approach to the mental health advantage of the married: Assessing how explanations vary by outcome measure and unmarried group. Journal of Family Issues,27(4), 554–582. Scholar
  5. Braithwaite, S. R., Delevi, R., & Fincham, F. D. (2010). Romantic relationships and the physical and mental health of college students. Personal Relationships,17(1), 1–12. Scholar
  6. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review,100(2), 204–232. Scholar
  7. Campbell, W. K., Sedikides, C., & Bosson, J. (1994). Romantic involvement, self-discrepancy and psychological well-being: A preliminary investigation. Personal Relationships,1(4), 399–404. Scholar
  8. Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist,54(3), 165–181. Scholar
  9. Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., et al. (2015). Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation And Emotion,39(2), 216–236. Scholar
  10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Coombs, R. H. (1991). Marital status and personal well-being: A literature review. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies,40(1), 97–102. Scholar
  12. Cotten, S. R. (1999). Marital status and mental health revisited: Examining the importance of risk factors and resources. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies,48(3), 225–233. Scholar
  13. Cramer, R. E., Abraham, W. T., Johnson, L. M., & Manning-Ryan, B. (2001). Gender differences in subjective distress to emotional and sexual infidelity: Evolutionary or logical inference explanation? Current Psychology: A Journal For Diverse Perspectives On Diverse Psychological Issues,20(4), 327–336. Scholar
  14. Dailey, R. M. (2009). Confirmation from family members: Parent and sibling contributions to adolescent psychosocial adjustment. Western Journal of Communication,73(3), 273–299. Scholar
  15. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry,11(4), 227–268. Scholar
  16. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,49(1), 71–75. Scholar
  17. Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., Karney, B. R., Reis, H. T., & Sprecher, S. (2012). Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest,13(1), 3–66. Scholar
  18. Fletcher, G. J., Simpson, J. A., & Thomas, G. (2000). The measurement of perceived relationship quality components: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,26(3), 340–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Heino, R. D. (2006). Self-presentation in online personals: The role of anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in internet dating. Communication Research,33(2), 152–177. Scholar
  20. Glaesmer, H., Grande, G., Braehler, E., & Roth, M. (2011). The German version of the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS): Psychometric properties, validity, and population-based norms. European Journal of Psychological Assessment,27(2), 127–132. Scholar
  21. Green, L. R., Richardson, D. S., Lago, T., & Schatten-Jones, E. C. (2001). Network correlates of social and emotional loneliness in young and older adults. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,27(3), 281–288. Scholar
  22. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Methodology in the social sciences. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  23. Holt-Lunstad, J., Birmingham, W., & Jones, B. Q. (2008). Is there something unique about marriage? The relative impact of marital status, relationship quality, and network social support on ambulatory blood pressure and mental health. Annals of Behavioral Medicine,35(2), 239–244. Scholar
  24. Horn, E. E., Xu, Y., Beam, C. R., Turkheimer, E., & Emery, R. E. (2013). Accounting for the physical and mental health benefits of entry into marriage: A genetically informed study of selection and causation. Journal of Family Psychology,27(1), 30–41. Scholar
  25. Horwitz, A. V., White, H. R., & Howell-White, S. (1996). Becoming married and mental health: A longitudinal study of a cohort of young adults. Journal Of Marriage And The Family,58(4), 895–907. Scholar
  26. House, J. S., Landis, K. R., & Umberson, D. (1988). Social relationships and health. Science,241(4865), 540–545. Scholar
  27. Kahn, R. L., & Antonucci, T. C. (1980). Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles, and social support. In P. B. Baltes & O. G. Brim (Eds.), Lifespan development and behavior (pp. 253–286). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kamp Dush, C. M., & Amato, P. R. (2005). Consequences of relationship status and quality for subjective well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,22(5), 607–627. Scholar
  29. La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,79(3), 367–384. Scholar
  30. Lamb, K. A., Lee, G. R., & DeMaris, A. (2003). Union formation and depression: Selection and relationship effects. Journal Of Marriage And Family,65(4), 953–962. Scholar
  31. LeBlanc, V., & Cox, M. A. (2017). Interpretation of the point-biserial correlation coeffcient in the context of a school examination. The Quantitative Methods For Psychology,13(1), 46–56. Scholar
  32. León, J., & Núñez, J. L. (2013). Causal ordering of basic psychological needs and well-being. Social Indicators Research, 114(2), 243–253. Scholar
  33. McArdle, J. J. (2009). Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal data. Annual Review Of Psychology,60, 577–605. Scholar
  34. Morris, K., & Fuller, M. (1999). Heterosexual relationships of young women in a rural environment. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(4), 531–543. Retrieved from
  35. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  36. Neubauer, A. B., Schilling, O. K., & Wahl, H.-W. (2017). What do we need at the end of life? Competence, but not autonomy predicts intra-individual fluctuations in subjective well-being in very old age. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences,72, 425–435. Scholar
  37. Neubauer, A. B., & Voss, A. (2016). Validation and revision of a German version of the Balanced Measure of Psychological Needs Scale. Journal of Individual Differences,37(1), 56–72. Scholar
  38. Neubauer, A. B., & Voss, A. (2018). The structure of need fulfillment: Separating need satisfaction and dissatisfaction on between- and within-person level. European Journal of Psychological Assessment,34, 220–228. Scholar
  39. Olmstead, S. B., Anders, K. M., & Conrad, K. A. (2016). Meanings for sex and commitment among first semester college men and women: A mixed-methods analysis. Archives Of Sexual Behavior,46, 46–85. Scholar
  40. Patrick, H., Knee, C. R., Canevello, A., & Lonsbary, C. (2007). The role of need fulfillment in relationship functioning and well-being: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,92(3), 434–457. Scholar
  41. Perlman, D., & Peplau, L. A. (1984). Loneliness research: A survey of empirical findings. In L. A. Peplau & S. E. Goldston (Eds.), Preventing the harmful consequences of severe and persistent loneliness (pp. 13–46). Rockville: National Institute of Mental Health.Google Scholar
  42. Poortman, A.-R., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2010). Singles’ relational attitudes in a time of individualization. Social Science Research,39(6), 938–949. Scholar
  43. Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., Dehaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior,29(4), 1841–1848. Scholar
  44. Roberts, B. W., & Wood, D. (2006). Personality development in the context of the Neo-Socioanalytic Model of Personality. In D. K. Mroczek & T. D. Little (Eds.), Handbook of personality development (pp. 11–39). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  45. Rokach, A., & Brock, H. (1998). Coping with loneliness. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied,132(1), 107–127. Scholar
  46. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, H. Cooper, & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231–244). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  47. Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships,5(4), 357–387. Scholar
  48. Russell, D., Cutrona, C. E., Rose, J., & Yurko, K. (1984). Social and emotional loneliness: An examination of Weiss’s typology of loneliness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,46(6), 1313–1321. Scholar
  49. Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,39(3), 472–480. Scholar
  50. Sheldon, K. M. (2011). Integrating behavioral-motive and experiential-requirement perspectives on psychological needs: A two process model. Psychological Review,118(4), 552–569. Scholar
  51. Sheldon, K. M., & Gunz, A. (2009). Psychological needs as basic motives, not just experiential requirements. Journal of Personality,77(5), 1467–1492. Scholar
  52. Simon, R. W., & Barrett, A. E. (2010). Nonmarital romantic relationships and mental health in early adulthood: Does the association differ for women and men? Journal of Health and Social Behavior,51(2), 168–182. Scholar
  53. Soons, J. P. M., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2008). Together is better? Effects of relationship status and resources on young adults’ well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,25(4), 603–624. Scholar
  54. Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland. (2016). Datenreport 2016: Familie, Lebensform und Kinder. Retrieved from
  55. Stevens, J. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (5. Aufl.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Tesch, I. (2014). Beziehungsstatus: „Mingle“– Wollen wir heute keine Verpflichtungen mehr eingehen?. Retrieved from
  57. Uecker, J. E. (2012). Marriage and mental health among young adults. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,53(1), 67–83. Scholar
  58. Umberson, D., & Williams, K. (1999). Family status and mental health. In C. S. Aneshensel & J. C. Phelan (Eds.), Handbook of sociology and social research. Handbook of sociology of mental health (pp. 225–253). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  59. Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Luyckx, K. (2006). Autonomy and relatedness among Chinese sojourners and applicants: Conflictual or independent predictors of well-being and adjustment? Motivation and Emotion,30(4), 273–282. Scholar
  60. Wei, M., Shaffer, P. A., Young, S. K., & Zakalik, R. A. (2005). Adult attachment, shame, depression, and loneliness: The mediation role of basic psychological needs satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology,52(4), 591–601. Scholar
  61. Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and social isolation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alica Bucher
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andreas B. Neubauer
    • 2
  • Andreas Voss
    • 1
  • Carolin Oetzbach
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of PsychologyHeidelberg UniversityHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF)FrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations