Advertisement

Journal of Population Research

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 213–247 | Cite as

What’s love got to do with it? Homogamy and dyadic approaches to understanding marital instability

  • Rebecca Kippen
  • Bruce Chapman
  • Peng Yu
  • Kiatanantha Lounkaew
Article
  • 291 Downloads

Abstract

What determines marital instability is an important area of research for demography, sociology and economics, with a host of public policy implications. This paper improves our understanding of the issue through the use of rich longitudinal data and the application of advanced research approaches for one of the first times anywhere, and certainly uniquely for Australian data. The combination of method and recent Australian data represents a significant advance in this research area. Using data from waves 1–7 of Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, 2,482 married couples—where both partners are respondents in the first wave—are traced over 6 years to identify factors associated with marital separation. The data are analysed dyadically; that is, the characteristics of both partners in each couple are considered in tandem. This allows assessment of whether marriages between partners with similar characteristics (homogamy) are more likely to last than are marriages between dissimilar partners, or whether particular characteristics of wives or husbands—independent of their partners’—are more strongly associated with marital stability. A Cox proportional hazards model with time-varying covariates is used to assess the association of characteristics with marital separation. Our most important contribution relates to the role of homogamy in marital stability or instability and in the context of spousal differences we find the following factors associated with higher risk of marital separation: age, education, preference for a child, and drinking and smoking behaviour. As well, there is a clear positive association between separation and: dissatisfaction with the relationship; husband’s unemployment and perceived financial stress; early age at marriage; separation of parents; second-plus marriage; resident children born before marriage; and low household income. The last of these findings should matter directly for public policy formulation.

Keywords

Marriage Marital separation Divorce Australia Dyadic Homogamy HILDA 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Analysis in this paper was carried out using Stata. This paper uses confidentialised unit record file from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Commonwealth Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (MIAESR). Kiatanantha Lounkaew would like to acknowledge financial assistance from Dhurakij Pundit University (DPU). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to FaHCSIA, the MIAESR or DPU. We are grateful to Ruth Weston, several FaHCSIA colleagues, the editor and two anonymous referees, for valuable comments on drafts of this paper.

References

  1. Amato, P. R. (1996). Explaining the intergenerational transmission of divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58(3), 628–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amato, P. (2000). The consequences of divorce for adults and children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(4), 1269–1287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amato, P. (2001). Children of divorce in the 1990s: An update of the Amato and Keith (1991) meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(3), 355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2006). Household expenditure survey and survey of income and housing: User guide. Catalogue number 6503.0, Canberra.Google Scholar
  5. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2009). Consumer price index Australia. Catalogue number 6401.0, Canberra.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, G. S. (1965). A theory of the allocation of time. Economic Journal, 75(299), 493–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker, G. S. (1973). A theory of marriage: Part 1. Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 813–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Becker, G. S., Landes, E. M., & Michael, R. T. (1977). An economic analysis of marital instability. Journal of Political Economy, 85(6), 1141–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bracher, M., Santow, G., Morgan, S. P., & Trussell, J. (1993). Marriage dissolution in Australia: Models and explanations. Population Studies, 47(3), 403–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bradbury, B., & Norris, K. (2005). Income and separation. Journal of Sociology, 41(4), 425–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bratter, J. L., & King, R. B. (2008). ‘But will it last?’: Marital instability among interracial and same-race couples. Family Relations, 57(2), 160–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bumpass, L. L., Martin, T. C., & Sweet, J. A. (1991). The impact of family background and early marital factors on marital disruption. Journal of Family Issues, 12(1), 22–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bumpass, L. L., & Sweet, J. A. (1972). Differentials in marital instability: 1970. American Sociological Review, 37(6), 754–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Butterworth, P., Oz, T., Rodgers, B., & Berry, H. (2008). Factors associated with relationship dissolution of Australian families with children. Social Policy Research Paper No. 37. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.Google Scholar
  15. Butterworth, P., & Rodgers, B. (2008). Mental health problems and marital disruption: Is it the combination of husbands and wives’ mental health problems that predicts later divorce? Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 43(9), 758–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Caces, M. F., Harford, T. C., Williams, G. D., & Hanna, E. Z. (1999). Alcohol consumption and divorce rates in the United States. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 60(5), 647–652.Google Scholar
  17. Chan, T. W., & Halpin, B. (2003). Union dissolution in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Sociology, 32(4), 76–93.Google Scholar
  18. Clarkwest, A. (2007). Spousal dissimilarity, race, and marital dissolution. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(3), 639–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cleves, M. A., Gould, W. W., & Gutierrez, R. G. (2004). An introduction to survival analysis using Stata. College Station: Stata Corporation.Google Scholar
  20. Compton, J. (2009). Why do smokers divorce? Time preference and marital stability. Winnipeg: Department of Economics, University of Manitoba.Google Scholar
  21. Coombs, L. C., & Zumeta, Z. (1970). Correlates of marital dissolution in a prospective fertility study: A research note. Social Problems, 18(1), 92–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cox, D. R. (1972). Regression models and life tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 34(2), 187–220.Google Scholar
  23. De Maris, A. (2004). Regression with social data: Modeling continuous and limited response variables. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. de Vaus, D., Gray, M., Qu, L., & Stanton, D. (2007). The consequences of divorce for financial living standards in later life. Research Paper 38. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
  25. de Vaus, D., Qu, L., & Weston, R. (2003). Premarital cohabitation and subsequent marital stability. Family Matters, 65, 34–39.Google Scholar
  26. de Vaus, D., Qu, L., & Weston, R. (2005). The disappearing link between premarital cohabitation and subsequent marital stability, 1970–2001. Journal of Population Research, 22(2), 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fu, H., & Goldman, N. (2000). The association between health-related behaviours and the risk of divorce in the USA. Journal of Biosocial Science, 32(1), 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gray, M., & Chapman, B. (2007). Relationship breakdown and the economic welfare of Australian mothers and their children. Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 10(4), 251–275.Google Scholar
  29. Hansen, H. (2005). Unemployment and marital dissolution: A panel data study of Norway. European Sociological Review, 21(2), 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heaton, T. B., & Blake, A. M. (1999). Gender differences in determinants of marital disruption. Journal of Family Issues, 20(1), 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hewitt, B. (2008). Marriage breakdown in Australia: Social correlates, gender and initiator status. Social Policy Research Paper No. 35. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.Google Scholar
  32. Hewitt, B., Baxter, J., & Western, M. (2005). Marriage breakdown in Australia: The social correlates of separation and divorce. Journal of Sociology, 41(2), 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hewitt, B., & de Vaus, D. (2009). Change in the association between premarital cohabitation and separation, Australia, 1945–2000. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(2), 353–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hewitt, B., Western, M., & Baxter, J. (2006). Who decides? The social characteristics of who initiates marital separation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(5), 1165–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hohmann-Marriott, B. E. (2006). Shared beliefs and the union stability of married and cohabiting couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(4), 1015–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Homish, G. G., & Leonard, K. E. (2007). The drinking partnership and marital satisfaction: The longitudinal influence of discrepant drinking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75(1), 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (HOR). (1998). To have and to hold: Strategies to strengthen marriage and relationships. Parliamentary Paper 95/1998. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  38. Jain, S. (2007). Lifetime marriage and divorce trends. Australian Social Trends. Catalogue No. 4102.0. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
  39. Jalovaara, M. (2003). The joint effects of marriage partners’ socioeconomic positions on the risk of divorce. Demography, 40(1), 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jensen, P., & Smith, N. (1990). Unemployment and marital dissolution. Journal of Population Economics, 3(3), 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kalmijn, M., & Poortman, A. (2006). His or her divorce? The gendered nature of divorce and its determinants. European Sociological Review, 22(2), 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kiernan, K., & Mueller, G. (1999). Who divorces? In S. McRae (Ed.), Changing Britain: Families and households in the 1990s (pp. 377–403). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lehrer, E. L. (2004). Religion as a determinant of economic and demographic behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, 30(4), 707–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lehrer, E. L. (2008). Age at marriage and marital instability: Revisiting the Becker–Landes–Michael hypothesis. Journal of Population Economics, 21(2), 463–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lyngstad, T. H. (2004). The impact of parents’ and spouses’ education on divorce rates in Norway. Demographic Research, 10(5), 121–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ortega, S. T., Whitt, H. P., & Williams, J. A., Jr. (1988). Religious homogamy and marital happiness. Journal of Family Issues, 9(2), 224–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ostermann, J., Sloan, F. A., & Taylor, D. H. (2005). Heavy alcohol use and marital dissolution in the USA. Social Science and Medicine, 61(11), 2304–2316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Poortman, A., & Lyngstad, T. H. (2007). Dissolution risks in first and higher order marital and cohabiting unions. Social Science Research, 36(4), 1431–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Power, C., & Estaugh, V. (1990). The role of family formation and dissolution in shaping drinking behaviour in early adulthood. British Journal of Addiction, 85(4), 521–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ross, H. L., & Sawhill, I. V. (1975). Time of transition: The growth of families headed by women. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  52. Smith, I. (1997). Explaining the growth of divorce in Great Britain. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 44(5), 519–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Teachman, J. D. (2002). Stability across cohorts in divorce risk factors. Demography, 39(2), 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thomson, E. (1997). Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births. Demography, 34(3), 343–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tzeng, J. M. (1992). The effects of socioeconomic heterogamy and changes on marital dissolution for first marriages. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54(3), 609–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tzeng, J. M., & Mare, R. D. (1995). Labor market and socioeconomic effects on marital stability. Social Science Research, 24, 329–351.Google Scholar
  57. Wagner, M., & Weiss, B. (2006). On the variation of divorce risks in Europe: Findings from a meta-analysis of European longitudinal studies. European Sociological Review, 22(5), 483–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weiss, Y. (1997). The formation and dissolution of families: Why marry? Who marries whom? And what happens upon divorce? In M. R. Rosenzweig & O. Stark (Eds.), Handbook of population and family economics. Elsevier.Google Scholar
  59. Weiss, Y., & Willis, R. J. (1997). Match quality, new information and marital dissolution. Journal of Labor Economics, 15(1), S293–S329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wolcott, I., & Hughes, J. (1999). Towards understanding the reasons for divorce. Working Paper 20. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
  61. Wolfinger, N. H. (2003). Family structure homogamy: The effects of parental divorce on partner selection and marital stability. Social Science Research, 32(1), 80–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zeiss, A. M., Zeiss, R., & Johnson, S. (1981). Sex differences in initiation of and adjustment to divorce. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 4(2), 21–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rebecca Kippen
    • 1
  • Bruce Chapman
    • 2
  • Peng Yu
    • 3
  • Kiatanantha Lounkaew
    • 4
  1. 1.Centre for Health and SocietyUniversity of MelbourneCarltonAustralia
  2. 2.Crawford School of Public PolicyThe Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous AffairsCanberraAustralia
  4. 4.Faculty of EconomicsDhurakij Pundit UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations