Advertisement

Demography

, Volume 56, Issue 4, pp 1195–1218 | Cite as

Measuring Cohabitation in U.S. National Surveys

  • Wendy D. ManningEmail author
  • Kara Joyner
  • Paul Hemez
  • Cassandra Cupka
Article

Abstract

Cohabitation is one of the fastest growing family forms in the United States. It is widespread and continues to increase but has not been consistently measured across surveys. It is important to track the quality of data on cohabitation because it has implications for research on the correlates and consequences of cohabitation for adults and children. Recent rounds of the Current Population Survey (CPS), National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY-97), and National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) provide an opportunity to contrast estimates of cohabitation status and experience using nationally representative data sets and assess the quality of data on cohabitation in these data sets. Results demonstrated that the surveys provide similar estimates of current cohabitation status, except the CPS resulted in lower estimates. In terms of cohabitation experience (i.e., having ever cohabited), Add Health produced higher estimates, whereas both the NSFG and NLSY-97 produced lower estimates. We documented a strong education gradient across all surveys, with lower levels of current cohabitation and cohabitating experience and with increases in educational attainment. Racial/ethnic differences in cohabitation were inconsistent across surveys. We discuss aspects of sampling and measurement that potentially explain differences in estimates. Our findings have implications not only for survey design but also for the interpretation of results based on these four national surveys.

Keywords

Cohabitation Young adulthood Measurement Surveys 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by the Center for Family and Demographic Research, Bowling Green State University, which has core funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P2CHD050959). This research uses data from Add Health, a program project directed by Kathleen Mullan Harris and designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and funded by Grant P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 23 other federal agencies and foundations. Special acknowledgment is due to Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Information on how to obtain the Add Health data files is available on the Add Health website ( http://www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth ). No direct support was received from Grant P01-HD31921 for this analysis. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2017 annual meeting of the Population Association of America. We appreciate helpful comments provided by Karen Benjamin Guzzo and Krista K. Payne.

Supplementary material

13524_2019_796_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (418 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 417 kb)

References

  1. Addo, F. (2014). Debt, cohabitation, and marriage in young adulthood. Demography, 51, 1677–1701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aughinbaugh, A., & Gardecki, R. M. (2008, May). Attrition in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997. Paper presented at the NLSY97 Tenth Anniversary Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  3. Avellar, S., & Smock, P. J. (2005). The economic consequences of the dissolution of cohabiting unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baughman, R., Dickert-Conlin, S., & Houser, S. (2002). How well can we track cohabitation using the SIPP? A consideration of direct and inferred measures. Demography, 39, 455–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Binstock, G., & Thornton, A. (2003). Separations, reconciliations, and living apart in cohabiting and marital unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 432–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1983). American couples: Money, work, sex. New York, NY: Morrow.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, S. L., Bulanda, J. R., & Lee, G. R. (2012). Transitions into and out of cohabitation in later life. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 774–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, S. L., & Manning, W. D. (2009). Family boundary ambiguity and the measurement of family structure: The significance of cohabitation. Demography, 46, 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, S. L., & Manning, W. D. (2011). Counting couples, counting families: Full report. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University, National Center for Family & Marriage Research. Retrieved from https://www.bgsu.edu/ncfmr/news/ncfmr-events/research-conferences/counting-couples-counting-families.html
  10. Brown, S. L., Manning, W. D., & Payne, K. K. (2017). Relationship quality among cohabiting versus married couples. Journal of Family Issues, 38, 1730–1753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brownstein, N., Kalsbeek, W. D., Tabor, J., Entzel, P., Daza, E., & Harris, K. M. (2011). Non-response in Wave IV of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Carolina Population Center. Retrieved from http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/documentation/guides/W4_nonresponse.pdf
  12. Bumpass, L. L., & Lu, H. H. (2000). Trends in cohabitation and implications for children’s family context in the United States. Population Studies, 54, 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cancian, M., Meyer, D. R., Brown, P. R., & Cook, S. T. (2014). Who gets custody now? Dramatic changes in children’s living arrangements after divorce. Demography, 51, 1381–1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Casper, L. M., & Cohen, P. N. (2000). How does POSSLQ measure up? Historical estimates of cohabitation. Demography, 37, 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eickmeyer, K. J., & Manning, W. D. (2018). Serial cohabitation in young adulthood: Baby boomers to millennials. Journal of Marriage and Family, 80, 826–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fitch, C., Goeken, R., & Ruggles, S. (2005, March). The rise of cohabitation in the United States: New historical estimates. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Philadelphia, PA. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Minnesota Population Center. Retrieved from http://users.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/cohab-revised2.pdf
  17. Gates, G. J. (2011, July). Recommendations for improving measurement of intimate partner relationships. Paper presented at the Counting Families Research Conference, Bethesda, MD. Retrieved from https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/research-conferences/counting-couples/Recommendations-Paper.pdf
  18. Glick, P. C., & Norton, A. J. (1977). Marrying, divorcing and living together in the U.S. today. Population Bulletin, 32(5), 4–34.Google Scholar
  19. Glick, P. C., & Spanier, G. B. (1980). Married and unmarried cohabitation in the United States. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guzzo, K. B. (2017). Marriage and dissolution among women’s cohabitations: Variations by stepfamily status and shared childbearing. Journal of Family Issues, 39, 1108–1136.Google Scholar
  21. Halpern-Meekin, S., Manning, W., Giordano, P., & Longmore, M. (2012). Relationship churning in emerging adulthood: On/off relationships and sex with an ex. Journal of Adolescent Research, 28, 166–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Halpern-Meekin, S., & Tach, L. (2013). Discordance in couple’s reporting of courtship stages: Implications for measurement and marital quality. Social Science Research, 42, 1143–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hayford, S. R., & Morgan, S. P. (2008). The quality of retrospective data on cohabitation. Demography, 45, 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hemez, P., & Manning, W. D. (2017). Over twenty-five years of change in cohabitation experience in the U.S., 1987–2013 (Family Profiles Series No. FP-17-02). Bowling Green, OH: National Center for Family & Marriage Research. Retrieved from https://www.bgsu.edu/ncfmr/resources/data/family-profiles/hemez-manning-25-years-change-cohabitation-fp-17-02.html
  25. Kennedy, S., & Fitch, C. A. (2012). Measuring cohabitation and family structure in the United States: Assessing the impact of new data from the Current Population Survey. Demography, 49, 1479–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Knab, J. T. (2005). Cohabitation: Sharpening a fuzzy concept (Working Paper #04-05-FF). Princeton, NJ: Center for Research on Child Wellbeing. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6885521.pdf
  27. Knab, J. T., & McLanahan, S. (2007). Measuring cohabitation: Does how, when and who you ask matter? In S. L. Hofferth & L. M. Casper (Eds.), Handbook of measurement issues in family research (pp. 19–34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Kreider, R. M. (2008). Improvements to demographic household data in the Current Population Survey: 2007 (Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division working paper). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps08/twps08.pdf
  29. Kuo, J. C., & Raley, R. K. (2016). Diverging patterns of union transition among cohabitors by race/ethnicity and education: Trends and marital intentions in the United States. Demography, 53, 921–935.Google Scholar
  30. Macklin, E. D. (1978). Nonmarital heterosexual cohabitation. Marriage & Family Review, 1(2), 1–12.Google Scholar
  31. Manning, W. D. (1995). Comparing direct and inferred measures of cohabitation (Working paper series). University Park, PA: Population Research Institute.Google Scholar
  32. Manning, W. D. (2015). Cohabitation and child wellbeing. Future of Children, 25(2), 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Manning, W. D., & Smock, P. J. (2005). Measuring and modeling cohabitation: New perspectives from qualitative data. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 989–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Manning, W. D., & Stykes, B. (2015). Twenty-five years of change in cohabitation in the U.S., 1987–2013 (Family Profile Series No. FP-15-01). Bowling Green, OH: National Center for Family & Marriage Research. Retrieved from https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/FP-15-01-twenty-five-yrs-cohab-us.pdf
  35. Moffitt, R. A., Reville, R., & Winkler, A. E. (1998). Beyond single mothers: Cohabitation and marriage in the AFDC program. Demography, 35, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Musick, K., & Michelmore, K. (2015). Change in the stability of marital and cohabiting unions following the birth of a child. Demography, 52, 1463–1485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nepomnyaschy, L., & Teitler, J. (2013). Cyclical cohabitation among unmarried parents in fragile families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75, 1248–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Paik, A. (2015). Surveying sexualities: Minimizing survey error in study of sexuality. In J. DeLamater & R. F. Plante (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of sexualities (pp. 93–107). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pollard, M., & Harris, K. M. (2007). Measuring cohabitation in the Add Health. In S. L. Hofferth & L. M. Casper (Eds.), Handbook of measurement issues in family research (pp. 35–52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Sassler, S. (2004). The process of entering into cohabiting unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 491–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smock, P., & Manning, W. D. (2010). New couples, new families: The cohabitation revolution in the United States. In B. J. Risman (Ed.), Families as they really are (pp. 131–139). New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
  42. Teitler, J. O., Reichman, N. E., & Koball, H. (2006). Contemporaneous versus retrospective reports of cohabitation in the Fragile Families Survey. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 469–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thomson, E., & Colella, U. (1992). Cohabitation and marital stability: Quality or commitment? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. U.S. Census Bureau. (2015). Current Population Survey: Annual social and economic supplements 1996 to 2015. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/time-series/demo/families-and-households/uc-1.pdf
  45. Vennum, A., Lindstrom, R., Monk, J. K., & Adams, R. (2014). “It’s complicated”: The continuity and correlates of cycling in cohabiting and marital relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 31, 410–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vespa, J. (2014). Historical trends in the marital intentions of one-time and serial cohabitors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Winkler, A. E. (1993). The living arrangements of single mothers with dependent children: An added perspective. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 52, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wu, L. L., Martin, S. P., & Long, D. A. (2011). Comparing data quality of fertility and first sexual intercourse histories. Journal of Human Resources, 36, 520–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wendy D. Manning
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kara Joyner
    • 1
  • Paul Hemez
    • 1
  • Cassandra Cupka
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Family and Demographic Research, Department of SociologyBowling Green State UniversityBowling GreenUSA

Personalised recommendations