The marital satisfaction of differently aged couples


We investigate how the marital age gap affects the evolution of marital satisfaction over the duration of marriage using household panel data from Australia. We find that men tend to be more satisfied with younger wives and less satisfied with older wives. Interestingly, women likewise tend to be more satisfied with younger husbands and less satisfied with older husbands. Marital satisfaction declines with marital duration for both men and women in differently aged couples relative to those in similarly aged couples. These relative declines erase the initial higher levels of marital satisfaction experienced by men married to younger wives and women married to younger husbands within 6 to 10 years of marriage. A possible mechanism is that differently aged couples are less resilient to negative shocks compared to similarly aged couples, which we find some supportive evidence for.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2


  1. 1.

    In the discussion below, we assume that individual reports of marital satisfaction are a proxy for the marital gains they experience. It should be noted that we implicitly assume that marital search is costly. If it were the case that individuals search at very low cost in large marriage markets with no gender imbalances, we would expect for competition among prospective mates to compete away any excess marital gains so that all couples begin marriage with equivalent (and zero) gains relative to their outside alternative (Weiss and Willis 1997). Given that even among recently married couples there is considerable variation in marital satisfaction, this seems a reasonable assumption.

  2. 2.

    Siow (1998) generates a very similar prediction: that older husband-younger wife pairs are generated because financially successful older men prefer younger “fecund” women and compensate their younger partners for marrying them with higher earnings. His model, however, does not result in older wife-younger husband pairings because he assumes that only young women are fecund and all women marry young in order to produce children.

  3. 3.

    Mansour and McKinnish argue that their empirical results likely reflect the fact that men and women with higher earnings potential spend more time in age-homogenous settings (e.g., postsecondary and graduate education, jobs with career ladders) and therefore are more likely to marry similarly aged spouses.

  4. 4.

    Hitsch et al. (2010) investigate for evidence of strategic behavior using appearance ratings. They find that for both men and women, regardless of appearance rating, the probability of e-mailing a potential dating partner is monotonically increasing in the attractiveness of the potential partner. There is no evidence, for example, that less attractive individuals strategically avoid contacting the most attractive potential partners. Based on these, Hitsch et al. (2010) conclude that there is little evidence of strategic behavior, although they acknowledge that they are only considering one characteristic: physical appearance.

  5. 5.

    In other words, if husbands are happier in older husband-younger wife marriages than marriages without an age gap, but wives are less happy in older husband-younger wife marriages than marriages without an age gap, this can average out to no effect of age gap on marital satisfaction if husbands and wives are pooled together.

  6. 6.

    Another paper which studies the outcomes of older married couples as a function of the marital age gap is Drefahl (2010), who finds that in a sample of Danish individuals over 50, having an older spouse increases the mortality rate for both men and women, and having an older spouse increases the mortality rate for women.

  7. 7.

    Another form of unanticipated shock to a marriage can be a shock to one’s outside alternatives. If there is a shock that changes a married individual’s perception of the average quality of his or her alternative mates, this will likely also affect their reported satisfaction with their current marriage. We cannot observe these shocks empirically and do not have any a priori reasoning for why the effect of such shocks should differ by marital age gap.

  8. 8.

    Although the paper does not focus on cohabitating couples, cohabitation is relatively common in Australia and often precedes marriage. In 2010, almost eight in ten (79%) marriages were preceded by a period of cohabitation (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012). Selection into marriage from cohabitation (or more broadly selection into marriage from dating) does mean that results might differ if we were studying couples from their first date or from the start of cohabitation but should not threaten our interpretation of our results as conditional on entry into marriage.

  9. 9.

    Specifically, Fig. 1 is a bivariate smooth function that estimates male marital satisfaction for different combinations of the marital age gap and marital duration by tensor product P-splines (Wood 2006), conditional on male age and age-squared.

  10. 10.

    It is important to note that Fig. 1 does not provide the density of observations, and therefore, it must be remembered that there is sparse data at the edges of the plot, for example, where the marital age gap is above 15 or below −5, or marital duration is above 25.

  11. 11.

    More specifically, these gender attitude questions are asked only in 2001, 2005, 2008, and 2011. Couples are labeled as (very) traditional in all survey years if the wife reports agreement with (3) 2 of the statements in any survey year. These three statements were chosen from a larger set of questions about gender roles because they were the three questions that generated the largest variance in responses (on a seven point scale).

  12. 12.

    It has been argued that the level of age homogamy is an important indicator of the egalitarian nature of relationships, as large age differences between spouses have been associated with more patriarchal family systems and less romantic love (Van Poppel et al. 2001; Van de Putte et al. 2009).

  13. 13.

    There is some question as to whether RelSat should be treated as a cardinal or ordinal variable. If it is cardinal (a change from 7 to 8 is of similar magnitude in terms of increased satisfaction as a change from 8 to 9), then linear regression is an appropriate model. If it is ordinal (9 is happier than 8 which is happier than 7, but a change from 7 to 8 is different in magnitude than a change from 8 to 9), a model such as an ordered logit would be preferred to linear regression. Ferrer-i-Carbonell and Frijters (2004) investigate this topic directly for happiness measures and find that the cardinality assumption is reasonable and that empirical results are not sensitive to relaxing it in favor of ordinality.

  14. 14.

    Sample sizes differ slightly for men and women because there is a relatively modest number of observations for which we only have either the wife’s or the husband’s marital satisfaction report.

  15. 15.

    One possible explanation for the insensitivity of the age difference estimates in Table 3 to the addition of a large number of individual, couple, and household controls is that different controls act to move the age difference coefficients in different directions, ultimately canceling each other out. We find, however, that is not the case. When we add the controls in small sets, we find the same degree of insensitivity of the age difference coefficient estimates.

  16. 16.

    We also find that the results are similar if we experiment with stricter definitions of specialization (for example, being in the top quartile for both the mean difference in work hours and mean difference in housework hours), use the traditional gender roles indicator instead of very traditional indicator, or add an interaction of marital duration with an indicator variable that both spouses are immigrants.

  17. 17.

    Controls for husband’s and wife’s age and age-squared, marital duration and duration-squared, and year fixed-effects are included in the regressions, as well as the additional controls used in Tables 2. 3, and 4, except economic controls (employment, earnings, household income, and house value). It would be inappropriate to include these controls given that they could control for much of the effect of a negative economic shock.

  18. 18.

    An alternative explanation is that individuals are sufficiently forward looking when selecting spouses to recognize that their initial higher levels of marital satisfaction with a younger spouse will dissipate, as we find. They might then prefer similarly aged spouses, to the extent that they generate the greater net present discounted value of lifetime marital satisfaction. Given it takes about 10 years for the benefit of marrying a younger spouse to dissipate, this would likely, however, require that an individual has both a low discount rate and a low subjective probability of divorce. Additionally, to the extent that the declines in satisfaction we observe are due in part to the larger negative effects of unanticipated shocks, individuals may not be able to anticipate these declines adequately to prefer a similarly aged spouse.


  1. Antfolk J, Salo B, Alanko K, Bergen E, Corander J, Sandnabba N, Santtila P (2015) Women’s and men’s sexual preferences and activities with respect to the partner’s age: evidence for female choice. Evol Hum Behav 36:73–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Amato P, Booth A, Johnson D, Rogers S (2007) Alone together: how marriage in America is changing. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  3. Becker G, Landes E, Michael R (1977) An economic analysis of marital instability. J Polit Econ 85:1141–1187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Belot M, Francesconi M (2013) Dating preferences and meeting opportunities in mate choice decisions. J Human Resour 48:474–508

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bergstrom T, Bagnoli M (1993) Courtship as a waiting game. J Polit Econ 101:185–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cherlin A (1977) The effect of children on marital dissolution. Demography 14(3):265–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Choo E, Siow A (2006) Who marries whom and why. J Polit Econ 114(1):175–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Coles M, Francesconi M (2011) On the emergence of toyboys: the timing of marriage with aging and uncertain careers. Int Econ Rev 52:825–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Diaz-Gimenez J, Giolito E (2013) Accounting for the timing of first marriage. Int Econ Rev 54:135–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Drefahl S (2010) How does the age gap between partners affect their survival? Demography 47:313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ferrer-i-Carbonell A, Frijters P (2004) How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinates of happiness? Econ J 114(497):641–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fisman R, Iyengar S, Kamenica E, Simonson I (2006) Gender differences in mate selection: evidence from a speed dating experiment. Q J Econ 121(2):673–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Glenn N (1998) The course of marital success and failure in five American 10-year marriage cohorts. J Marriage Fam 60:569–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Glick P, Lin S-L (1986) Recent changes in divorce and remarriage. J Marriage Fam 48:737–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Groot W, Van Den Brink H (2002) Age and education differences in marriages and their effects on life satisfaction. J Happiness Stud 3:153–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hitsch G, Hortascsu A, Ariely D (2010) Matching and sorting in online dating. Am Econ Rev 100(1):130–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lillard L, Brien M, Waite L (1995) Premarital cohabitation and subsequent marital dissolution: a matter of self selection. Demography 32(3):437–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mansour H, McKinnish T (2014) Who marries differently aged spouses? Ability, education, occupation, earnings, and appearance. Rev Econ Statistics 96:577–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Meng X, Gregory RG (2005) Intermarriage and economic assimilation of immigrants. J Labor Econ 23:135–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Presser H (1975) Age differences between spouses. Am Behav Sci 19:190–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rogler L, Procidano M (1989) Marital heterogamy and marital quality in Puerto Rican families. J Marriage Fam 51:363–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sanderson E, Windmeijer F (2016) A weak instrument F-test in linear IV models with multiple endogenous variables. J Econ 190:212–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Siow A (1998) Differential fecundity, markets, and gender roles. J Polit Econ 106:334–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Van Poppel F, Liefbroer A, Vermunt J, Smeenk W (2001) Love, necessity and opportunity: changing patterns of marital age homogamy in the Netherlands, 1850–1993. Popul Stud 55:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Van De Putte B, Van Poppel F, Vanassche S et al (2009) The rise of age homogamy in 19th century Western Europe. J Marriage Fam 47:1234–1253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Van Laningham J, Johnson D, Amato P (2001) Marital happiness, marital duration, and the U-shaped curve: evidence from a five-wave panel study. Social Forces 78:1313–1341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Vera H, Berardo D, Berardo F (1985) Age heterogamy in marriage. J Marriage Fam 47:553–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Weiss Y, Willis R (1997) Match quality, new information, and marital dissolution. J Labor Econ 15(1):S293–S329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wood S (2006) Low-rank scale-invariant tensor product smooths for generalized additive mixed models. Biometrics 62:1025–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang H, Ho P, Yip P (2012) Does similarity breed marital and sexual satisfaction? J Sex Res 49:583–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


We are grateful to two anonymous referees for providing very helpful comments and suggestions. This paper uses unit record data from the Household, Income, and Labor Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the author and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wang-Sheng Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Alessandro Cigno

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, W., McKinnish, T. The marital satisfaction of differently aged couples. J Popul Econ 31, 337–362 (2018).

Download citation


  • Assortative matching
  • Marital age gap
  • Marital duration
  • Marital satisfaction

JEL classification

  • D1
  • J12