The relationship between cohabitation and divorce: Selectivity or causal influence?
- 1.2k Downloads
Recent evidence linking premarital cohabitation to high rates of divorce poses a complex theoretical and empirical puzzle. We develop hypotheses predicting that premarital cohabitation is selective of those who are prone to divorce as well as hypotheses predicting that the experience of premarital cohabitation produces attitudes and values which increase the probability of divorce. Using multiwave panel data from a recent cohort of young men and women in the United States, we specify and test models of these predictions. The results are consistent with hypotheses suggesting that cohabitation is selective of men and women who are less committed to marriage and more approving of divorce. The results also are consistent with the conclusion that cohabiting experiences significantly increase young people’s acceptance of divorce.
KeywordsUnion Formation Divorce Rate Causal Influence Marital Stability Maternal Attitude
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Axinn, W. G. and A. Thornton. 1991. “The Intergenerational Reciprocal Relationships between Cohabitation Attitudes and Cohabitation and Marriage Behavior.” Unpublished marmscript, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
- Axinn, W. G. and A. Thornton. 1992. “The Influence of Parental Resources on the Timing of the Transition to Marriage.” Social Science Research, forthcoming.Google Scholar
- Ben-Akiva, M. and S. R. Lerman. 1987. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Burch, T. K. and A. K. Madan. 1986. Union Formation and Dissolution: Results from the 1984 Family History Survey. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, No. 99–963.Google Scholar
- Cherlin, A. 1981. Marriage. Divorce. Remarriage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Cox, D. R. 1972. “Regression Models and Life Tables.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B34:187–202.Google Scholar
- Freedman, D., A. Thornton, D. Camburn, D. Alwin, and L. Young-DeMarco. 1988. “The Life History Calendar: A Technique for Collecting Retrospective Data.” pp. 37–68 in Sociological Methodology 18, edited by C. C. Clogg. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Luce, R. 1959. Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Maddala, G. S. 1983. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- McFadden, D. 1975. “On Independence, Structure and Simultaneity in Transportation Demand Analysis.” Working Paper 7511, Urban Travel Demand Forecasting Project, Institute for Transportation and Traffic Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
- Namboodiri, K. and C. M. Suchindran. 1987. Life Table Techniques and Their Applications. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Pratt, W. 1965. “A Study of Marriage Involving Premarital Pregnancies.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Department of Sociology.Google Scholar
- Sweet, J. A. and L. L. Bumpass. 1987. American Families and Households. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Thomson, E. and U. Colella. 1991. “Cohabitation and Marital Stability: Quality or Commitment?” NSFH Working Paper 23, Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
- Thornton, A., W. G. Axinn, and D. H. Hill. 1992. “Reciprocal Effects of Religiosity, Cohabitation, and Marriage.” American Journal of Sociology, forthcoming.Google Scholar