1. Currently cohabiting: relationship attitudes and intentions in the BHPS.
Ernestina Coast

2. Cohabitation Fuzzy Heterogeneous, includes: Evolving
Post-marriage (pre- and post-divorce)
Pre-marriage
Post widowhood
Evolving
“a moving target”
1980s “alternative lifestyle”

3. Relationship pathways, all women, BHPS (2005)

4. Good large-scale descriptive data on incidence and trends
Representative attitudinal surveys
Empirical gap: cohabitees
US research
emerging qualitative research
survey data relationship intentions and attitudes
longitudinal data – collected while subjective state exists
systematic empirical investigation of social change

5. Normative attitudes Changing social norms around marriage
Deinstitutionalisation of marriage
(Cherlin, 1994)
Démariage
(Thery, 1994),
Disestablishment of marriage
(Coontz, 2004, quoting Cott).

6. BHPS normative attitudes
“Living together outside of marriage is always wrong”
1992, 1994, 1996
“It is alright for people to live together even if they have no interest in considering marriage”
1998, 2000, 2002, 2004

8. Percentage distribution of youths aged years response to the question statement “Living together outside of marriage is always wrong”, BHPS
1994
1999
2000
2001
2005
Strongly agree/
agree
19.0
12.8
11.9
10.6
13.3
Neither agree nor disagree
21.2
27.9
26.7
23.5
30.8
Strongly disagree / disagree
59.8
59.3
61.4
65.9
55.9

10. Social acceptance of cohabitation well-established
Moved from deviant to normative behaviour
Acceptance likely to increase
Cohort replacement
Socialisation
Social diffusion

11. British Household Panel Survey (BHPS)
Annual since 1991
Approx. 5,000 households
Full interview with new partners

12. Questions
“We are interested in why you and your partner have chosen to live together rather than being married. Do you think there are any (dis)advantages in living as a couple, rather than being married?”
If “Yes”
“What do you think are the (dis)advantages of living as a couple?”

13. Question: Future intentions
“Obviously you cannot say for certain what will happen, but could you please look at this card and read out the number of the statement which you feel applies most closely to your current relationship?
1 Planning to marry
2 Probably get married at some point
3 Probably just keep living together without marrying
4 Have not really thought about the future
5 Other (specify)
6 Don’t know

14. Supplementary Question
“Even though you have no plans to marry at the moment, can you please look at this card and tell me how likely it is that you will ever get married to anyone in the future?”
1 Very likely
2 Likely
3 Unlikely
4 Very unlikely
5 Don’t know

15. Interrogating the questions
Grounded in reality
Take account of circumstances rather than an expression of abstract desire
Supplementary question on marriage expectation moves from current relationship to any future hypothetical relationship
Phrased relative to marriage

16. Percentage distribution of reported advantages of cohabitation relative to marriage, currently cohabiting respondents, 1998 and 2003.
1998
2003
Advantages in living as a couple rather than marriage?
40.0%
32.0%
First mentioned advantage
Trial marriage
No legal ties
Improves relationship
Previous bad marriage
Personal independence
Financial advantage
Companionship
Prefer cohabitation
Other
30.7
29.8
5.2
1.6
10.0
16.1
2.0
1.4
3.2
23.6
24.5
3.6
2.7
10.9
22.2
3.1
1.3
8.2
Parenthood status is significant:
Non-parents = trial marriage. Parents = personal independence + absence of legal ties

17. Percentage distribution of reported disadvantages of cohabitation relative to marriage, currently cohabiting respondents, 1998 and 2003.
1998
2003
Disadvantages in living as a couple rather than marriage?
26.7
23.6
First mentioned disadvantage
Financial insecurity
No legal status
Effects on children
Lack of commitment
Social stigma
Other
39.0
16.6
5.4
15.6
16.3
7.1
30.4
32.1
6.2
9.6
11.3
10.4

18. 1998 n=268 2003 n=401 Male Female Very likely 4.7 5.8 3.1 3.4 Likely
Percentage distribution of responses to the statement “How likely it is that you will ever get married to anyone in the future?”, by currently cohabiting, never married respondents with no plans to marry their current partner, by sex, 1998 and 2003.
1998
n=268
2003
n=401
Male
Female
Very likely
4.7
5.8
3.1
3.4
Likely
24.0
28.8
18.9
23.9
Unlikely
25.6
38.8
40.8
42.9
Very unlikely
34.1
18.0
27.0
22.9
Don’t know
11.6
8.6
10.2
6.8

19. Expectation of current cohabiting relationship
Percentage distribution of future relationship expectations, by duration of current cohabiting relationship (n=1,015 respondents), 2003
Expectation of current cohabiting relationship
Plan to marry
Probably marry
Live together
Duration of current cohabiting relationship
< 1 year
30.5
38.0
31.6
1-2 years
29.9
44.4
25.7
2-5 years
19.8
48.5
31.7
> 5 years
9.2
33.4
57.4

20. % distribution of union expectations, by prior live-in relationship, 1998 and 2003
No prior live-in union
Prior live-in union
Expect. of current cohabit union
Plan to marry
24.7
13.3
22.7
16.9
Prob. marry
46.8
37.6
47.2
33.7
Live together
28.5
49.0
30.1
49.4

21. Do individuals achieve their relationship expectations?
Outcome
Expectation
Split up
Marry
Continue cohabit
Plan to marry
0.9
10.7
4.2
Probably marry
7.0
13.6
20.9
Live together
6.6
4.8
23.9
No thought to future
1.3
0.6
3.7
Do not know
0.1
1.5
Never-married childless couples interviewed in 1998 – subsequent birth of a child is sig. associated with continuation of cohabitation compared to entry to marriage

22. Couple concordance / discordance
Use only couples with full responses to questions
Potential bias for homogeneity of response
Only first-ever live-in relationships
Interview effect?
% of individual interviews record 3rd party
89% coded as no influence exerted by the third party

23. % distribution couple expectations, 1998 and 2003, first unions only
n=137 couples
2003
n=196 couples
Women
Plan to marry
Prob. marry
Just live tog.
Men
20.4
8.0
0.7
19.9
5.1
1.0
3.6
43.8
5.8
37.8
10.7
11.7
4.6
17.3

24. Percentage distribution of relationship outcomes by 1998 relationship expectations, cohabiting couples.

25. Discussion Analyses at the relationship level
Living apart together (LAT)
Assumption of rational choice
Vague or underspecified goals
Qualitative insights
Cohabitation versus marriage or LAT?

26. Mid-career research training fellowship
“Multiplier” effect
Research and training skills
Longitudinal data in the developing world
Qualitative longitudinal research
Other datasets
New avenues of research: The Household