BACKGROUND Across the industrialized world, more couples are living together without marrying. Although researchers have compared cohabitation cross-nationally using quantitative data, few have compared union formation using qualitative data. OBJECTIVE We use focus group research to compare social norms of cohabitation and marriage in Australia and nine countries in Europe. We explore questions such as: what is the meaning of cohabitation? To what extent is cohabitation indistinguishable from marriage, a prelude to marriage, or an alternative to being single? Are the meanings of cohabitation similar across countries? METHODS Collaborators conducted seven to eight focus groups in each country using a standardized guideline. They analyzed the discussions with bottom-up coding in each thematic area. They then collated the data in a standardized report. The first and second authors systematically analyzed the reports, with direct input from collaborators. RESULTS The results describe a specific picture of union formation in each country. However, three themes emerge in all focus groups: commitment, testing, and freedom. The pervasiveness of these concepts suggests that marriage and cohabitation have distinct meanings, with marriage representing a stronger level of commitment. Cohabitation is a way to test the relationship, and represents freedom. Nonetheless, other discourses emerged, suggesting that cohabitation has multiple meanings. CONCLUSIONS This study illuminates how context shapes partnership formation, but also presents underlying reasons for the development of cohabitation. We find that the increase in cohabitation has not devalued the concept of marriage, but has become a way to preserve marriage as an ideal for long-term commitment.

Towards a new understanding of cohabitation: Insights from focus group research across Europe and Australia / B. Perelli-Harris; M. Mynarska; A. Berrington; C. Berghammer; A. Evans; O. Isupova; R. Keizer; A. Klaerner; T. Lappegård; D. Vignoli. - In: DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH. - ISSN 2363-7064. - STAMPA. - 31:(2014), pp. 1043-1078. [10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.34]

Towards a new understanding of cohabitation: Insights from focus group research across Europe and Australia

VIGNOLI, DANIELE
2014

Abstract

BACKGROUND Across the industrialized world, more couples are living together without marrying. Although researchers have compared cohabitation cross-nationally using quantitative data, few have compared union formation using qualitative data. OBJECTIVE We use focus group research to compare social norms of cohabitation and marriage in Australia and nine countries in Europe. We explore questions such as: what is the meaning of cohabitation? To what extent is cohabitation indistinguishable from marriage, a prelude to marriage, or an alternative to being single? Are the meanings of cohabitation similar across countries? METHODS Collaborators conducted seven to eight focus groups in each country using a standardized guideline. They analyzed the discussions with bottom-up coding in each thematic area. They then collated the data in a standardized report. The first and second authors systematically analyzed the reports, with direct input from collaborators. RESULTS The results describe a specific picture of union formation in each country. However, three themes emerge in all focus groups: commitment, testing, and freedom. The pervasiveness of these concepts suggests that marriage and cohabitation have distinct meanings, with marriage representing a stronger level of commitment. Cohabitation is a way to test the relationship, and represents freedom. Nonetheless, other discourses emerged, suggesting that cohabitation has multiple meanings. CONCLUSIONS This study illuminates how context shapes partnership formation, but also presents underlying reasons for the development of cohabitation. We find that the increase in cohabitation has not devalued the concept of marriage, but has become a way to preserve marriage as an ideal for long-term commitment.
2014
31
1043
1078
B. Perelli-Harris; M. Mynarska; A. Berrington; C. Berghammer; A. Evans; O. Isupova; R. Keizer; A. Klaerner; T. Lappegård; D. Vignoli
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
31-34.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione finale referata (Postprint, Accepted manuscript)
Licenza: Open Access
Dimensione 611.1 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
611.1 kB Adobe PDF

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/923141
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 99
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 82
social impact