Section 4: Relationship Status
Together is Better?
Advanced Psychology
Soons and Liefbroer (2008)
Are there differences in well-being among young adults who are single, steadily
dating, cohabiting-unmarried, and married?
Another purpose of the current study is to contribute to explanation of these
differences in well-being.
Role played by the differential provision of these resources
Resources are material or non-material
The greater the access, the higher the well-being
Literature Review
3 broad categories of resources: material, social, and personal
A resource perspective on well-being and partner relationships – the kind and
level of resources available to individuals depend on their relationship status.
Resources and partner relationships – authors propose that singles have lower
levels of all 3 types of resources compared with partnered individuals.
Living together vs. marriage – those who are married are likely to enjoy more
resources in terms of material and social aspects.
H1: Among young adults, well-being will be highest among
those who are married, followed, in order, by cohabiting, steadily dating, and
single adults.
H2: Material, personal, and social resources mediate the
effect of relationship status on subjective well-being of single adults
Moderating effects of resources: singles depend more on resources provided by
friends, family, and others than partnered
H3: Material, persona, and social resources play a moderating
role in explaining the effect of relationship status on subjective well-being
Gender differences: gender plays a moderating role because men depend more on
partner for social support
Methods
Sample: data come from the Dutch Panel Study on social integration in the
Netherlands
Measurement
Well-being: Satisfaction with life Scale (Deiner et al.,
(1985)
Relationship status
Material resources: level of education, activity status
Personal resources: neuroticism, self-esteem scales
Social resources: emotional support, instrumental support
Other: age, sex, cohort, presence of children, dissolution of past union
Results
Demographics
As relationships became closer, subjective well-being
increased
Personal resources: singles have lower self-esteem
Social resources: singles receive lower levels of emotional
and instrumental support
Relationship status and well being
Life satisfaction of married was significantly higher
Being male, having children, and having experienced
dissolution of previous marriage predicted lower life satisfaction
Mediating effects – resources partially mediate relationship of marital status
and well-being
Satisfaction decreased between married and singles by 32%
Married and dating by 25%
Cohabiting and married by 28%
Moderating effects – having neither full-time employment or education related to
lower satisfaction to all groups except married
Gender differences – resources explained well-being for men in all categories
except single; instrumental support positively related to life satisfaction
among cohabiting women only
Discussion
Marital status is not a good indicator to understanding partner-related
differences in well-being among young adults.
Resources explain 25-32% variation in well-being among single, cohabiting, and
married; thus effect of relationship status is due to differences in resources,
namely material.
For the most part, effect size of resources is independent of relationship
status (except not having a partner increases negative effects of neuroticism.
Conclusion
Differential resource availability provides “compelling explanation” for
relational status differences in well-being.
Discussion Questions
Critically evaluate this article. What are its strengths and weaknesses?
(life-sat scale; assumption of levels of commitment, etc.)
Do the conclusions that married individuals have better well-being than other
groups adequately reflect reality, in your opinion? Why or why not?
Are the conclusions consistent with your personal experiences? Why or why not?