Romantic relationships significantly impact physical and mental wellbeing. While both partnership history and current relationship quality influence wellbeing in later life, they are seldom investigated together. This study examines the long-term effects of partnership history on wellbeing, exploring whether current relationship quality can mitigate the impact of past experiences. Using data from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) Finland, we categorize partnership histories and examine if relationship quality mediates their effect on life satisfaction. The analysis identifies five partnership history clusters, revealing that continuous relationships lead to the highest life satisfaction, while unstable histories are linked to lower wellbeing. High relationship satisfaction and fewer conflicts are associated with greater wellbeing for both sexes. Relationship quality mediates the negative associations between unstable partnership histories and subjective wellbeing for both men and women but does not alter the wellbeing associations for those with a continuous partnership history.
AassveA.FuochiG.MencariniL. (2014). Desperate housework: Relative resources, time availability, economic dependency, and gender ideology across Europe. Journal of Family Issues, 35(8), 1000–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14522248
2.
AbbottA.TsayA. (2000). Sequence analysis and optimal matching methods in sociology: Review and prospect. Sociological Methods & Research, 29(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124100029001001
3.
AisenbreyS.FasangA. E. (2010). New life for old ideas: The “second wave” of sequence analysis bringing the “course” back into the life course. Sociological Methods & Research, 38(3), 420–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124109357532
4.
AllenK. R.WalkerA. J. (2013). Aging and gender in families: A very grand opening. In Age Matters (pp. 155–174). Routledge.
5.
AnderssonG.ThomsonE.DuntavaA. (2017). Life-table representations of family dynamics in the 21st century. Demographic Research, 37(1), 1081–1230. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2017.37.35
6.
BarbanN. (2013). Family trajectories and health: A life course perspective. European Journal of Population/Revue européenne de Démographie, 29(4), 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-013-9296-3
7.
BaumbuschJ. L. (2004). Unclaimed treasures: Older women's reflections on lifelong singlehood. Journal of Women & Aging, 16(1-2), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1300/j074v16n01_08
8.
BeD.WhismanM. A.UebelackerL. A. (2013). Prospective associations between marital adjustment and life satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 20(4), 728–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12011
9.
BergA. I. (2008). Life satisfaction in late life: Markers and predictors of level and change among 80+ year olds. Department of Psychology. Psykologiska institutionen.
10.
BildtgårdT.ÖbergP. (2017). Intimacy and ageing: New relationships in later life. Policy Press.
BrownS. L. (2000). The effect of union type on psychological well-being: Depression among cohabitors versus marrieds. Journal of health and social behavior, 41(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.2307/2676319
13.
BuckleL.GallupG. G.Jr.RoddZ. A. (1996). Marriage as a reproductive contract: Patterns of marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17(6), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0162-3095(96)00075-1
14.
CarrD.FreedmanV. A.CornmanJ. C.SchwarzN. (2014). Happy marriage, happy life? Marital quality and subjective well‐being in later life. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76(5), 930–948. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12133
15.
CarrD.MoormanS. M.BoernerK. (2013). End-of-life planning in a family context: Does relationship quality affect whether (and with whom) older adults plan?Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 68(4), 586–592. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbt034
CherlinA. J. (2020). Degrees of change: An assessment of the deinstitutionalization of marriage thesis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12605
19.
ColemanD. (2013). Partnership in Europe; its variety, trends and dissolution. Finnish Yearbook of Population Research, 48(1), 5–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/cyt.12043
20.
ComolliC. L.BernardiL.VoorpostelM. (2021). Joint family and work trajectories and multidimensional wellbeing. European Journal of Population, 37(3), 643–696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-021-09583-3
21.
CoombsR. H. (1991). Marital status and personal wellbeing: A literature review. Family Relations, 40(1), 97–102. https://doi.org/10.2307/585665
22.
DanneferD. (2003). Cumulative advantage/disadvantage and the life course: Cross-fertilizing age and social science theory. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 58(6), S327–S337. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/58.6.s327
23.
DavilaJ.KarneyB. R.HallT. W.BradburyT. N. (2003). Depressive symptoms and marital satisfaction: Within-subject associations and the moderating effects of gender and neuroticism. Journal of Family Psychology, 17(4), 557–570. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.17.4.557
24.
de ChavezA. C.Backett-MilburnK.ParryO.PlattS. (2005). Understanding and researching wellbeing: Its usage in different disciplines and potential for health research and health promotion. Health Education Journal, 64(1), 70–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/001789690506400108
25.
DehleC.WeissR. L. (1998). Sex differences in prospective associations between marital quality and depressed mood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60(4), 1002–1011. https://doi.org/10.2307/353641
26.
DemeyD.BerringtonA.EvandrouM.FalkinghamJ. (2014). Living alone and psychological wellbeing in mid-life: Does partnership history matter?Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 68(5), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2013-202932
27.
DienerE.SuhE. M.SmithH.ShaoL. (1995). National differences in reported subjective wellbeing: Why do they occur?Social Indicators Research, 34(1), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01078966
28.
DienerE.TamirM.ScollonC. N. (2006). Happiness, life satisfaction, and fulfillment: The social psychology of subjective well-being. Bridging social psychology: Benefits of transdisciplinary approaches, 3(1), 319–324. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410616982-56
29.
DiPreteT. A.EirichG. M. (2006). Cumulative advantage as a mechanism for inequality: A review of theoretical and empirical developments. Annual Review of Sociology, 32(1), 271–297. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123127
DushC. M. K.AmatoP. R. (2005). Consequences of relationship status and quality for subjective wellbeing. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(5), 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407505056438
33.
DwyerD. S.MitchellO. S. (1999). Health problems as determinants of retirement: Are self-rated measures endogenous?Journal of Health Economics, 18(2), 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-6296(98)00034-4
34.
DykstraP. A.FokkemaT. (2007). Social and emotional loneliness among divorced and married men and women: Comparing the deficit and cognitive perspectives. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530701330843
35.
EidM.DienerE. (2004). Global judgments of subjective well-being: Situational variability and long-term stability. Social Indicators Research, 65(3), 245–277. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:soci.0000003801.89195.bc
ElderJ. , G. H. (1994). Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly, 1(3), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786971
38.
FahlénS. (2016). Equality at home–A question of career? Housework, norms, and policies in a European comparative perspective. Demographic Research, 35(3), 1411–1440. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2016.35.48
39.
FalconierM. K.JacksonJ. B.HilpertP.BodenmannG. (2015). Dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 42(2), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.07.002
40.
FarooqiS. R. (2014). The construct of relationship quality. Journal of Relationships Research, 5, Article e2. https://doi.org/10.1017/jrr.2014.2
41.
FuR.NoguchiH. (2018). Does the positive relationship between health and marriage reflect protection or selection? Evidence from middle-aged and elderly Japanese. Review of Economics of the Household, 16(4), 1003–1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-018-9406-4
42.
GabadinhoA.RitschardG.MüllerN. S.StuderM. (2011). Analyzing and visualizing state sequences in R with TraMineR. Journal of Statistical Software, 40(4), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v040.i04
43.
GalliherR. V.BentleyC. G. (2010). Links between rejection sensitivity and adolescent romantic relationship functioning: The mediating role of problem-solving behaviors. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(6), 603–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2010.502066
44.
GauthierJ. A.WidmerE. D.BucherP.NotredameC. (2010). 1. Multichannel sequence analysis applied to social science data. Sociological Methodology, 40(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9531.2010.01227.x
45.
GustavsonK.RøysambE.BorrenI.TorvikF. A.KarevoldE. (2016). Life satisfaction in close relationships: Findings from a longitudinal study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(3), 1293–1311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9643-7
46.
HägglundA.E.RotkirchA. (2021). The family situation across the life course. In Komp-Leukkunen, K (ed.), Life-histories in Finland: First Results from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. (pp. 62–74). Helsinki: Population Research Institute.
47.
HagqvistE.GådinK. G.NordenmarkM. (2017). Work–family conflict and wellbeing across Europe: The role of gender context. Soc Indic Res, 132(2), 785–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1301-x
48.
HansenT. (2010). Subjective wellbeing in the second half of life: The influence of family and household resources. Department of Behavioural Sciences in Medicine, Faculty of Medicine. University of Oslo.
49.
HawkinsD. N.BoothA. (2005). Unhappily ever after: Effects of long-term, low-quality marriages on wellbeing. Social Forces, 84(1), 451–471. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2005.0103
50.
HelliwellJ. F. (2003). How's life? Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective wellbeing. Economic Modelling, 20(2), 331–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0264-9993(02)00057-3
51.
HudsonN. W.LucasR. E.DonnellanM. B. (2020). The highs and lows of love: Romantic relationship quality moderates whether spending time with one’s partner predicts gains or losses in well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(4), 572–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219867960
52.
HughesM. E.WaiteL. J. (2009). Marital biography and health at mid-life. Journal of health and social behavior, 50(3), 344–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/002214650905000307
JalovaaraM.NeyerG.AnderssonG.DahlbergJ.DommermuthL.FallesenP.LappegårdT. (2019). Education, gender, and cohort fertility in the Nordic countries. European Journal of Population, 35(3), 563–586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-018-9492-2
55.
JungJ. (2023). Partnership trajectories and their consequences over the life course. Evidence from the German life study. Advances in Life Course Research, 55(3), 100525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2022.100525
56.
KalmijnM. (2013). The educational gradient in marriage: A comparison of 25 European countries. Demography, 50(4), 1499–1520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-013-0229-x
57.
Kamp DushC. M.TaylorM. G. (2012). Trajectories of marital conflict across the life course: Predictors and interactions with marital happiness trajectories. Journal of Family Issues, 33(3), 341–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x11409684
58.
KanskyJ. (2018). What’s love got to do with it? Romantic relationships and wellbeing. In Handbook of wellbeing. DEF Publishers.
59.
KaristoA. (2007). Finnish baby boomers and the emergence of the third age. International Journal of Ageing and Later Life, 2(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.3384/ijal.1652-8670.072291
60.
KoballH. L.MoiduddinE.HendersonJ.GoeslingB.BesculidesM. (2010). What do we know about the link between marriage and health?Journal of Family Issues, 31(8), 1019–1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x10365834
61.
KulikL. (2002). Equality in marriage, marital satisfaction, and life satisfaction: A comparative analysis of preretired and retired men and women in Israel. Families in Society, 83(2), 197–207. https://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.32
62.
LeeK. S.OnoH. (2012). Marriage, cohabitation, and happiness: A cross‐national analysis of 27 countries. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(5), 953–972. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01001.x
63.
LindgrenJ. (1986). Recent divorce trends and patterns in Finland. Finnish Yearbook of Population Research, 1(5), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.23979/fypr.44808
64.
LiuH.WaiteL. (2014). Bad marriage, broken heart? Age and gender differences in the link between marital quality and cardiovascular risks among older adults. Journal of health and social behavior, 55(4), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146514556893
65.
LiuH.ZhangZ.ZhangY. (2021). A national longitudinal study of marital quality and cognitive decline among older men and women. Social Science & Medicine, 282(4), 114151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114151
66.
LoveA. B.HolderM. D. (2016). Can romantic relationship quality mediate the relation between psychopathy and subjective wellbeing?Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(6), 2407–2429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9700-2
67.
MäkiM.HägglundA. E.RotkirchA.KulathinalS.MyrskyläM. (2022). Stable marital histories predict happiness and health across educational groups.INVEST Working Papers, 64.
68.
MargelischK.SchneewindK. A.VioletteJ.Perrig-ChielloP. (2017). Marital stability, satisfaction and wellbeing in old age: Variability and continuity in long-term continuously married older persons. Aging & Mental Health, 21(4), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2015.1102197
Metsä-SimolaN.MartikainenP. (2013). The short-term and long-term effects of divorce on mortality risk in a large Finnish cohort, 1990–2003. Population Studies, 67(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2012.746386
71.
MidanikL. T.SoghikianK.RansomL. J.TekawaI. S. (1995). The effect of retirement on mental health and health behaviors: The Kaiser Permanente Retirement Study. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50(1), S59–S61. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/50b.1.s59
72.
MorryM. M.ReichT.KitoM. (2010). How do I see you relative to myself? Relationship quality as a predictor of self-and partner-enhancement within cross-sex friendships, dating relationships, and marriages. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(4), 369–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903365471
73.
MroczekD. K.SpiroA.3rd (2005). Change in life satisfaction during adulthood: Findings from the veteran’s affairs normative aging study. Journal of personality and social psychology, 88(1), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.189
74.
NoorN. M. (2003). Work-and family-related variables, work–family conflict and women's wellbeing: Some observations. Community, Work & Family, 6(3), 297–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366880032000143474
75.
O’FlahertyM.BaxterJ.HaynesM.TurrellG. (2016). The family life course and health: Partnership, fertility histories, and later-life physical health trajectories in Australia. Demography, 53(3), 777–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-016-0478-6
76.
Perelli-HarrisB.HoherzS.LappegårdT.EvansA. (2019). Mind the “happiness” gap: The relationship between cohabitation, marriage, and subjective well-being in the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, and Norway. Demography, 56(4), 1219–1246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00792-4
77.
PetersA.LiefbroerA. C. (1997). Beyond marital status: Partner history and wellbeing in old age. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59(3), 687–699. https://doi.org/10.2307/353954
78.
PiccarretaR.StuderM. (2019). Holistic analysis of the life course: Methodological challenges and new perspectives. Advances in Life Course Research, 41(4), 100251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2018.10.004
79.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03206553
80.
PreacherK. J.RuckerD. D.HayesA. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316
ProulxC. M.HelmsH. M.BuehlerC. (2007). Marital quality and personal well‐being: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(3), 576–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00393.x
83.
RappI.KleinT.FronkS.StauderJ. (2015). Partner market opportunities and relationship stability. Comparative Population Studies, 40(3). https://doi.org/10.12765/cpos-2015-08
84.
RappI.StauderJ. (2020). Mental and physical health in couple relationships: Is it better to live together?European Sociological Review, 36(2), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcz047
85.
RobersonP. N.NoronaJ. C.LengerK. A.OlmsteadS. B. (2018). How do relationship stability and quality affect wellbeing? Romantic relationship trajectories, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction across 30 years. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(7), 2171–2184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1052-1
RossC. E.MirowskyJ. (2003). Social structure and psychological functioning: Distress, perceived control, and trust. In Handbook of social psychology (pp. 411–447): Springer Us.
88.
RotkirchA. (2018). Evolutionary family sociology. In Oxford handbook of evolution, biology and society. (pp. 1–33). Oxford University Press.
89.
SoonsJ. P.KalmijnM. (2009). Is marriage more than cohabitation? Well‐being differences in 30 European countries. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(5), 1141–1157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00660.x
90.
SoonsJ. P.LiefbroerA. C.KalmijnM. (2009). The long‐term consequences of relationship formation for subjective well‐being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(5), 1254–1270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00667.x
StuderM.RitschardG.GabadinhoA.MüllerN. S. (2011). Discrepancy analysis of state sequences. Sociological Methods & Research, 40(3), 471–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124111415372
93.
TemkinaA.ShpakovskayaL.Lavie-AjayiM.RotkirchA. (2024). Changes in ageing women’s sexual subjectivity as seen from a life course perspective: Security, caring, and desire. Culture, Health and Sexuality, 1(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2024.2382879
94.
ThompsonL.WalkerA. J. (1989). Gender in families: Women and men in marriage, work, and parenthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 51(4), 845–871. https://doi.org/10.2307/353201
95.
ThomsonE.MosleyJ.HansonT. L.McLanahanS. S. (2001). Remarriage, cohabitation, and changes in mothering behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00370.x
UhlenbergP.MuellerM. (2003). Family context and individual Weil-being: Patterns and mechanisms in life course perspective (pp. 123–148). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48247-2_6
98.
UmbersonD.WilliamsK.PowersD. A.LiuH.NeedhamB. (2006). You make me sick: Marital quality and health over the life course. Journal of health and social behavior, 47(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/002214650604700101
99.
VäänänenA.KevinM. V.Ala-MursulaL.PenttiJ.KivimäkiM.VahteraJ. (2005). The double burden of and negative spillover between paid and domestic work: Associations with health among men and women. Women & Health, 40(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1300/j013v40n03_01
von Heideken WågertP.RönnmarkB.RosendahlE.Lundin-OlssonL.GustavssonJ. M.NygrenB.LundmanB.NorbergA.GustafsonY.GustafsonY. (2005). Morale in the oldest old: The Umeå 85+ study. Age and Ageing, 34(3), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afi044
102.
WardJ. H.Jr. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1963.10500845
103.
WhittonS. W.KurylukA. D. (2012). Relationship satisfaction and depressive symptoms in emerging adults: Cross-sectional associations and moderating effects of relationship characteristics. Journal of Family Psychology, 26(2), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027267
104.
WiedemannA. U.SchüzB.SniehottaF.ScholzU.SchwarzerR. (2009). Disentangling the relation between intentions, planning, and behaviour: A moderated mediation analysis. Psychology and Health, 24(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440801958214
105.
WilliamsK. (2003). Has the future of marriage arrived? A contemporary examination of gender, marriage, and psychological wellbeing. Journal of health and social behavior, 44(4), 470–487. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519794
106.
XavierF. M.FerrazM.MarcN.EscosteguyN. U.MoriguchiE. H. (2003). Elderly people s definition of quality of life. Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry, 25(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-44462003000100007
107.
YamF. C. (2023). The relationship between partner phubbing and life satisfaction: The mediating role of relationship satisfaction and perceived romantic relationship quality. Psychological Reports, 126(1), 303–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221144611
108.
ZellaS. (2017). Marital status transitions and self-reported health among Canadians: A life course perspective. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 12(2), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-016-9462-y
109.
ZhangZ.HaywardM. D. (2006). Gender, the marital life course, and cardiovascular disease in late midlife. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(3), 639–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00280.x
110.
ZimmermannO.HameisterN. (2019). Stable cohabitational unions increase quality of life: Retrospective analysis of partnership histories also reveals gender differences. Demographic Research, 40(3), 657–692. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2019.40.24
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
