This study uses data from the Norwegian NorLAG study (N = 2,455) to examine differences in relationship quality and psychological well-being between middle-aged cohabitors and married persons. The authors question whether previous results linking cohabitation as compared with marriage to lower well-being will replicate in Norway, where cohabitation is much more widespread and socially accepted and where the legal system increasingly treats cohabitation and marriage as equal. The authors find that never-married cohabitors but not formerly married cohabitors report lower levels of relational and subjective well-being compared with their married counterparts. In this way, cohabitation per se is not qualitatively different from marriage. The presence of children and union duration have previously been linked to greater discontentment among cohabitors, but this is not evinced in this study.
Amato, P.R., & Booth, A. (1997). A generation at risk: Growing up in an era of family upheaval. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
Bianchi, S.M., & Casper, L.M. (2000). American families (Population Bulletin 55). Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau.
3.
Brines, J., & Joyner, K. (1999). The ties that bind: Principles of cohesion in cohabitation and marriage. American Sociological Review, 64, 333-355.
4.
Brown, S.L. (2000). The effects of union type on psychological well-being: Depression among cohabitors versus marrieds. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 41, 241-255.
5.
Brown, S.L. (2003). Relationship quality dynamics of cohabiting unions . Journal of Family Issues, 24, 583-601.
6.
Brown, S.L. (2004). Moving from cohabitation to marriage: Effects on relationship quality. Social Science Research, 33, 1-19.
7.
Brown, S.L., & Booth, A. (1996). Cohabitation versus marriage: A comparison of relationship quality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 49, 391-400.
8.
Brown, S.L., Bulanda, J.R., & Lee, G.L. (2005). The significance of cohabitation: Marital status and mental health benefits among middle-aged and older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 60, 21-29.
9.
Bumpass, L., & Lu, H. (2000). Trends in cohabitation and implications for children's family contexts in the United States. Population Studies, 54, 29-41.
10.
Cherlin, A. (1992). Marriage, divorce, remarriage (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
Cherlin, A. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage . Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 848-861.
12.
Diener, E., Gohm, C.L., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Similarity of the relations between marital status and subjective well-being across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 419-436.
13.
Evans, M.D., & Kelley, J. (2004). Effect of family structure on life satisfaction: Australian evidence. Social Indicators Research, 69, 303-349.
14.
Horwitz, A.V., & White, H.R. (1998). The relationship of cohabitation and mental health: A study of a young adult cohort. Journal of Marriage and Family , 60, 505-514.
15.
Jensen, A.M., & Clausen, S.E. (2003). Children and family dissolution in Norway. The impact of consensual unions. Childhood, 10, 65-81.
16.
Kalmijn, M., & Bernasco, W. (2001). Separated lifestyles in married and cohabiting relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 639-654.
17.
Kiernan, K. (2002). Cohabitation in Western Europe: Trends, issues and implications. In A. Booth & A. Crouter (Eds.), Just living together: Implications of cohabitation on families, children and social policy (pp. 3-31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
Kravdal, ø. (1997). Wanting a child without a firm commitment to the partner: Interpretations and implications of a common behaviour pattern among Norwegian cohabitants. European Journal of Population, 13, 269-298.
19.
Lau, B., Moum, T., Sørensen, T., & Tambs, K. (2002). Sivilstand og mental helse [Marital status and mental health]. Norsk Epidemiologi, 12, 281-290.
20.
Marks, N.F., Bumpass, L.L., & Jun, H. (2004). Family roles and well-being during the middle life course. In O. G. Brim, C. D. Ryff, & R. C. Kessler (Eds.), How healthy are we?: A national study of well-being at midlife (pp. 514-549). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
Mastekaasa, A. (1995). Age variations in the suicide rates and self-reported subjective well-being of married and never-married persons. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 5, 21-39.
22.
The Ministry of Children and Family Affairs. ( 2003). Stortingsmelding nr. 29 (2002-2003). Om familien—forpliktende samliv og foreldreskap [White Paper No. 29. Couple relationships— Commitment and parenthood]. Oslo, Norway: Barne- og Familiedepartementet.
23.
The Ministry of Children and Family Affairs. ( 2004). Faktavedlegg: Familie og samliv [Family and couple relationships] . Retrieved May 23, 2004, from http://www.odin.dep.no
24.
Myers, D.G. (1999). Close relationships and quality of life. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being. The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 374-391). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Noack, T. (2001). Cohabitation in Norway: An accepted and gradually more regulated way of living. International Journal of Law, Policy, and the Family, 15, 102-117.
26.
Noack, T., & Seierstad, A. (2003). Samboerskap ved tusenårsskiftet: Dagligdags og uutforsket [Cohabitation in the new millennium: Common and unexplored]. Samfunnsspeilet, 1, 30-34.
27.
Nock, S.L. (1995). A comparison of marriages and cohabiting relationships . Journal of Family Issues, 16, 53-76.
28.
Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C.R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 149-161.
29.
Popenoe, D., & Whitehead, B.D. (2002). Should we live together? What young adults need to know about cohabitation and marriage. New Brunswick, NJ: The National Marriage Project.
30.
Ramsøy, N.R. (1994). Non-marital cohabitation and change in norms: The case of Norway. Acta Sociologica, 37, 23-37.
31.
Reissman, C., Aron, A., & Bergen, M.R. (1993). Shared activities and marital satisfaction: Causal direction and self-expansion versus boredom. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 243-254.
32.
Ross, C.E. (1995). Reconceptualizing marital status as a continuum of social attachment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 129-140.
33.
Skinner, K.B., Bahr, S.J., Crane, D.R., & Call, V.R. (2002). Cohabitation, marriage, and remarriage. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 74-90.
34.
Slagsvold, B., & Hansen, T. (2005). Flere samboere—vil de i like stor grad som gifte stille opp for partners foreldre? [More cohabitors—Are they as likely to provide assistance to partner's parents as are marrieds?]. In B. Slagsvold & P. E. Solem (Eds.), Morgendagens eldre (pp. 73-81). Oslo , Norway: NOVA.
35.
Smock, P.J. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States: An appraisal of research themes, findings, and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 1-20.
36.
Smock, P.J., & Gupta, S. (2002). Cohabitation in contemporary North America. In A. Booth & A. Crouter (Eds.), Just living together: Implications of cohabitation on families, children and social policy (pp. 53-84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37.
Stack, S., & Eshleman, J.R. (1998). Marital status and happiness: A 17-nation study. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 527-536.
38.
Stafford, L., Kline, S.L., & Rankin, C.T. (2004). Married individuals, cohabitors, and cohabitors who marry: A longitudinal study of relational and individual well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 231-248.
39.
Statistics Canada. (2002). 2001 census: Marital status, common-law status, families, dwellings and households . Retrieved October 5, 2004, from http://www.statcan.ca
40.
Statistics Norway. (2002). Samboertall [Statistics on cohabitation]. Retrieved January 13, 2006, from http://www.ssb.no
41.
Texmon, I. (1999). Samliv i Norge mot slutten av 1900-tallet [Cohabitation in Norway at the end of the 20th Century] (NOU Publication No. 25). Oslo: Norway Statens forvaltningstjeneste/Statens trykning.
42.
Thornton, A., & Young-DeMarco, L. (2001). Four decades of trends in attitudes toward family issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1009-1037.
43.
Van de Kaa, D.J. (1987). Europe's second demographic transition (Population Bulletin 42). Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau.
44.
Waite, L.J. (2000). Trends in men's and women's well-being in marriage . In L. J. Waite, C. Bachrach, M. Hindin, E. Thomson, & A. Thornton (Eds.), The ties that bind: Perspectives on marriage and cohabitation (pp. 368-392). New York: Aldinede Gruyter.
45.
Waite, L.J., & Gallagher, M. (2000). A case for marriage. New York : Doubleday.
46.
Willetts, M.C. (2006). Union quality comparison between long-term heterosexual cohabitation and legal marriage. Journal of Family Issues , 27, 110-127.
