ArticlePDF Available

THE CHANGING PARADIGM OF COHABITATION: INTERPLAY BETWEEN SOCIAL NORMS, EMOTIONAL INTERDEPENDENCE AND SUBJECTIVE WELL BEING

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Objectives: The present study attempts to understand how the social norms concerning the idea of cohabitation and different patterns of emotional interdependence affect an individuals subjective well-being in cohabiting relationships. Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 6 participants (three males and three females) aged 21-48 (n=6) in a cohabiting relationship for more than eight months and residing in Indian metropolitan cities. A semi-structured interview schedule with twenty-six questions was designed and validated by three experts. Results: A review of audio recordings, transcripts, and process notes revealed thirteen sub-themes listed under six global themes that emerged from the qualitative analysis: Emotional Covariation Interpersonal Emotion Dynamic Societys Standpoint Social Support Individual Perspective, and Well Being. Conclusion: Examining emotional interdependence, social norms, and subjective well-being, we drew attention to several vital factors of interpersonal emotion dynamics and individual versus relational well-being. Participants views about cohabitation were recorded. A low social acceptance of cohabitation led to significant distress and feelings of anxiety, fear, and uncertainty. The role of social support in higher levels of affective well-being is also analyzed.
Content may be subject to copyright.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
840
Journal Homepage: - www.journalijar.com
Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/16733
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/16733
RESEARCH ARTICLE
THE CHANGING PARADIGM OF COHABITATION: INTERPLAY BETWEEN SOCIAL NORMS,
EMOTIONAL INTERDEPENDENCE AND SUBJECTIVE WELL BEING
Deepika Jain1 and Priyesh C.2
1. Department of Psychology, Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR, India.
2. Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR, India.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
Manuscript Info Abstract
……………………. ………………………………………………………………
Manuscript History
Received: 25 February 2023
Final Accepted: 30 March 2023
Published: April 2023
Key words:-
Cohabitation, Social Norms, Emotional
Interdependence, Subjective Well Being,
Interpersonal Emotion Dynamics
Objectives: The present study attempts to understand how the social
norms concerning the idea of cohabitation and different patterns of
emotional interdependence affect an individual's subjective well-being
in cohabiting relationships.
Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 6
participants (three males and three females) aged 21-48 (n=6) in a
cohabiting relationship for more than eight months and residing in
Indian metropolitan cities. A semi-structured interview schedule with
twenty-six questions was designed and validated by three experts.
Results: A review of audio recordings, transcripts, and process notes
revealed thirteen sub-themes listed under six global themes that
emerged from the qualitative analysis: Emotional Covariation;
Interpersonal Emotion Dynamic; Society's Standpoint; Social Support;
Individual Perspective, and Well Being.
Conclusion: Examining emotional interdependence, social norms, and
subjective well-being, we drew attention to several vital factors of
interpersonal emotion dynamics and individual versus relational well-
being. Participants' views about cohabitation were recorded. A low
social acceptance of cohabitation led to significant distress and feelings
of anxiety, fear, and uncertainty. The role of social support in higher
levels of affective well-being is also analyzed.
Copy Right, IJAR, 2023,. All rights reserved.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
Introduction:-
Breaking the barriers of marriage as the only socially acceptable institution, the concept of cohabiting relationships
has been increasingly emerging in India. Cohabiting relationships can be defined as an arrangement where people in
a romantic or sexually intimate relationship for a long-term or permanent basis live with their partner in a
consensual union but are not legally married and registered.
In India, live-in relationships have been taboo since the beginning, as customs, ideas, and beliefs do not accept them.
However, it is common to find people in metro cities living in a cohabiting relationship. It has been observed in
various studies that people in modern society prefer cohabitation before marriage to test their compatibility. On the
contrary, maintaining cohabiting relationships in smaller cities in India would land the couple in trouble as the
concept of marriage is deeply embedded as a religious sacrament in people's mindsets.
Corresponding Author:- Deepika Jain
Address:- Department of Psychology, Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR, India.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
841
As a result, since cohabitation is against the norm of our society, most people that live together, especially young
adults, do not let their parents know about it. Therefore, this exposes the cohabitors to risk and harm as they
continue to live together. Recent literature has emphasized that when young people make partnership choices that
clash with social attitudes and norms, their relations with their parents may deteriorate (Rosina & Fraboni, 2004; Di
Giulio & Rosina, 2006).
Argyle, Martin, and Crossland (1989) defined subjective well-being as a frequency and positive affect, or joy and a
high level of satisfaction over a period of time, as well as the absence of negative affect. The quality of one's
romantic relationship is an essential variable in terms of subjective well-being. From a conceptual point of view, the
discrepancy between social expectations and the life choices of young adults might adversely affect a person's health
and well-being.
Couples in romantic relationships and cohabitation tend to be happier when they provide social support to each other
in their relationship, have less conflict, and when their commitment is vital. In other words, when the quality of their
relationship is positive, their subjective well-being is also positive (Demir, 2010; Prager, 1995).
Emotional interdependence can be defined as a situation where one person's feelings are related to another person's.
This is often seen as a critical characteristic of close relationships. It is seen as one of the defining markers of
intimate relationships, with partners constantly influencing each other's emotions, cognition, and behavior (Kelley et
al., 1983; Berscheid et al., 2001).
The transition to cohabitation is a major developmental milestone for romantic couples yet is linked to myriad
adverse outcomes. One's cultural surroundings can affect how a cohabiting couple is perceived by society and affect
their relationship. Since partners continuously influence each other's emotions, cognition, and behavior, emotional
interdependence can affect subjective well-being in cohabiting relationships.
Research conducted in the field of non-marital, heterosexual cohabitation reflects an increase in cohabitation and the
availability of new data. "Half of all couples entering their first marriage today live together or cohabit before
marriage, and there are at least ten times as many couples living together today than there were just thirty years ago"
(Bumpass & Lu, 2000). With the availability of birth control and the increased likelihood of non-marital sex, the
concept of cohabiting among never-married adults is fundamentally changing. It is becoming a part of our society,
but it has yet to be accepted by most of the older population (Stanley et al., 2011). "The increase in cohabitation has
occurred alongside other major demographic shifts, including rising levels of divorce, delay in marriage, and
childbearing" (John & Coast, 2009).
The social norms shaped by ideational goals, historical specificities, and socialization processes cannot be
considered a random error term and must be structured in social sciences and demographic research (Lesthaeghe &
Surkyn, 1988). The effect of social norms and cultural dynamics on behavioral change is cohort-related. Cohorts
have their value orientation defined through socialization and preserve it during their lives until they pass it on.
People who are still conditioned to the mindset of previous generations resent the very concept of a live-in
relationship as they believe that it is the destroyer of our culture and social values and hence, the concept of a live-in
relationship, which is averse to religious significance, faces resentment from the commoners living in India.
Romantic relationships are important markers for both the completion of identity exploration of emerging adults
(Arnet, 2000) and for them to feel better subjectively (Berscheid & Regan, 2005). However, Soons, Liefbroer, and
Kalmijn (2009) found the well-being level of cohabiting young adults (aged 18 to 26 years at the start of their study)
to be lower than that of married young adults but higher than that of young adults not in a union. Using data from
the National Survey of Families and Households in the United States, Brown (2000) found that cohabiters aged 19
and over reported significantly higher levels of depression than married individuals, even after controlling for
several demographic factors. Using the same data, Marcussen (2005) found that even after controlling for
socioeconomic resources, cohabiting individuals still reported higher levels of depression than married individuals.
This, in turn, may affect one's well-being.
Recent studies have emphasized that in countries where the level of social acceptance of cohabitation is low, and the
value placed on marriage is high, choosing to cohabit may lead couples toward distress (Di Giulio & Rosina, 2007;
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
842
Schröder, 2008). Nevertheless, the youngest generations are increasingly choosing to cohabit when forming
partnerships (Mynarska & Bernardi, 2007; Matysiak, 2009).
Emotional interdependencedefined as partners' emotions being linked to each other over timeis often
considered a key characteristic of healthy romantic relationships. Emotions emerge in interactions between people
and can become intertwined over time, giving rise to complex interpersonal emotion dynamics (Butler & Randall,
2013; Kappas, 2013). These interpersonal emotion dynamics can be observed in several phenomena, one of the most
prominent being that one person's feelings may influence another person's feelings across time (Butler, 2011).
Emotional interdependence has primarily been investigated in a very confined manner by looking at connections
between the same emotions of both partners. Second, there is a methodological consideration that existing research
on emotion interdependence and its relation with well-being often did not take into account (Sels et al., 2016).
In close relationships, there can be two ways in which emotional interdependence can be interpreted. In one way, it
can be seen as a healthy feature of romantic relationships, emphasizing the necessity of "being on the same
wavelength" (Larson & Almeida, 1999). On the other hand, there seems to be abundant evidence for the existence of
emotional interdependence in adult romantic relationships, especially for negative emotions.
When couples show substantial interdependence, "the specific interdependence patterns vary tremendously, with
associations between every emotion pair and in every direction. Unidirectional interdependence, in which only one
partner influences the other partner across time, is the predominant pattern, and only a few couples show
bidirectional interdependence. Although it is recognized that emotional interdependence can be unidirectional"
(Larson & Almeida, 1999; Ferrer & Nesselroade, 2003; Gottman, 2013), bidirectional interdependence and
reciprocity are often considered to be the norm (Gottman, 2013).
The present study attempts to understand how the social norms around the idea of cohabitation and different patterns
of emotional interdependence affect an individual's subjective well-being.
Despite abundant data on the adverse effects of cohabitation on subsequent marriage, young adults continue to
engage in premarital cohabitation. In the Indian social context, most studies on cohabitation are descriptive, dealing
with prevalence rates or contrasts between married and unmarried couples, and do not attempt to place cohabitation
in a theoretical or historical context. The meaning and consequences and lack of consistency in the evidence on the
association between cohabitation and mental health reflect a gap in the literature, which this study attempts to
address. It will extend the literature by studying how social norms and patterns of emotional interdependence affect
one's subjective well-being in cohabiting relationships by adopting a narrative research design.
The study's findings will help devise culture-specific intervention strategies in the domains of individual counseling,
relational counseling, couple's counseling, and family therapy. It will also help design a mental health toolkit for
young people residing in cohabitation with psychoeducation, positive actions, and coping strategies. Thus the
objective of the study is to understand the nature of the psychological experiences of individuals residing in
cohabitation and to understand how social norms around cohabitation and different patterns of emotional
interdependence affect an individual's subjective well-being in cohabiting relationships.
Method:-
The research data of this qualitative study was collected from 6 participants (m=3; f=3) of urban families who were
in a cohabiting relationship for more than eight months residing in Indian metropolitan cities. A semi-structured
interview schedule with twenty-six questions was designed and validated by three experts. The study follows a
narrative research design, and the individual narratives were prioritized, focused on, and respected (Bruce, Beuthin,
Sheilds, Molzahn, & Schick-Makaroff, 2016). The method of snowball sampling was used in this study, and the
recruitment of new participants was interrupted when data saturation was reached (Saunders B., Sim J., Kingstone
T., et al., 2018).
Ethical approval was taken from the Institutional Review Board as a measure of approval for data collection. The
interviews were conducted via telephone in English and were audio recorded with the participant’s consent and all
measures taken to ensure confidentiality. The interviews were 50 minutes to 70 minutes. The audio was then
transcribed and prepared for thematic analysis based on Braun and Clarke’s model (2006).
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
843
This technique involved reading and rereading the transcriptions. The thematic analysis was done following six
steps including familiarization, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and
writing up. The transcribed data was read several times for sorting, and codes were identified and categorized into
suitable themes. A non-hierarchical level was used to categorize the codes into themes. Respondent validation and
peer validation were used to validate the analyzed data.
Results:-
The collected data were analyzed using thematic analysis to obtain the following results. Demographic proforma
was taken from the participants, and the participants' demographic details are represented in Table 1.
Table 1:- Demographic Details of the Participants.
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
Sex
Male
Female
Female
Female
Male
Male
Age
21
22
25
22
27
22
Occupation
IT Sector
Student
Research
Assistant
IT Sector
Dancer
Freelancer
Partner’s
Occupation
Student
IT Sector
Lawyer
IT Sector
IT Sector
Student
Period of
Cohabitation
1Y 6M
1Y 7M
11M
10M
9M
1Y 1M
Residence
Bangalore
Bangalore
Bangalore
Mumbai
Bangalore
Hyderabad
A review of audio recordings, transcripts, and process notes revealed six global themes which had emerged from the
qualitative analysis, which have been represented below in Figure 1:
Figure 1:- Thematic Representation Of The Global Themes
Theme 1 Emotional Covariation
This theme describes the extent to which two partners' emotions fluctuate across time through emotional similarity,
coregulation, or synchrony. It explicitly captures the time-dependent, temporal component of emotional change
(Sels et al., 2016). The participants agreed that they exert influences on each other's emotional cycles and rates of
change.
The sub-themes that emerged from this theme:
Emotional Susceptibility
It captures the extent to which change in a person's emotion is readily affected and predicted by a change in the
emotion of their partner at the previous time point (Larson & Almeida, 1999) through emotion transfer,
transmission, or crossover.
―...I think my emotions also affect him and his actions. (P4)‖
―...so, more or less, when she is sad, I feel the same. (P2)‖
Relationship Characteristics
The referents of this factor capture the communication pattern between the couples, perceived support provided by
the partners to each other, and the kind of environment built around the couple, which affects the rate of emotional
covariation. The partners who curated a safe space, healthy and effective communication with each other, and an
environment of support reported lesser emotional covariation than others.
―...since both of us…are not that connected with our family…things just you know…they got easier after this as now
I do have someone…haina…like one person who I can just share whatever I am going through. (P6)‖
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
844
Theme 2 Interpersonal Emotion Dynamic
This theme describes the patterns of dependency between partners’ emotions and the magnitude of empathetic
concern. It also tries to capture the extent to which any emotional experience in one partner is linked to any
emotional experience in the other. Participants reported linkages between their emotions of varied ranges.
―...I'm very independent. But at the same time, I'm very, very dependent on my partner…because in my relationship,
I think, emotionally, I'm very dependent on my partner… Happiness, any sadness, any emotion that I get, uh it's
shared with my partner. And uh it's the same with her. (P1)‖
The sub-themes devised from this are:
Characteristics of Dependence
This sub-theme captures the reasons given by participants for dependence, such as level of comfort, being together
in partner’s experiences, partner being the primary source of comfort, ability to be vulnerable, and a sense of
constant support. Two participants described this experience as overwhelming. It also includes other forms of
dependence, such as financial dependence, transportation, and household chores.
―...and I think that sharing of emotions…uh…sharing of emotions, benefits that dependency for that person. And
without being dependent on someone else, how can you keep some relationship going?... If you're choosing to be
dependent, it means you're choosing to be vulnerable with a person. (P1)‖
Moderating Factors of Emotional Interdependence
This factor captures the time spent together, relationship longevity, commitment, and closeness between couples. It
captures the cognitive, conative, and affective components. A long-term orientation for the relationship shows
higher interdependence, the intention to persist in the relationship showed an increase in emotional interdependence,
and the psychological attachment to the relationship was also a factor in patterns of emotional interdependence. The
partners whose activities, goals, and interests were mainly linked also showed more emotional interdependence.
―...umm time wise I don't know…it depends like I said some days 2 hours some days 10 hours. We just hang out,
talk, watch shows, just chill together…Maybe have a drink or two on the weekend..umm go out. We do go out often
to dinners and workshops, watch shows and all. (P5)‖
Theme 3 Society’s Standpoint
This captures the experiences of the participants’ interactions with their surroundings and notes ot her people’s
reactions and interactions. It captures the positive and the negative responses that the participants received. All the
participants reported feelings of hesitation, uncertainty, and fear while moving in with their significant others due to
societal norms.
This theme led to three sub-themes:
Immediate Surroundings and Neighborhood
The referents of this factor reflect the reactions and interactions with the people residing in the immediate
neighborhood, including neighbors, shopkeepers in the area, and other handypersons. Four participants reported
problems in finding a house because of being an unmarried couple, and one reported contractual issues with the
owner. The participants reported the neighbors to be inquisitive. Two participants reported that the neighbors were
accepting and friendly.
―...I can hear the judgment in voices of people my age too but that's something I've learnt how to deal with. (P6)‖
Family Awareness
This factor includes the awareness level and involvement of immediate family members in the process of
cohabitation. Most participants did not reveal their cohabitation status to their families due to their parents’
ideologies, family values, and strict nature of the parents. Participants who revealed their relationship status to their
families faced judgment from extended family members. All the participants reported feelings of guilt about lying to
their parents, and several reported decreased communication at home.
―...I do feel a little guilty about lying to my parents…umm I really feel bad about it because my partner's mother
knows that we live together… so yeah that guilt is quite there. (P3)‖
―...I currently have a certain image with my family, which did not make much sense because my family is very, very
religious…So according to my family, um, I'm more or less like a playboy (P1)‖
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
845
Social and Legal Implications
This factor reflects the reactions and the reception of cohabitation by the extended society in which the couple
resides. The participants revealed feeling unsafe, experiences of social judgment, negative social responses, and
society’s resistance towards change. None of the participants reported any legal troubles.
―...so we were at a local-ish bar and a group of guys they… were pretty sloshed, sitting next to us overheard
somehow that we live together… and three of them…came on to me when she was in the washroom and said some
pretty cheap and vulgar things about us, mostly about her…(P2)‖
Theme 4 Individual Perspective
This factor compiles the general views of participants about cohabitation and marriage. All the viewpoints support
cohabitation and describe it as a consensual form of love, a necessary precursor to marriage, and a way to know their
partner better. They believed marriage is contractual and couples should first be willing to live together without a
contract. No participant experienced any feeling of guilt toward society.
―...I absolutely don't believe that living without marriage should be considered as going against Indian culture.
It's…uh just, just about being sure of what you want. (P2)‖
Theme 5 Well Being
This theme reflects the participants' experience and evaluates their lives and specific domains. It captures
experienced well-being (Kahneman & Deaton, 2010) and judgments of overall life satisfaction of specific aspects of
life, such as relationships, community, health, and occupation, as well as overall evaluations.
Sub-themes that emerged were:
Positive and Negative Affect
The referents of this factor reflect feelings of well-being. As in the case of positive affect, it represents an overall
perception of life as functioning smoothly and joyfully. Several participants reported their happiness with their
current lifestyle, feelings of contentment, and motivation from their partner to improve and for a healthy lifestyle.
―...spending time with him, with my family, and with my friends. I've got a really good circle. umm…Even though I
did not plan on working at this place for so long…I am happy…So I've been really happy with what I've done
personally in recent life. (P5)‖
The negative affect represents a generally depressed outlook on life. This factor represents overall constructs only to
the extent that the overall perception of life is concerned. The participants reported experiencing feelings of
insignificance and difficulty in adjusting to the new living arrangement.
Expectation- Achievement Congruence
This factor refers to feelings of well-being generated by achieving success and the standard of living per one’s
expectations, or what may be called satisfaction. Four participants reported contentment with their profession and
standard of living. They mentioned experiences of personal growth and satisfaction with social status. Two
participants who reported incongruent expectations and achievement described experiences of self-reflection and
motivation to work towards their goal. Positive and negative aspects have emerged as independent and not
correlated. This factor also considers the work-life balance in participants, and the majority showed an imbalance in
this aspect.
―...For specifically me…work..umm work comes at a very different timing. So that's really…balancing it with life
makes it more difficult.(P3)‖
―...I still haven't found a way to manage my social life with my work life.(P4)‖
Biological Functioning and Physical Health
This factor measures happiness and worries over health and physical fitness. It is a one-dimensional factor, as both
happiness and worry are highly correlated. Most of the participants experienced complaints of back pain, irregular
sleep patterns, irregular meals, lack of exercise, and unhealthy eating. There were specific complaints of Polycystic
ovary syndrome, Dust Allergy, Minor Surgery, and Asthma by the participants.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
846
Theme 6 Social Support
This theme describes social support experienced by the participants as the support accessible through social ties to
other individuals, groups, and the larger community (Lin N et al., 1979).
Two sub-themes were devised from this:
Social Support and Contracts
It measures the security and density of social networks in the social environment beyond family, including friends,
colleagues, and neighbors. The referents of this factor also reflect a deficiency in social contracts. The participants
who reported well-maintained interpersonal relationships and stable and robust social support showed a positive
attitude toward their perceived well-being. Participants who reported low social support, a lack of immediate social
support, and their partner as the primary source of support showed a negative attitude toward their perceived well-
being.
―...I don't have any colleagues as such, I have clients and it's a strict professional type of a relationship…and umm
Friends from school and college…I have but we…like rarely talk…it is a good relationship but now since we're all
in different places, everyone is busy with their own life…(P4)‖
Family Support
This factor reflects positive feelings derived from the perception of the family as supportive, cohesive, and
emotionally attached. It also reflects the negative feelings of lack of joint decision-making and disharmony.
Participants’ responses varied from having supportive parents and close relations with family to distant relationships
with uninvolved parents, lack of communication with parents, and strict parents.
―...I have a single mother, she's been supportive, at least on my end…Knowing about our move in…uh living in a
relationship. (P1)‖
―...first of all, they are too strict, they wouldn't approve. And I don't talk to them also that often…so it's no big of a
deal for me that they don't know it…They didn't even try to ask…you know so…it's better this way. (P3)‖
Table 2:- Verbatim Table.
Theme
Verbatim
Emotional Covariation
―...I think my emotions also affect him and his actions. (P4)‖
―...so, more or less, when she is sad, I feel the same. (P2)‖
―...since both of us…are not that connected with our
family…things just you know…they got easier after this as now
I do have someone…haina…like one person who I can just share
whatever I am going through. (P6)‖
Interpersonal Emotion
Dynamic
―...I'm very independent. But at the same time, I'm very, very
dependent on my partner…because in my relationship, I think,
emotionally, I'm very dependent on my partner… Happiness,
any sadness, any emotion that I get, uh it's shared with my
partner. And uh it's the same with her. (P1)‖
―...and I think that sharing of emotions…uh…sharing of
emotions, benefits that dependency for that person. And without
being dependent on someone else, how can you keep some
relationship going?... If you're choosing to be dependent, it
means you're choosing to be vulnerable with a person. (P1)‖
―...umm time wise I don't know…it depends like I said some
days 2 hours some days 10 hours. We just hang out, talk, watch
shows, just chill together…Maybe have a drink or two on the
weekend..umm go out. We do go out often to dinners and
workshops, watch shows and all. (P5)‖
Society’s Standpoint
―...I can hear the judgment in voices of people my age too but
that's something I've learnt how to deal with. (P6)‖
―...I do feel a little guilty about lying to my parents…umm I
really feel bad about it because my partner's mother knows that
we live together… so yeah that guilt is quite there. (P3)‖
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
847
―...I currently have a certain image with my family, which did
not make much sense because my family is very, very
religious…So according to my family, um, I'm more or less like
a playboy (P1)‖
―...so we were at a local-ish bar and a group of guys they… were
pretty sloshed, sitting next to us overheard somehow that we live
together… and three of them…came on to me when she was in
the washroom and said some pretty cheap and vulgar things
about us, mostly about her…(P2)‖
Individual Perspective
―...I absolutely don't believe that living without marriage should
be considered as going against Indian culture. It's…uh just, just
about being sure of what you want. (P2)‖
Well-Being
―...spending time with him, with my family, and with my friends.
I've got a really good circle. umm…Even though I did not plan
on working at this place for so long…I am happy…So I've been
really happy with what I've done personally in recent life. (P5)‖
―...For specifically me…work..umm work comes at a very
different timing. So that's really…balancing it with life makes it
more difficult.(P3)‖
―...I still haven't found a way to manage my social life with my
work life. (P4)‖
Social Support
―...I don't have any colleagues as such, I have clients and it's a
strict professional type of a relationship…and umm Friends from
school and college…I have but we…like rarely talk…it is a good
relationship but now since we're all in different places, everyone
is busy with their own life…(P4)‖
―...I have a single mother, she's been supportive, at least on my
end…Knowing about our move in…uh living in a relationship.
(P1)‖
―...first of all, they are too strict, they wouldn't approve. And I
don't talk to them also that often…so it's no big of a deal for me
that they don't know it…They didn't even try to ask…you know
so…it's better this way. (P3)‖
Discussion:-
With this study, we aimed to contribute to understanding the emotional interdependence between couples in a
cohabiting relationship and social norms around cohabitation and its relation with subjective well-being. The
majority of the participants in the study did not produce substantial evidence of emotional interdependence (n=4).
Indeed the participants reflected strong evidence of emotional covariation. Specifically, the participants
demonstrated positive concurrent linear and non-linear covariation in their negative emotions, positive emotions,
and emotional extremity. "Attachment researchers theorize that adult partners "coregulate," referring to a process in
which partners regulate each other's affect and physiological arousal, resulting in interwoven oscillating emotional
patterns" (Field, 1985; Sbarra & Hazan, 2009; Butler & Randall, 2013).
As reported in a previously conducted study by Laura Sels et al. in 2016, it was found that when participants showed
evidence of substantial interdependence, the specific interdependence patterns varied tremendously with
associations between every emotion pair and in every direction. There were lesser instances of unidirectional
interdependence (n=2). Although it is recognized that emotional interdependence can be unidirectional (Gottman,
2013), bidirectional interdependence and reciprocity were observed at a higher rate.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
848
In spite of this observed heterogeneity, the strength of emotional interdependence related to several aspects of
individual well-being, including overall life satisfaction, relational well-being, perceived social support, and
empathic concern. Individuals that were part of bidirectionally interdependent couples reported higher life
satisfaction and less concern for support. As reported in previous studies, by modulating each other's emotions,
partners would help maintain each other's emotional stability, which is critical for psychological well-being
(Kuppens et al., 2007).
Additionally, analyses of the "degree to which an individual's emotions drove (sender effects) or followed (receiver
effects) the partner's emotions" (Bandura, 1997; Kuijer & De Ridder, 2003) over time revealed that sender effects
were positively associated with life satisfaction and negatively with empathic concern. It was consistent with the
previous findings that driving one's partner's emotions would increase individuals' sense of self-efficacy and feeling
supported by their partner, which are known to enhance well-being (Maisel & Gable, 2009).
Further, emotional interdependence seemed largely unaffected by potential moderators, such as the amount of time
that partners spent together was positively related to the extent to which positive emotions were dependent on each
other but not to the extent of covariation in negative emotions or emotional extremity. It was observed that
relationship longevity was not associated with the degree of observed emotional interdependence.
This study shows a lack of observed emotional interdependence, which could have been due to specific
characteristics of the study, such as the small sample size, limited questions, and no real-time observation of the
couple's routine. However, it is noteworthy that a study conducted by Laura et al. (2020) revealed surprisingly
similar results while using face-to-face daily life measurements of emotional interdependence.
As observed in the study conducted by Perelli-Harris et al. (2012), the participants' views about cohabitation were
also recorded in the study, and it was seen that the participants accepted the idea of marriage but instead postponed it
until later in the life course. Cohabitation is seen as a medium that allows couples to ensure they are compatible.
"Although this conceptualization of cohabitation could be considered similar to the concepts of "prelude to
marriage" or "trial marriage," the emphasis on the temporary or impermanent nature of the relationship suggests that
early in the relationship, cohabitation is only a minor step beyond dating." (Brienna Perelli-Harris et al., 2019).
While young individuals support the idea of cohabitation, the norms of Indian society about cohabitation are entirely
different. All the participants experienced low levels of social acceptance at different rates. It was also observed that
the participants who faced more societal problems reported higher distress and feelings of anxiety, fear, and
uncertainty. These findings are consistent with recent studies that have emphasized that in countries where the level
of social acceptance of cohabitation is low and the value placed on marriage is high, choosing to cohabit may lead
couples toward distress (Di Giulio & Rosina, 2007; Schröder, 2008).
We also noted that India is a country where the level of social acceptance of cohabitation is low. As a result,
participants (n=5) did not inform their parents about their living status, and few also reported feelings of guilt (n=5)
and a deterioration in their relationship with their parents (n=3). These findings are supported by previous literature
as it has emphasized that when young people make partnership choices that clash with social attitudes and norms, a
deterioration in their relations with their parents may occur (Rosina & Fraboni, 2004; Di Giulio & Rosina, 2007;
Schröder, 2008). Hence, distress that occurs due to interactions with society is relational to the emotional well-being
of the individuals in a cohabiting relationship.
Social support can be described as the perception of being cared for by others and having a reliable network to turn
to when needed, in everyday situations or specific moments of crisis (Taylor, 2011). This research observed social
support provided to participants from three sources: family, friends, and significant others (Zimet et al., 1988). All
the participants (n=6) reported higher social support from their partners. The participants who obtained more social
support from their friends and family showed higher levels of affective well-being. This finding could be justified by
previous studies that found that people with close social relationships tend to report higher levels of well-being and
flourishing (Myers, 2015; Diener et al., 2018).
Conclusion:-
Examining emotional interdependence, social norms, and subjective well-being, we drew attention to several
essential constituents of interpersonal emotion dynamics, including heterogeneity in emotional interdependence, the
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
849
prevalence of emotional covariation, the potential differential relation between interdependence and individual
versus relational well-being, and differences in sender versus receiver effects. It also revealed that cohabitation was
seen as a medium that allows couples to make sure they are compatible. Low social acceptance of cohabitation led
to significant distress and feelings of anxiety, fear, and uncertainty. Participants who obtained greater social support
from their significant others, friends, and family showed higher levels of affective well-being.
Limitations and Future Studies
The results of this study must be considered in light of several limitations. The first one is that the research is the
non-inclusion of sociodemographic and mental health variables such as stress, depression, and coping strategies,
which could have influenced the interdependence of emotions between partners. The study's sample size needed to
be bigger, limiting its findings. Real-time observation of the couple's routine can also be considered as one of the
limitations, as only limited evidence was collected with the help of semi-structured interviews.
Further, we assessed emotions in the light of the participant's daily life, and no distinction could be made between
emotions whose precipitating sources were within the relationship versus emotions whose origins lay outside the
relationship. Since cohabitation is an emerging phenomenon in India and is not widely accepted by society, the data
was collected from participants aged 21 to 27. In light of this study, the effect of different patterns of emotional
interdependence on an individual's subjective well-being cannot be understood from an age-normative life-stage
perspective.
Further research on cohabitation can be multi-method with larger sample sizes. It should include viewpoints of
young, middle-aged, and older adults and cohabitating LGBTQIA couples, which the present study did not cover.
Expanding theoretical and application-oriented knowledge generation on family systems and marriage with a greater
focus on alternate union formations should be the focus of future research endeavors. Conventional research themes
on union formation will give way to novel research that reflects the altered scenario of marriage and cohabitation.
References:-
1. Argyle, M., Martin, M., & Crossland, J. (1989). Happiness as a Function of Personality and Social Encounters.
In J. P. Forgas, & J. M. Innes (Eds.), Recent Advances in Social Psychology: An International Perspective (pp.
189-247). North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.
2. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties.
American Psychologist, 55(5), 469480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
3. Bandura, A. (1997). Editorial. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1), 810.
https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.8
4. Berscheid, E., Lopes, J., Ammazzalorso, H., & Langenfeld, N. (2001). Causal attributions of relationship
quality. In V. Manusov & J. H. Harvey (Eds.), Attribution, communication behavior, and close relationships
(pp. 115133). Cambridge University Press.
5. Berscheid, E., & Regan, P. C. (2016). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relationships. In Psychology Press
eBooks. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315663074
6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,
3(2), 77101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
7. Brown, R. (2000). Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 30(6), 745778. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992(200011/12)30:6
8. Bruce, A., Beuthin, R., Sheilds, L., Molzahn, A.E., Schick Makaroff, K. (2016). Narrative Research Evolving:
Evolving Narrative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methodology. 15, 1:1609406916659292.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406916659292
9. Bumpass, L. L., & Lu, H. (2000). Trends in cohabitation and implications for children s family contexts in the
United States. Population Studies-a Journal of Demography, 54(1), 2941. https://doi.org/10.1080/713779060
10. Butler, E. A. (2011). Three Views of Emotion Regulation and Health. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 5(8), 563577. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00372.x
11. Butler, E. A., & Randall, A. K. (2013). Emotional coregulation in close relationships. Emotion Review, 5(2),
202210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912451630
12. Coast, E. (2009). Currently Cohabiting: Relationship Attitudes, Expectations and Outcomes. In Springer
eBooks (pp. 105125). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9682-2_6
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
850
13. Cohan, C., & Kleinbaum, S. (2002). Toward a greater understanding of the cohabitation effect: Premarital
cohabitation and marital communication. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(1), 180192.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00180.x
14. Demir, M. (2010). Close relationships and happiness among emerging adults. Journal of Happiness Studies: An
Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 11(3), 293313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-009-9141-x
15. Di Giulio, P., & Rosina, A. (2006). Intergenerational family ties and the diffusion of cohabitation in Italy.
Demographic Research, 16, 441468. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2007.16.14
16. Di Giulio, P., & Rosina, A. (2007). Intergenerational family ties and the diffusion of cohabitation in Italy.
Demographic Research, 16, 441468. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2007.16.14
17. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour,
2(4), 253260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
18. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very Happy People. Psychological Science, 13(1), 8184.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00415
19. Ferrer, E., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2003). Modeling Affective Processes in Dyadic Relations via Dynamic Factor
Analysis. Emotion, 3(4), 344360. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.3.4.344
20. Field, T. (1985). Attachment as Psychobiological Attunement: Being on the Same Wavelength. In Elsevier
eBooks (pp. 415454). Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-586780-1.50019-7
21. Ghosh V. (2021). Perception of Youth Towards Live-In Relationships in India. International Journal of Indian
Psychology, 9(2), 2117-2125. DIP:18.01.209.20210902, DOI:10.25215/0902.209
22. Gonzaga, G. C., Campos, B., and Bradbury, T. (2007). Similarity, convergence, and relationship satisfaction in
dating and married couples. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 93, 3448. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.34
23. Horwitz A.V., White H.R. The relationship of cohabitation and mental health: A study of a young adult cohort.
Journal of Marriage and Family. 1998;60(2):505514.
24. Houben M., Van Den Noortgate W., Kuppens P. (2015). The relation between short-term emotion dynamics
and psychological well-being: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 141 901930. 10.1037/a0038822
25. Joel, S., & MacDonald, G. (2021). We're Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in
Romantic Relationships. Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for
Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 25(4), 317343. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683211025860
26. Johnson S. M., Hunsley J., Greenberg L., Schindler D. (1999). Emotionally focused couples therapy: status and
challenges. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 6 6779.
27. Joireman J. A., Needham T. L., Cummings A. L. (2002). Relationships between dimensions of attachment and
empathy. N. Am. J. Psychol. 4 6380.
28. Joshi, N., & Kang, T. (2014). Association of socio-personal factors with the subjective well-being of infertile
women. Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing, 5(6), 715.
29. Kappas, A. (2013). Social regulation of emotion: messy layers. Frontiers in Psychology, 4.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00051
30. Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(38), 1648916493.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011492107
31. Kuijer, R. G., & de Ridder, D. T. D. (2003). Discrepancy in illness-related goals and quality of life in
chronically ill patients: The role of self-efficacy. Psychology & Health, 18(3), 313330.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0887044031000146815
32. Kuppens, P., Van Mechelen, I., Nezlek, J. B., Dossche, D., & Timmermans, T. (2007). Individual differences in
core affect variability and their relationship to personality and psychological adjustment. Emotion, 7(2), 262
274. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.262
33. Larson, R. W., & Almeida, D. M. (1999). Emotional transmission in the daily lives of families: A new paradigm
for studying family process. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(1), 520. https://doi.org/10.2307/353879
34. Lesthaeghe, R., & Surkyn, J. (1988). Cultural Dynamics and Economic Theories of Fertility Change. Population
and Development Review, 14(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/1972499
35. Maisel, N. C., & Gable, S. L. (2009). The Paradox of Received Social Support. Psychological Science, 20(8),
928932. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02388.x
36. Marcussen, K. (2005). Explaining Differences in Mental Health Between Married and Cohabiting Individuals.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(3), 239257. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800304
37. Matysiak, A. (2009). Employment first, then childbearing: Women’s strategy in post-socialist Poland.
Population Studies-a Journal of Demography, 63(3), 253276. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324720903151100
38. Myers, D.G. (2015) Exploring Social Psychology. 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill Education, New York.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 11(04), 840-851
851
39. Mynarska, M., & Bernardi, L. (2007). Meanings and attitudes attached to cohabitation in Poland: qualitative
analyses of the slow diffusion of cohabitation among the young generation. In RePEc: Research Papers in
Economics. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics. https://doi.org/10.4054/mpidr-wp-2007-006
40. Perelli-Harris, B., & Gassen, N. S. (2012). How Similar Are Cohabitation and Marriage? Legal Approaches to
Cohabitation across Western Europe. Population and Development Review, 38(3), 435467.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2012.00511.x
41. Perelli-Harris, B., Hoherz, S., Addo, F. R., Lappegård, T., Evans, A., Sassler, S., & Styrc, M. (2018). Do
Marriage and Cohabitation Provide Benefits to Health in Mid-Life? The Role of Childhood Selection
Mechanisms and Partnership Characteristics Across Countries. Population Research and Policy Review, 37(5),
703728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-018-9467-3
42. Perelli-Harris, B., Hoherz, S., Lappegård, T., & Evans, A. (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), 12191246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00792-4
43. Rosina, A., & Fraboni, R. (2004). Is marriage losing its centrality in Italy? Demographic Research, 11, 149
172. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2004.11.6
44. Saunders, B. E., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C.
(2018). Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality &
Quantity, 52(4), 18931907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8
45. Sbarra, D. A., & Hazan, C. (2008). Coregulation, Dysregulation, Self-Regulation: An Integrative Analysis and
Empirical Agenda for Understanding Adult Attachment, Separation, Loss, and Recovery. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 12(2), 141167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308315702
46. Schröder, C. (2007). The influence of parents on cohabitation in Italy - Insights from two regional contexts.
Demographic Research, 19, 16931726. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2008.19.48
47. Schroeder, M. A. (2008). How Expressivists Can and Should Solve Their Problem with Negation. Noûs, 42(4),
573599. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0068.2008.00693.x
48. Sels, L., Ceulemans, E., Bulteel, K., & Kuppens, P. (2016). Emotional Interdependence and Well-Being in
Close Relationships. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00283
49. Soons, J. P. M., Liefbroer, A. C., & Kalmijn, M. (2009). The Long-Term Consequences of Relationship
Formation for Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(5), 12541270.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00667.x
50. Stanley, J., Hensher, D. A., Stanley, J., & Vella-Brodrick, D. (2011). Mobility, social exclusion and well-being:
Exploring the links. Transportation Research Part A-policy and Practice, 45(8), 789801.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2011.06.007
51. Taylor, S. E. (2011). Social Support: A Review. In Oxford University Press eBooks. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195342819.013.0009
52. Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived
Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 3041. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
A live-in relationship is an arrangement where two unmarried people live together on a long-term basis in an emotionally or sexually intimate relationship" (Gopal, n.d.). Live-in relationships have seen a remarkable rise in the Indian society in the past decade. This rise can be attributed to the changing perception of youth towards live-in relationships, the need to test compatibility before marriage or to establish financial security before marriage. This paper aims to study the current attitude of Indian youth towards heterosexual cohabitation, popularly known as live-in relationships. This paper has tried to understand whether gender-based differences play an important role in the formation of attitudes towards live-in relationships, whether live-in relationships have become a presumption for marriage and if it has taken precedence over the institution of marriage. I constructed a questionnaire to assess the current attitude of youth towards live-in relationships and used the survey method to collect data. According to the results, it can be said that gender-based differences play an important role in the formation of attitudes towards live-in relationships. Although live-in relationships help in assessing compatibility before marriage, it has not become a presumption for marriage, so it would be incorrect to say that live-in relationships have become a testing ground for marriage. The results also indicate that live-in relationships have not taken precedence over marriage.
Article
Full-text available
Dating is widely thought of as a test phase for romantic relationships, during which new romantic partners carefully evaluate each other for long-term fit. However, this cultural narrative assumes that people are well equipped to reject poorly suited partners. In this article, we argue that humans are biased toward pro-relationship decisions—decisions that favor the initiation, advancement, and maintenance of romantic relationships. We first review evidence for a progression bias in the context of relationship initiation, investment, and breakup decisions. We next consider possible theoretical underpinnings—both evolutionary and cultural—that may explain why getting into a relationship is often easier than getting out of one, and why being in a less desirable relationship is often preferred over being in no relationship at all. We discuss potential boundary conditions that the phenomenon may have, as well as its implications for existing theoretical models of mate selection and relationship development.
Article
Full-text available
Many studies have found that married people have higher subjective well-being than those who are not married. Yet the increase in cohabitation raises questions about whether only marriage has beneficial effects. Here we examine differences in subjective well-being between cohabiting and married men and women in mid-life, comparing Australia, Norway, the UK, and Germany. We apply propensity-score weighted regression analyses to examine selection processes into marriage and differential treatment bias. We find no differences between cohabitation and marriage for men in the UK and Norway, and women in Germany. We do find significant differences for men in Australia and women in Norway. The differences disappear after controlling for selection in Australia, but they unexpectedly persist for Norwegian women, only disappearing when accounting for relationship satisfaction. For German men and British and Australian women, those in a partnership with a lower propensity to marry would benefit from marriage. Controls eliminate differences for German men, but not UK women, but relationship satisfaction reduces differences. Overall, our study indicates that especially once selection and relationship satisfaction are taken into account, differences between marriage and cohabitation disappear in all countries. Marriage does not lead to higher subjective well-being; instead, cohabitation is a symptom of economic and emotional strain.
Article
Full-text available
Extensive research has found that marriage provides health benefits to individuals, particularly in the U.S. The rise of cohabitation, however, raises questions about whether simply being in an intimate co-residential partnership conveys the same health benefits as marriage. Here, we use OLS regression to compare differences between partnered and unpartnered, and cohabiting and married individuals with respect to self-rated health in mid-life, an understudied part of the lifecourse. We pay particular attention to selection mechanisms arising in childhood and characteristics of the partnership. We compare results in five countries with different social, economic, and policy contexts: the U.S. (NLSY), U.K. (UKHLS), Australia (HILDA), Germany (SOEP), and Norway (GGS). Results show that living with a partner is positively associated with self-rated health in mid-life in all countries, but that controlling for children, prior separation, and current socio-economic status eliminates differences in Germany and Norway. Significant differences between cohabitation and marriage are only evident in the U.S. and the U.K., but controlling for childhood background, union duration, and prior union dissolution eliminates partnership differentials. The findings suggest that cohabitation in the U.S. and U.K., both liberal welfare regimes, seems to be very different than in the other countries. The results challenge the assumption that only marriage is beneficial for health.
Article
Full-text available
Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.
Article
Full-text available
Narrative research methodology is evolving, and we contend that the notion of emergent design is vital if narrative inquiry (NI) is to continue flourishing in generating new knowledge. We situate the discussion within the narrative turn in qualitative research while drawing on experiences of conducting a longitudinal narrative study. The philosophical tensions encountered are described, as our understanding and application of narrative approaches evolved. We outline challenges in data collection and analysis in response to what we were learning and identify institutional barriers within ethics review processes that potentially impede emergent approaches. We conclude that researchers using NI can, and must, pursue unanticipated methodological changes when in the midst of conducting the inquiry. Understanding the benefits and institutional barriers to emergent aspects of design is discussed in this ever-maturing approach to qualitative research.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This study contributes to the understanding of the low level of non-marital cohabitation in Poland at the beginning of the XXI century. We employ an interpretative analysis of semi-structured interviews in order to capture the meanings and attitudes associated to non-marital cohabitation by a selected sample of young Poles. The results indicate that although cohabitation has begun to be interpreted as a testing period leading to marriage, attitudes towards it are still very ambiguous. The idealization of marital commitment hinders the spread of informal unions. Understanding the determinants of low cohabitation in Poland enables us to advance grounded hypotheses on its evolution in the near future and, more generally, to illustrate the ways in which local cultures influence the diffusion of behaviors.
Article
Full-text available
Emotional interdependence—here defined as partners’ emotions being linked to each other across time—is often considered a key characteristic of healthy romantic relationships. But is this actually the case? We conducted an experience-sampling study with 50 couples indicating their feelings 10 times a day for 7 days and modeled emotional interdependence for each couple separately taking a dyadographic approach. The majority of couples (64%) did not demonstrate strong signs of emotional interdependence, and couples that did, showed great inter-dyad differences in their specific patterns. Individuals from emotionally more interdependent couples reported higher individual well-being than individuals from more independent couples in terms of life satisfaction but not depression. Relational well-being was not (relationship satisfaction) or even negatively (empathic concern) related to the degree of emotional interdependence. Especially driving the emotions of the partner (i.e., sender effects) accounted for these associations, opposed to following the emotions of the partner (i.e., receiver effects). Additionally, assessing emotional interdependence for positive and negative emotions separately elucidated that primarily emotional interdependence for positive emotions predicted more self-reported life satisfaction and less empathic concern. These findings highlight the existence of large inter-dyad differences, explore relationships between emotional interdependence and key well-being variables, and demonstrate differential correlates for sending and receiving emotions.
Article
The empirical science of subjective well-being, popularly referred to as happiness or satisfaction, has grown enormously in the past decade. In this Review, we selectively highlight and summarize key researched areas that continue to develop. We describe the validity of measures and their potential biases, as well as the scientific methods used in this field. We describe some of the predictors of subjective well-being such as temperament, income and supportive social relationships. Higher subjective well-being has been associated with good health and longevity, better social relationships, work performance and creativity. At the community and societal levels, cultures differ not only in their levels of well-being but also to some extent in the types of subjective well-being they most value. Furthermore, there are both universal and unique predictors of subjective well-being in various societies. National accounts of subjective well-being to help inform policy decisions at the community and societal levels are now being considered and adopted. Finally we discuss the unknowns in the science and needed future research.
Article
Social support, which is the perception or experience that one is cared for, esteemed, and part of a mutually supportive social network, has beneficial effects on mental and physical health. We review the psychobiological pathways whereby these effects may occur and detail the circumstances under which socially supportive efforts may misfire. Origins of social support include genetic factors and the early environment. We examine gender and cultural differences in how social support is experienced. Under some circumstances, providing social support confers the same benefits as receiving it. A myriad number of social support interventions, including those delivered via the internet, have been evaluated and have the potential to provide emotional and informational support to people who might otherwise lack social support.