Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cohabitation Expectations Among Young Adults in the United States: Do They Match Behavior?

  • Published:
Population Research and Policy Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cohabitation continues to rise, but there is a lack of knowledge about expectations to cohabit and the linkage between expectations and subsequent cohabitation. We capitalize on a new opportunity to study cohabitation expectations by drawing on the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY79) main youth and two waves (2008 and 2010) of the NLSY young adult (YA) surveys (n = 1,105). We find considerable variation in cohabitation expectations: 39.9 % have no expectation of cohabiting in the future and 16.6 % report high odds of cohabiting in the next 2 years. Cohabitation expectations are associated with higher odds of entering a cohabiting relationship, but are not perfectly associated. Only 38 % of YAs with certain cohabitation expectations in 2008 entered a cohabiting union by 2010. Further investigation of the mismatch between expectations and behaviors indicates that a substantial minority (30 %) who entered a cohabiting union had previously reported no or low expectations, instances of what we term “unplanned cohabitation.” Our findings underscore the importance of considering not only just behavior but also individuals’ expectations for understanding union formation, and more broadly, family change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I., & Koblas, J. (2013). Fertility intentions: An approach based on the theory of planned behavior. Demographic Research, 29, 203–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axinn, W. G., & Thornton, A. (1993). Mothers, children, and cohabitation: The intergenerational effects of attitudes and behavior. American Sociological Review, 58(2), 233–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, J. S. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Considering drives, proximity and dynamics. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 31–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogle, R. H., & Wu, H. S. (2010). Thirty years of change in marriage and union formation attitudes, 1976–2008 (Family Profile-10-03). Bowling Green: National Center for Family and Marriage Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. L. (2000). Union transitions among cohabitors: The significance of relationship assessments and expectations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 833–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulcroft, R. A., & Bulcroft, K. A. (1993). Race differences in attitudinal and motivational factors in the decision to marry. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55(2), 338–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bumpass, L. (1990). What’s happening to the family? Interactions between demographic and institutional change. Demography, 27(4), 483–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, M., McLanahan, S., & England, P. (2004). Union formation in fragile families. Demography, 41(2), 237–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Manning, W. (2010). The relationship context of premarital serial cohabitaiton. Social Science Research, 39(5), 766–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copen, C., Daniels, K., & Mosher, W. (2013). First premarital cohabitation in the United States: 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports, 64. Hyattsville, MD.

  • Crissey, S. R. (2005). Race/ethnic differences in the marital expectations of adolescents: The role of romantic relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 697–709.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMaris, A. (2004). Regression with social data: Modeling continuous and limited response variables (vol. 417). Wiley.

  • Eggebeen, D., & Dew, J. (2009). The role of religion in adolescence for family formation in young adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(1), 108–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior. New York: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, R., Coombs, L. C., & Bumpass, L. L. (1965). Stability and change in expectations about family size. Demography, 2, 250–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson-Davis, C. M., Edin, K., & McLanahan, S. (2005). High hopes but even higher expectations: The retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1301–1312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, K. B. (2006a). The relationship between life course events and union formation. Social Science Research, 35(2), 384–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, K. B. (2006b). How do marriage market conditions affect entrance into cohabitation vs. marriage? Social Science Research, 35(2), 332–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, K. B. (2009). Marital intentions and the stability of first cohabitations. Journal of Family Issues, 30(2), 179–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagewen, K. J., & Morgan, S. P. (2005). Intended and ideal family size in the United States, 1970–2002. Population and Development Review, 31(3), 507–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern-Meekin, S. (2012). Unlikely optimists, skeptics, and believers: Understanding adolescents’ prospective relationship views. Journal of Adolescent Research, 27(5), 606–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayford, S. R. (2009). The evolution of fertility expectations over the life course. Demography, 46(4), 765–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, P. M., Smock, P. J., Manning, W. D., & Bergstrom-Lynch, C. (2011). He says, she says: Gender and cohabitation. Journal of Family Issues, 32(7), 876–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, S., & Bumpass, L. (2011). Cohabitation and trends in the structure and stability of children’s family lives. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Washington, DC.

  • Kiser, C. V. (1967). The growth of American families studies: An assessment of significance. Demography, 4(1), 388–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landale, N. S., Schoen, R., & Daniels, K. (2010). Early family formation among White, Black, and Mexican American women. Journal of Family Issues, 31(4), 445–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, E. (2004). The role of religion in union formation: An economic perspective. Population Research and Policy Review, 23(2), 161–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesthaeghe, R., & Neidert, L. (2006). The second demographic transition in the United State: Exception or textbook example? Population and Development Review, 32(4), 669–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Licther, L., Batson, C., & Brown, J. (2004). Marriage promotion: The marital expectations and desires of single and cohabiting mothers. Social Service Review, 78(1), 2–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liefbroer, A. (2011). On the usefulness of the theory of planned behaviour for fertility research. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liefbroer, A., Gerritsen, L., & Gireveld, J. (1994). The influence of intentions and life course factors on union formation behavior of young adults. Journal of Marriage and Family, 56(1), 193–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D. (2013). Trends in cohabitation: Twenty years of change, 1987–2008 (Family Profile-13-12). Bowling Green: National Center for Family and Marriage Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., Cohen, J. A., & Smock, P. J. (2011). The role of romantic partners, family, and peer networks in dating couples’ views about cohabitation. Journal of Adolescent Research, 26(1), 115–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., Longmore, M. A., & Giordano, P. C. (2007). The changing institution of marriage: Adolescents’ expectations to cohabit and to marry. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(3), 559–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., & Smock, P. J. (2005). Measuring and modeling cohabitation: New perspectives from qualitative data. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 989–1002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., Trella, D., Lyons, H., & Du Toit, N. C. (2010). Marriageable women: A focus on participants in a community healthy marriage program. Family Relations, 59(1), 87–102.

  • McLanahan, S. S., & Sandefur, G. D. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: What hurts, what helps. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W. B., & Pasta, D. (1995). Behavioral intentions: Which ones predict fertility behavior in married couples? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(6), 530–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S. P., & Bachrach, C. (2011). Is the theory of planned behavior an important model for human fertility? Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S. P., & Rackin, H. (2010). The correspondence between fertility intentions and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, 36(1), 91–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, V. (2003). Cohabiting and marriage during young men’s career development process. Demography, 40(1), 127–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, L. D., & Thornton, A. (2007). Religious identity and family ideologies in the transition to adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(5), 1227–1243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philipov, D. (2011). Theories on fertility intentions: A demographer’s perspective. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 37–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raley, R., Crissey, S., & Muller, C. (2007). Of sex and romance: Late adolescent relationships and young adult union formation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(5), 1210–1226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindfuss, R. R. (1991). The young adult years: Diversity, structural change, and fertility. Demography, 28(4), 493–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S., Franzetta, K., Schelar, E., & Manlove, J. (2009). Family structure history: Links to relationship formation behaviors in young adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(4), 935–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sassler, S., Cunningham, A., & Lichter, D. T. (2009). Intergenerational patterns of union formation and relationship quality. Journal of Family Issues, 30(6), 757–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sassler, S., & Schoen, R. (1999). The effect of attitudes and economic activity on marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61(1), 147–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen, R., Astone, N. M., Kim, Y. J., Nathanson, C. A., & Fields, J. M. (1999). Do fertility intentions affect behavior? Journal of Marriage and Family, 61(3), 790–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen, R., Landale, N., & Daniels, K. (2007). Family transitions in young adulthood. Demography, 44(4), 807–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. E., Schelar, E., Manlove, J., & Cui, C. (2009). Young adult attitudes about relationships and marriage: Times may have changed, but expectations remain high. (Research Brief). Washington, DC: Child Trends.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smock, P. J. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States: An appraisal of research themes, findings, and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smock, P. J., & Greenland, F. (2010). Diversity in pathways to parenthood: Patterns, implications, and emerging research directions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 576–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smock, P. J., & Manning, W. D. (1997). Cohabiting partners’ economic circumstances and marriage. Demography, 34(3), 331–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • South, S. J. (1993). Racial and ethnic differences in the desire to marry. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55(2), 357–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, S., Manning, W., & Smock, P. (2003). Union formation among men in the U.S.: Does having prior children matter? Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(1), 90–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, A., Axinn, W., & Teachman, J. (1995). The influence of school enrollment and accumulation on cohabitation and marriage in early adulthood. American Sociological Review, 60(5), 762–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(4), 1009–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of the Census (2011) Estimated median age at first marriage, by sex: 1890 to the present. In Families and Living Arrangements: Marital Status. Retrieved August 31, 2012 from http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/marital.html.

  • Waller, M. R., & McLanahan, S. S. (2005). “His” and “her” marriage expectations: Determinants and consequences. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(1), 53–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whelpton, P. K., Campbell, A. A., & Patterson, J. E. (1966). Fertility and family planning in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zito, R. C. (2013). Family structure history and teenage cohabitation: Instability, socioeconomic disadvantage or transmission? Journal of Family Issues,. doi:10.1177/0192513X13490933.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sociology Department and Center for Family and Demographic Research, Bowling Green State University, 233 Williams Hall, Bowling Green, OH, 43402, USA

    Wendy D. Manning

  2. Sociology Department and Population Studies Center, The University of Michigan, 426 Thompson Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48106, USA

    Pamela J. Smock

  3. Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 50011, USA

    Cassandra Dorius

  4. Department of Sociology, Ohio State University, 104 Townhend Hall, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA

    Elizabeth Cooksey

Authors
  1. Wendy D. Manning
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pamela J. Smock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cassandra Dorius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elizabeth Cooksey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wendy D. Manning.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manning, W.D., Smock, P.J., Dorius, C. et al. Cohabitation Expectations Among Young Adults in the United States: Do They Match Behavior?. Popul Res Policy Rev 33, 287–305 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-013-9316-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-013-9316-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation