Part II: Unmarried Cheating (Infidelity in Unmarried, Serious Romantic Relationships)

I last left you on the edge of your seat about what I’d write next about the study on extradyadic sex I introduced you to in my last post. If you have not already read the prior post, please do so as this one builds on it. That post was all about findings in a study from our lab at the University of Denver (Shaw, Rhoades, Allen, Stanley, & Markman, 2013).

Here’s a very brief recap:  Shaw et al. examined predictors of having sex outside of one’s serious, unmarried, romantic relationship over a 20 month period of time. As you can read in the prior post, many variables were associated with new occurrences of infidelity in these relationships and many other variables were not associated with infidelity. For example, those who were happier and more committed and who had less negativity with their partners were less likely to report having had sex with someone else. Not shocking but good to know. In contrast, those who had a greater number of prior sexual partners or who reported more use of alcohol were more likely to report having had sex with someone else.  And so forth and so on.

Did any of the findings seem surprising to you? The finding that I think many people would consider surprising is that living together was not significantly associated with whether or not a person reported having had sex with someone other than their partner.  That is, living together was not associated with greater odds of cheating nor was it associated with lower odds of cheating. Living together just didn’t provide information about sexual exclusivity.  

I believe that many people believe that cohabitation = commitment or that it means there has been a step-up in commitment. Closely related, I believe that many people believe the fact that two people live together means that the two partners are “off the market,” so to speak. There actually is no evidence that I know of for believing this. 

From all of the studies I know, I have not seen convincing evidence that living together sends any clear signal about commitment between two people. That’s a problem for some people because they believe that it does. In contrast, other variables studied by Shaw et al. were associated with greater odds of exclusivity, for example commitment to one’s partner or engagement to marry.

As I’ve said before, if couple tells me they are living together, and this is all I know, I don’t know much about commitment. In contrast, if a couple tells me they are married, engaged, have mutual plans for marriage, or have a made a really strong, mutual commitment to a future together, I know a lot about their level of commitment. Those things are all strong and clear signals of commitment. And that’s really my point here. While I am reporting findings about sex and living together, the key underlying issue is about clear and unclear signals about commitment.

There is some practical advice in this. If you want to know if your partner is really committed to you, look for something that reflects actual commitment. Don’t rely on an unreliable signal—living together. Living together does not signal commitment. Commitment signals commitment.

As an aside, I’ve noted in other posts that I believe there are some places and conditions where living together does signal a higher level of commitment compared to not living together. But I want to point out that there is just not much evidence for this being true for most people in most communities.

The practical point is something like this: If you are trying to figure out if a relationship is exclusive and has a future, the starting point isn’t going to moving in together—nor would it be the willingness of someone to have sex with you. Moving in together does not mean much about commitment. It’s much more informative to talk openly (when it is the right time to start doing so) and see if there really is a mutual commitment and a similar understanding about relationship. Too many people find out the hard way that moving in together didn’t mean what they thought or hoped it meant.

*

[Technical note for those so inclined:  Our sample is relatively large for the level of measurement that we have on these relationships over time. That means the lack of a significant association between living together and infidelity is not likely a result of having too little statistical power. Also, the analyses reported in Shaw et al. are not what you often see in sociological studies where many variables are controlled for while looking at the impact of one or two key predictors of something interesting. We’re psychologists, and I must confess we sometimes think sociologists over do their controls. The analyses in Shaw et al. are intentionally showing which variables among a substantial list are associated with new instances of infidelity, not what is associated with infidelity when many other variables are controlled for at the same time. I have, however, also looked at some related analyses with and without controlling for some other variables such as how long the person had already been in the present relationships. Same general finding: living together is not reliably associated with more or less odds of infidelity. There may be a more complicated or otherwise interesting story to tell in the future when we get to other analyses. We’ll see. The present finding is consistent and it fits other findings that shed light on what does and does not signal higher levels of commitment.]

Unmarried Cheating: Stepping Out in Unmarried, Serious Romantic Relationships

A recent study examines who is most likely to have sex with someone else while they are in a serious but unmarried romantic relationship. I am going to summarize the key findings for you here and give you a reference and link below where you can read more if you wish.

This study on what researchers call “extradyadic sex” was headed up by Amanda Maddox Shaw who used to work in our lab at the University of Denver and who is now a graduate student the University of Rochester. (She’s brilliant, by the way.) The authors of this particular study included Amanda Shaw, Galena Rhoades, Elizabeth Allen, yours truly, and Howard Markman.

Okay, on to the study. 

Unless you live under a rock, you’ve noticed that in most industrialized nations, people are marrying later and later and having increasingly significant, romantic relationships prior to marriage. People who are seriously involved with another tend to expect sexual faithfulness even though they are not married. But how many people have sex with someone else when already in a serious romantic relationship? And what are the characteristics of the people who do versus those who do not have sex with someone else?

In our lab, we have collected data over time on a large, national sample of younger adults who were romantically involved. We recruited this sample such that, at the first time point, the participants were aged 18 to 34 and in serious romantic relationships that had lasted at least two months. Recruiting was conducted by the use of phone survey methods (230,000 phone calls were made to recruit the sample of around 1300 people who met the criteria. You should have seen my cell phone bill that month.). Asking that people be in a serious relationship of two months or more yielded a sample of people who had been in their present relationship for an average of two years. So, what we are talking about here are people who are already involved in important, ongoing, serious relationships. We have followed this sample for five years, including through all the potential changes in their relationships.The sample matches census characteristics for this age amazingly well. It tilts toward a lower average income, however, given that we recruited unmarried people in this age range.

What our team did, headed up by Shaw, was examine who was most likely to have sex with someone outside of their relationship over a period of 1.5 years from the first time point in the study. I refer to this as “cheating” in the title of this post because that is what most of it would entail. However, we are not able to tease out the small number of people who would have agreed with their partners to be in open relationships where it would not be cheating but it would merely be extradyadic sex. But most of what we’re talking about here would be cheating in the sense that it’s having sex with someone else where that would not have been considered “okay” by the partner. And even in unmarried relationships and dating relationships that have turned more serious, people have high expectations for their partner not to step out on them.

Based on some earlier work by Elizabeth Allen, Galena Rhoades, and others on our team, Shaw looked at whether characteristics of the individual or of their relationships tended to tell us more about who was most likely to sex with someone other than their partner over time. In this sample, 14% reported having sex outside of their relationship during the 1.5 years from when they began participating in the long-term study. [Added clarification on 7-31-2013: People who had already had sex with someone other than their partner at the first time point were excluded from these analyses in order to make sure that the study was looking at what predicted future extradyadic sex over the course of the 1.5 years.]

What I will now list are the variables (in no particular order) that we found to be associated with having extradyadic sex over the period of time studied (1.5 yrs).

            Individual variables associated with extradyadic sex

- Having more sexual partners prior to the present relationship

- Greater use of alcohol

- Having parents who never married

            Individual variables NOT associated with extradyadic sex

- Gender (males were not more likely than females to cheat)

- Age

- Education

- Religiousness

- Having children (with partner or from prior relationships)

- Parental divorce

Relationship variables associated with extradyadic sex

- Lower relationship satisfaction

- Lower levels of dedication (commitment) to the partner

- Higher levels of negative communication

- A history of physical aggression in the relationship

- Not having mutual plans for marriage

- Suspicion of partner having sex with other(s)

- Partner has had sex with another

Relationship variables NOT associated with extradyadic sex

- Frequency of sex in present relationship

- Satisfaction with sex in present relationship

- Living together

I want to discuss a few highlights here and in my next post. I will leave other interesting details to those who would like to read the journal article written by Amanda Shaw and our team.

There are not a lot of studies looking at unmarried but serious romantic relationships with regard to cheating. That makes this sample we have quite valuable for addressing questions like this. Loads of studies look at infidelity in marriage but few have looked at unmarried serious relationships like we do here. With the changing times, what happens in unmarried relationships is increasingly important to understand because these relationships have massive impacts on peoples’ lives. I am not saying this is a good trend, just that it’s reality. (For more on that point, see my post on “WhatHappens in Vegas Stays in Vegas, Right? Thoughts on Life Before Marriage,” which I plan to update soon. So, stay tuned for that.)

Here’s a highlight from this new study described above. While there are some individual characteristics that were associated with having extradyadic sex, there were many more individual characteristics that were not associated with sex with another. The big story is that the characteristics of the relationship—especially the quality of the relationship—says the most about who is likely to cheat over time. Those who were less satisfied in their relationships, less committed to their partner, and who had reported more negative patterns of communicating were the ones most likely to have sex with another. Contrary to what you might have guessed, sexual frequency and sexual satisfaction with the partner were not associated with cheating. Rather, the overall quality of the relationship, apart from sex, is what mattered most--for both men and women.

In addition to the quality of the relationship, I want to point out that suspecting one’s partner of cheating or knowing one’s partner has cheated in the past was strongly associated with the likelihood a person would have sex with someone other than their partner in the future. In other words, people who think or know that their partner has had sex with someone else are more likely, over time, to do the same. Some of that is just part of the relationships having lower commitment and some is doubtless revenge, but I'd bet more on low commitment being the big story there. 

The headline is that overall relationship quality mattered most in explaining who, in unmarried romantic relationships, was most likely to step out on their partner. I will pick up on some of the (surprising) things that were not associated with sex with others in my next post.

Citation and Funding:

Citation:  Maddox Shaw, A. M.M., Rhoades, G. K., Allen, E. S., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J.(2013).  Predictors of extradyadic sexualinvolvement in unmarried opposite-sex relationships.  Journal of Sex Research, 50(6), 598 - 610.DOI:10.1080/00224499.2012.666816

The project described was supported by Award Number R01HD047564 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development or the National Institutes of Health.

*

Same Place But Not On Same Page: Men and Women and Moving In Together

There is a great piece on this subject, just out in the Atlantic, written by sociologist Brad Wilcox: Men and Women Often Expect Different Things When They Move In Together.

As regular followers of our work at the University of Denver know, there can be a lot of misunderstandings about cohabitation stemming from the fact that most couples (really, most!) slide into it without the two partners being all that clear about what it means and where it is going. That is partly why moving in together is such a totally different thing from getting married. While many marriages do not work out like people planned or hoped, at least the meaning of the transition is usually clear with regard to having a future together. This is often not at all true of moving in together.

Wilcox's piece highlights some new findings from a study by sociologists at the Rand Corporation as well as some of the research we and others have done in this area that gets into ways commitment dynamics can be different for men versus women when it comes to cohabiting.

A key line from Wilcox's piece will give you the flavor for what he writes about:  "Finally, when she turned 33, Shannon told him she wanted a wedding date, to which he responded that he was not ready for marriage....."

There are a lot of women (and men) who reach a "finally" point, where they realize their partner is not on the same page about a future together when that is what they thought was the whole point. Not only not on the same page, but not even in the same book.

I highly recommend his piece to those of you interested in current trends in relationship development as well as cohabitation.  You can read his piece at the link above.  Highly recommended!

*

A few thoughts on Stephanie Coontz’s “The Disestablishment of Marriage”

Stephanie Coontz wrote a valuable piece on the state of marriage that was published a few days ago in the New York Times.  She talks about numerous trends in her piece, and I think it’s very much worth reading. You can read it here.

Some of you have written to ask me about the comment she makes at the end of the piece about premarital cohabitation, wherein she suggests that it is no longer associated with higher risks in marriage. I have a few brief points about that part.

1.  I think what Manning and Cohen actually found was that, among those who cohabited prior to marriage since 1995, cohabitation before marriage was no longer associated with increased risk for divorce among those who were engaged first (particularly, in the female data). This parallels what we keep finding, though it is fair to say that the finding is a bit murkier (and complex) in that paper.

2. Manning and Cohen’s study does not assess marital quality outcomes, which our research team has long predicted will be associated with the clarity two partners have about commitment to the future (especially to marriage) prior to cohabiting.  That’s because we believe that cohabiting makes it harder to break up, and that this is the detail most people seem oblvious to as they slide into cohabiting.  That matters because it can make it harder to break up before two people have decided for sure they want to be together—long-term. People can raise their odds of getting stuck in the wrong place. We consistently find, including in recent samples, that cohabiting before either engagement or marriage is associated with lower average marital quality (less happiness, poorer communication, etc.).  That, and other predictions we test, are all consistent with this theory that the greater inertia of cohabiting sneaks up on some people and keeps them in relationships they would have otherwise left before ever marrying. 

3. Coontz also notes that there is some evidence within the data Manning and Cohen analyzed suggesting that cohabitation (quoting Coontz) “with definite plans to marry at the outset is tied to lower levels of marital instability than direct entry into marriage” among disadvantaged women with high risks. In other words, cohabiting may actually be associated with doing better in marriage for some groups. This is a rare finding but there is some reason to expect it. I explained why I thought such a finding might show up in a post a while ago (it can be found in the fourth link below, which is one of my longest, most theoretical prior posts on cohabitation and marriage).  

I’m going to list a number of links to prior posts of mine for those of you who want to read more deeply about the theory and research of our team related to the types of cohabitation prior to marriage that might be riskier, and why. Some of these posts are more fun but still explain the theory well (see playlist to paylist) and others are pretty heavy duty theory and conceptual reasoning, if you are really wanting to dig in deeper on this subject. 

If you want to read a summary of our studies and theory in this area (cohabitation prior to marriage, etc.), you can download the file at the first link below. 

The summary document of our research and studies on cohabitation.  

A fun blog entry likening one risk of cohabiting to choosing an iPhone or anAndroid phone (or, Windows Mobile, if you like)

A post on the increasing phenomenon of CohabiDating 

A long, detailed post on theory related to cohabiting, marriage, and signals ofcommitment. (Relatively heavy duty compared to other things here, and the last in a series on some bigger issues in science about selection.)

A post from last year about one of the media dust-ups on the risks, or not, ofcohabiting prior to marriage

Have at it!  

*

Some Basic Facts About the High School Class of 2013

The research firm Child Trends released a report recently about the High School Class of 2013.  Here are a few of the numbers that stood out to me.

As they say, “Imagine a senior class of 100” students.  

•    71 have experienced physical assault; 28 have been victimized sexually; 32 have experienced some form of child maltreatment.
•    68 will go on to a college or university.
•    64 have had sexual intercourse.
•    51 used NO alcohol, cigarettes, or illicit drugs during the past 30 days
•    48 are sexually active (64 have had sexual intercourse)
•    45 watch less than an hour of TV on weekdays; 20 watch 4 or more hours on weekdays
•    39 have ever been bullied, physically or emotionally; 16 have been bullied in the past year
•    35 eat meals together with their families 6 or 7 days a week
•    29 felt “sad and hopeless” continuously for at least two weeks during the past year
•    28 attend religious services at least once at week
•    24 were binge-drinking in the past two weeks.
•    23 smoked marijuana in the past 30 days
•    21 had a sexually transmitted infection in the past year
•    14 thought seriously about attempting suicide in the past year
•    12 have ADHD
•    10 reported they were victims of dating violence in the past year
•    10 report they have been raped

I was surprised that 35 of 100 regularly have meals with their families. In some families, work patterns make this almost impossible, but for most families, it’s a possible but increasingly rare thing to have family meals. Many experts believe that meals together is one basic marker of how connected a family is, and, very likely, how good of a sense parents have about how their children are doing. My colleague Howard Markman and I were doing a training in Norway years ago, and I remember that the Norwegians had a strong tradition of families singing folk songs and having dinner together. This was years ago, but at the time, they had recently gone from just having a couple of national TV channels to having cable and scores of channels. I still remember clearly one of our colleagues there telling us how having many channels on TV had rapidly started to wipe out family meals. That’s very sad. That’s the simple type of stuff that probably matters a lot for how children will do in life.

It’s not surprising that the data show that most high school students have had sex and nearly half are sexually active. But that’s a lot of opportunity for sliding into life altering consequences at a young age in life. As one example or risk, 21 of 100 report having had an STD within the past year. That’s a lot of disease.

The data that stood out most to me in these numbers are the ones about binge drinking and smoking marijuana. Nearly a quarter of high school seniors have done one or the other recently, as of the time surveyed, which means a lot of teens do one or both regularly.

There is some good news here, such as in the number of students who will go to college. Not everyone can, should, or needs to, but that high number reflects some opportunity for a lot of seniors. Of course, not all those 68 of 100 will really go to college, and many fewer will complete college.

Overall, these numbers reflect a lot of evidence of how much risk older teens are regularly taking on. If you are a parent and your teenager is at all open to it, hang out with him or her a bit more. Get a meal together. Play a game. Go out and do something he or she likes. Whenever you have a little opportunity, talk with your teenage about whatever he or she will talk about, day-to-day. That way, you will have the most relationship possible to talk about what he or she might need to talk about some day in the future. 


You can read more about the research findings, here. 

[Their technical note: Child Trends Senior Research Scientist David Murphey provided the statistical composite by examining available data for U.S. high school seniors (or youth of about that age) that are nationally representative, and as close in time to 2013 as is available.]

*

A Couple of Great Pieces on Fatherhood

It's Father's Day.

I read two really good pieces on fatherhood and men this morning. The first is in Slate Magazine, by Brad Wilcox, called "Daddy's Home."  It's a terrific piece on some of the ways that being a father changes men. In it, he highlights that the impacts are greatest as long as the man lives with his children and their mother (and, of course, the positive impacts are non-existent when the man is not involved in the lives of the children at all).

The next piece I want to recommend to you is also by Brad Wilcox. This one, however, focuses on the "The Distinct, Positive Impact of a Good Dad" in the lives of children. It is in the Atlantic. In this piece, Wilcox addresses the question of evidence that there is something special about what men do in the fathering role and, thereby, add to the lives of their children. The question that is being raises is an important one at a time in our culture when ever fewer men are substantially involved in the lives of their children.

These two pieces bring me back to the video I shared in my last post. While there are many exceptions,we know from accumulating studies that the surest way for men to be involved in raising their children is for men to remain involved with the mother of their children. Now check out the video I posted.  You will see five involved fathers (along with five involved mothers).  The blog post is here.  The video I posted is here. 

Usual caveat, seriously stated: Many children are doing great in single parent families and many single parents are the reason why. But it's a great thing when a child has both parents pulling for him or her in life. And it's a powerful thing in the life of a man.  If you are a father, I hope you have a Happy Father's Day, and more, a meaningful year to come as a father. 

*

In Honor of Father’s Day: A Little Video of Five Families

I have a brief video I want to share with you. It’s about families. Five families, in fact. It’s footage I captured on my iPhone the other day on the way home from work.  

It will only take 1 minute, 11 seconds of your life to watch it. I’ve entitled it, “Getting Parenting Down.”

I’m sharing this in honor of father’s day. The video shows five different families. In each, the parents are working together to raise and protect their children.

I hope you enjoy the video.  Here it is (click here).

I know that father’s day (and mother’s day) are complicated, even painful, for many people based on either their family(s) growing up or what they have experienced with a co-parent as an adult. But if you are a parent, and, especially this week if you are a father, here’s to doing what you are able to do to raise and protect the young ones before they fly away.

Have a Great Father’s Day

[You can download a copy of the video here if you like.]

*