Abstract
This study investigates whether the imbalance of supply and competitors on the partner market impacts the stability of marital and non-marital unions. Using the first six waves of the German Family Panel (pairfam) we find partner market effects on the proposal of a separation and on separation itself. Women’s partner market opportunities impact union stability depending on the duration of the union. The impact of men’s partner market opportunities on union stability depends on living arrangement with the effect being stronger for cohabiting than for married couples. Whether or not a context provides opportunities for (alternative) partner choice and for separation depends on using adequate bridging assumptions about individuals’ preferences for a (new) partner’s traits.
This study is part of the research project “The macrostructural context of the marriage market: longitudinal dynamics” funded by the German Research Council (DFG, grants no. STA1209/1–1, STA1209/1–2, STA1209/1–3).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
See Obersneider et al. (2018) as well for a more detailed up-to-date-review of previous research.
- 2.
Given that interethnic couples are still a minority and that official statistics can only differentiate Germans and non-Germans, we assume a preference for a partner with the same nationality. Thus, our partner market measures use only the German population.
- 3.
Though pairfam uses a cohort sample design restricted to anchors born in 1971–1973, 1981–1983 and 1991–1993, the anchors’ partners can come from all birth years.
- 4.
Due to item-nonresponse on the questions about suggesting a separation, models 1 and 2 use subsamples with less observations.
- 5.
There are only few couples with union durations larger than 7 years. Therefore, coefficients are more or less erratic.
References
Åberg, Y. (2009). The contagiousness of divorce. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Akers, D. S. (1967). On measuring the marriage squeeze. Demography, 4, 907–924.
Becker, G. S. (1973). A theory of marriage: Part I. Journal of Political Economy, 81, 813–846.
Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of marriage: Part II. Journal of Political Economy, 82, S11–S26.
Becker, G. S. (1981). A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Becker, G. S., Landes, E. M., & Michael, R. T. (1977). An economic analysis of marital instability. Journal of Political Economy, 85, 1141–1187.
Blau, P. M. (1977a). A macrosociological theory of social structure. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 26–54.
Blau, P. M. (1977b). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. New York: The Free Press.
Blau, P. M., Blum, T. C., & Schwartz, J. E. (1982). Heterogeneity and intermarriage. American Sociological Review, 47, 45–62.
Blau, P. M., Beeker, C., & Fitzpatrick, K. M. (1984). Intersecting social affiliations and intermarriage. Social Forces, 62, 585–605.
Blossfeld, H.-P. (2009). Educational assortative marriage in comparative perspective. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 513–530. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115913.
Brüderl, J., Hank, K., Huinink, J., Nauck, B., Neyer, F. J., Walper, S., Alt, P., Buhr, P., Castiglioni, L., Finn, C., Hajek, K., Herzig, M., Huyer-May, B., Lenke, R., Müller, B., Peter, T., Salzburger, V., Schmiede- and C. Berg, Schubach, E., Schütze, P., Schumann, N, Thönnissen, C. & Wilhelm, B. (2015). The German family panel (pairfam). Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
Buunk, B. P., Dijkstra, P., Kenrick, D. T., & Warntjes, A. (2001). Age preferences for mates as related to gender, own age, and involvement level. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 22, 241–250.
Corijn, M., & Klijzing, E. (2001). Transitions to adulthood in Europe: Conclusions and discussion. In M. Corijn & E. Klijzing (eds.), Transitions to adulthood in Europe (pp. 313–340). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.
Crowder, K. D., & Tolnay, S. E. (2000). A new marriage squeeze for black women: The role of racial intermarriage by Black Men. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 792–807. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00792.x.
Eckhard, J., & Stauder, J. (2016). Partnermarkt und familiendemografische Prozesse. In J. Stauder, I. Rapp, & J. Eckhard (eds.), Soziale Bedingungen privater Lebensführung (pp. 121–143). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Eckhard, J., & Stauder, J. (2018a). Partner market opportunities and union formation over the life course: a comparison of different measures. Population, space and place, 25, 4. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2178.
Eckhard, J., & Stauder, J. (2018b). Migration and the partner market: How gender-selective relocations affect regional mating chances in Germany. European Journal of Population, 34, 59–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-017-9422-8.
Eckhard, J., Kossow, T., Sari, E., Stauder, J., Wiese, D., & Wiesen, M. (2019). The macrostructural framework of the partnermarket in a longitudinal perspective. Documentation on conception, preliminary methodological studies and the development of partner market indicators. Methodology report (short version). University of Heidelberg, Max Weber Institute for Sociology. https://www.soz.uni-heidelberg.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Methodology-Report.pdf
Esser, H. (1999). Heiratskohorten und die Instabilität von Ehen. In J. Kopp & T. Klein (eds.), Scheidungsursachen aus soziologischer Sicht (pp. 63–90). Würzburg: Ergon.
Feld, S. L. (1981). The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 1015–1035.
Felmlee, D., Sprecher, S., & Bassin, E. (1990). The dissolution of intimate relationships: A hazard model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 13–30.
Fronk, S., & Häring, A. (2014). Der Einfluss des Partnermarktes auf die Partnerwahl im Längsschnitt des Partnermarktsurvey. In A. Häring, T. Klein, J. Stauder, & K. Stoye (eds.), Der Partnermarkt und die Gelegenheiten des Kennenlernens. Der Partnermarktsurvey (pp. 139–158). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Goldman, N., Westoff, C. F., & Hammerslough, C. (1984). Demography of the marriage market in the United States. Population Index, 50, 5–25.
Hill, P. B., & Kopp, J. (1990). Theorien der ehelichen Instabilität. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 2, 211–243.
Hill, P. B., & Kopp, J. (2006). Familiensoziologie. Grundlagen und theoretische Perspektiven. 4 (überarbeitete). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Kelley, H. H. (1983). Love and commitment. In H. H. Kelley (ed.), Close relationships (pp. 265–314). New York: Freeman.
Kenrick, D. T., & Keefe, R. C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 75–91.
Klein, T. (1995). Heiratsmarkt und 'Marriage Squeeze'. Analysen zur Veränderung von Heiratsgelegenheiten in der Bundesrepublik. In B. Nauck & C. Onnen-Isemann (eds.), Familie im Brennpunkt von Wissenschaft und Forschung. Rosemarie Nave-Herz zum 60. Geburtstag gewidmet (pp. 357–367). Neuwied: Luchterhand.
Klein, T., & Rapp, I. (2014). Die altersbezogene Partnerwahl im Lebenslauf und ihr Einfluss auf die Beziehungsstabilität. In A. Steinbach, M. Hennig, & O. Arránz Becker (eds.), Familie im Fokus der Wissenschaft (pp. 203–223). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Lewis, R. A., & Spanier, G. B. (1979). Theorizing about the quality and stability of marriage. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & L. I. Reiss (eds.), Contemporary theories about the family (Bd. 1, pp. 268–294). New York: The Free Press.
Lichter, D. T., Anderson, R. N., & Hayward, M. D. (1995). Marriage markets and marital choice. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 412–431.
Lloyd, K. M., & South, S. J. (1996). Contextual influences on young men’s transition to first marriage. Social Forces, 74, 1097–1119.
Lyngstad, T. H. (2011). Does community context have an important impact on divorce risk? A fixed-effects study of twenty norwegian first-marriage cohorts. European Journal of Population / Revue européenne de Démographie, 27, 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-010-9226-6.
Mckinnish, T. (2007). Sexually integrated workplaces and divorce: Another form of on-the-job search. Journal of Human Resources, 42, 331–352. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:uwp:jhriss:v:42:y:2007:i2:p331-352.
Mckinnish, T. G. (2004). Occupation, sex-integration, and divorce. American Economic Review, 94(2), 322–325.
Obersneider, M., Janssen, J.-C., & Wagner, M. (2018). Regional sex ratio and the dissolution of relationships in Germany. European Journal of Population, 35, 825–849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-018-9506-0.
Oppenheimer, V. K. (1988). A theory of marriage timing. American Journal of Sociology, 94(3), 563–591.
Oropesa, R. S., Lichter, D. T., & Anderson, R. N. (1994). Marriage markets and the paradox of Mexican American nuptiality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 889–907.
Rapp, I., Klein, T., Fronk, S., & Stauder, J. (2015). Partner market opportunities and relationship stability. Comparative Population Studies, 40, 229–250.
Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic association: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172–186.
Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.
Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1–19. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.000245. Zugegriffen: 4. Aug. 2020.
South, S. J. (1995). Do you need to shop around? Age at marriage, spousal alternatives, and marital dissolution. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 432–449.
South, S. J., & Lloyd, K. M. (1992). Marriage opportunities and family formation. Further implications of imbalanced sex ratios. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 440–451.
South, S. J., & Lloyd, K. M. (1995). Spousal alternatives and marital dissolution. American Sociological Review, 60, 21–35.
South, S. J., Trent, K., & Shen, Y. (2001). Changing partners: Toward a macrostructural-opportunity theory of marital dissolution. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 743–754.
Stauder, J. (2002). Eheliche Arbeitsteilung und Ehestabilität. Eine Untersuchung mit den Daten der Mannheimer Scheidungsstudie 1996 unter Verwendung ereignisanalytischer Verfahren. Würzburg: Ergon.
Stauder, J. (2006). Die Verfügbarkeit partnerschaftlich gebundener Akteure für den Partnermarkt. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 58, 617–637.
Stauder, J. (2008). Opportunitäten und Restriktionen des Kennenlernens. Zur sozialen Vorstrukturierung der Kontaktgelegenheiten am Beispiel des Partnermarkts. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsycholgie, 60, 265–285.
Stauder, J. (2011). Regionale Ungleichheit auf dem Partnermarkt? Die makrostrukturellen Rahmenbedingungen der Partnerwahl in regionaler Perspektive. Soziale Welt, 62, 45–73.
Stauder, J. (2015). Durchdringende Sozialstruktur? Der Einfluss makrostruktureller Rahmenbedingungen auf den Partnermarkt. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 67, 401–432.
Svarer, M. (2007). Working late. Do workplace sex ratios affect partnership formation and dissolution? Journal of Human Resources, 42, 582–595.
Udry, R. J. (1981). Marital alternatives and marital disruption. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 889–897.
Veevers, J. E. (1988). The „Real“ marriage squeeze. Mate selection, mortality, and the mating gradient. Sociological Perspectives, 31, 169–189.
White, L. K., & Booth, A. (1991). Divorce over the life course. Journal of Family Issues, 12, 5–21.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert durch Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stauder, J., Unsöld, L. (2021). Partner Market and Union Stability in Germany. In: Bachmann, U., Schwinn, T. (eds) Theorie als Beruf. Studien zum Weber-Paradigma. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-32000-3_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-32000-3_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-31999-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-32000-3
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)