Benjamin R. Karney

Objective: This study compares associations between division of housework and relationship outcomes across members of different‐sex and same‐sex couples. Background: Different‐sex couples tend to report lower relationship quality when housework is divided in unequal and gendered ways. Because most research has focused on different‐sex couples, it remains unclear whether these associations stem from general fairness principles or a disruption of gender roles. These explanations can be disentangled by comparing associations in different‐sex and same‐sex couples. Method: These analyses use survey and time diary data from men and women in same‐sex or different‐sex couples ( N = 3455) from the National Couples' Health and Time Use Study . Regression with moderation by couple type examined associations between division of housework (both subjective satisfaction and more objective diary measures) and relationship and sexual satisfaction. Results: Across all couple types, partners who were more satisfied with the division of housework reported greater relationship and sexual satisfaction. For relationship satisfaction, associations were stronger for members of different‐sex couples than for same‐sex couples. For both outcomes, results were stronger for subjective self‐reports than for time diary data. Conclusion: The implications of household labor arrangements are not only a matter of fairness, but are also shaped by broader gendered structures, a pattern only made visible through attention to diverse couples. Stronger effects obtained with subjective compared to time diary measures further indicate that interpretations of housework, rather than objective time alone, are central to understanding links with relationship quality.

In relationship science, researchers have generated a wide array of constructs and corresponding self-report measures to characterize, explain, and predict relationship quality – the foremost studied outcome in the field. Collectively, however, the boundaries among these variables remain unclear. In the current research, we examined the extent to which measures of relationship quality and other important relationship constructs are empirically separable from one another. Across two studies of US census-matched participants (total N = 3,439), we applied latent variable techniques (e.g., exploratory bifactor analysis) on broad pools of items representing various prominent relationship-specific constructs. Results revealed robust evidence that a single general factor Q (representing global relationship sentiment) accounts for a vast majority of common variance across distinct relationship measures. Thus, respondents appear to draw primarily on their overall global relationship evaluations when reporting on an array of presumably-distinct relationship facets. This is consistent with a ‘sentiment override’ perspective. Our findings provide novel empirical evidence for a relationship-specific response bias that challenges prevailing assumptions and practice in the field, including the widespread use of self-report methods to capture meaningful aspects of relationship functioning.

The development of generative artificial intelligence capable of sustaining complex conversations has created a burgeoning market for companion chatbots promising social and emotional connection. The appeal of these products raises questions about whether chatbots can fulfill the functions of close relationships. Proponents argue that relationships with chatbots can be as meaningful as relationships between humans, whereas critics argue they are a dangerous distraction from genuine connections. This analysis applies theoretical tools from more than 50 years of research on close relationships to evaluate the extent to which human–chatbot interactions meet the definition of and fulfill the functions of close relationships. Interactions between humans and chatbots do possess some characteristic features of close relationships: Humans and chatbots can influence each other and engage in frequent and diverse conversations over time. Chatbots can be responsive in ways humans perceive as supportive, generating feelings of connection and opportunities for growth. Yet because chatbots make only superficial requests of their users, relationships with them cannot provide the benefits of negotiating with and sacrificing for a partner and may reinforce undesirable behaviors. Research that attends to the characteristics of users, chatbots, and their interactions will be crucial for identifying for whom these relationships will be beneficial or harmful.

The development of generative AI capable of sustaining complex conversations has created a burgeoning market for companion chatbots promising social and emotional connection. The appeal of these products raises questions about whether chatbots can fulfill the functions of close relationships. Proponents argue that relationships with chatbots can be as meaningful as relationships between humans, whereas critics argue they are a dangerous distraction from genuine connections. This analysis applies theoretical tools from over 50 years of research on close relationships to evaluate the extent to which human-chatbot interactions meet the definition of and fulfill the functions of close relationships. Interactions between humans and chatbots possess some characteristic features of close relationships: humans and chatbots can influence each other, and engage in frequent and diverse conversations over time. Chatbots can be responsive in ways humans perceive as supportive, generating feelings of connection and opportunities for growth. Yet because chatbots make only superficial requests of their users, relationships with them cannot provide the benefits of negotiating with and sacrificing for a partner, and may reinforce undesirable behaviors. Research that attends to characteristics of users, chatbots, and their interactions will be crucial for identifying for whom these relationships will be beneficial or harmful.

Although all couples desire fulfilling and long-lasting relationships, couples with lower socioeconomic status (SES) experience less satisfying and stable relationships than couples with higher SES. To date, most explanations for this association have focused on how exposure to deprivation affects the individual psychology of partners. In this chapter, we expand that focus, drawing upon research from multiple disciplines to consider the concrete challenges that constrain couples with low SES. The first section reviews how limited resources and poorer health interfere with relationship maintenance. The second section examines moderators of these effects, including racial identity, social support networks, and partners’ own explanations for their financial circumstances. The final section highlights priorities for future research and intervention. A central implication of this work is that programs that improve the material circumstances of couples with low SES are likely to improve their intimate relationships as well.

Although prominent theories of intimate relationships, and couples themselves, often conceive of relationships as fluctuating widely in their degree of closeness, longitudinal studies generally describe partners' satisfaction as stable and continuous or as steadily declining over time. The increasing use of group-based trajectory models (GBTMs) to identify distinct classes of change has reinforced this characterization, but these models fail to account for individual differences within classes and within-person variability across classes and may thus misrepresent how couples' satisfaction changes. The goal of the current analyses was to determine whether accounting for these additional sources of variance through growth mixture models (GMMs) alters characterizations of satisfaction changes over time. Applied to longitudinal data from 12 independent studies of first-married couples (combined N = 1,249 couples), GMMs that allowed for class-specific individual differences and within-person variability fit the data better than the GBTMs that constrained these to be equal across classes. Most notably, considerable within-person variability was evident within each class, consistent with the idea that spouses do indeed fluctuate in their satisfaction. Spouses who dissolved their marriages were 3.8-5.7 times more likely to be in classes characterized by greater volatility in satisfaction. Because the early years of marriage appear to be characterized by within-person fluctuations in satisfaction, time-varying correlates of these fluctuations are likely to be at least as important as time-invariant correlates in explaining why some marriages thrive where others falter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

As adults embark upon marriage, forming their own new nuclear families, they often remain connected to their families of origin. Nevertheless, spouses’ relationships with their parents and in-laws are likely to change across the early years of marriage. Given that empirical studies to date are typically limited to only a couple of measurement occasions, however, the stability and impact of such changes are unclear. Using Repeated Measures Latent Class Analyses, the present study addresses this gap by identifying classes of spouses (N=375 dyads) experiencing different types of relationships with their parents and in-laws across the first 9 years of marriage. Further, correlates and consequences of spouses’ longitudinal sentiment profiles were also examined. Three sentiment profiles (i.e., Mostly Helpful, Mostly Ambivalent, Mostly Indifferent, Mostly Difficult) emerged when looking at spouse’s sentiments toward their own parents and for husbands’ sentiments towards their in-laws, whereas 4 profiles (i.e., Mostly Helpful, Mostly Ambivalent, Mostly Indifferent, Mostly Difficult) were found for wives’ sentiments towards their in-laws. Mostly Ambivalent sentiment profiles showed the least stability, and spouses showed significantly higher odds of being in the Mostly Ambivalent class if they were living in a multigenerational household and if the wife was a 2nd generation immigrant. Spouses whose marriages dissolved showed significantly higher odds of being in the Mostly Indifferent, Mostly Ambivalent, and Mostly Difficult classes, compared to the Mostly Helpful class. These results provide an important starting point for future research aiming to understand how intergenerational bonds may promote or hinder successful marriages.

Marriage sanctifies the relationship between two spouses, but what happens to their relationships with family, friends, and others who comprise their social networks? Scholarly accounts disagree about whether couples' networks strengthen, weaken, or remain stable in the years after marriage. To reconcile competing perspectives, marriage licenses from lower income communities were used to recruit 462 spouses (231 couples) in their first marriages. Each spouse independently provided data on 24 network members with whom they interact regularly (over 11,000 network members). These data were used to calculate 14 dimensions of each spouse's social network, and networks were assessed in this way three times over the first 18 months of marriage. Over time, spouses' networks grew to include more of each other's family members, more married and financially secure individuals and more members with whom they reported good relationships. For husbands, proportions of their own friends and their wives' friends declined. Proportions of own family and members providing support did not change. With rare exceptions, these changes were not moderated by premarital parenthood, cohabitation, or relationship duration. Thus, regardless of a couples' premarital history, getting married itself appears to be associated with specific changes in spouses' social networks. Yet whether those changes broaden or narrow their networks depends on where in the network one looks. Illuminating how relationships between spouses are shaped by relationships outside the marriage therefore requires multifaceted assessments that are capable of distinguishing among discrete elements of couples' social networks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: To estimate the effects of state‐level changes in the minimum wage on marriage and divorce among low‐wage earners.Background: Proponents of raising the minimum wage highlight the potential benefits of increased earnings for low‐income families, yet to date research on the effects of raising the minimum wage has focused almost exclusively on economic outcomes. No research has yet documented whether these changes actually affect marriage and divorce.Method: Using the Current Population Survey and the American Community Survey, this project applied a quasi‐experimental difference‐in‐difference method to exploit similarities between states that have, and have not, raised their minimum wage.Results: Across data sources, among men and women earning low wages, a one‐dollar increase in the state minimum wage predicts a 3%–6% decline in marriage entry and a 7%–15% decline in divorce one and 2 years later.Conclusion: Both changes are likely to strengthen low‐income families, and are substantially larger effects than those obtained by federal policies directly targeting interpersonal dynamics within low‐income couples.Implications: Government policies that reduce stress on couples and facilitate their access to resources may improve family outcomes, invisibly and without making additional demands on the time of couples who are already strained.