Classic and contemporary studies of mate selection share a common goal: to describe and explain how individuals mate romantic unions choose one selection as partners. Upon first reading, this definition may seem to imply that mate selection is concerned only with choosing a partner for a committed relationship, but the study of mate selection is much more varied and dynamic in its focus.
A full understanding of mate selection requires attention to the development and maintenance of romantic relationships, including their very beginnings and endings and the ups and downs in between. In this chapter, we review research aimed at these topics and suggest ways in which they are and are not being addressed.
Because other chapters in this volume are devoted to cohabitation and to gay and lesbian relationships, we concentrate on mate selection in heterosexual relationships, and we discuss cohabitation only as it pertains to contemporary dating relationships and mate selection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Institutional subscriptions. Batson, C.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 68— Selection Google Scholar. Becker, G. A treatise on the family enlarged ed. Google Scholar. Binstock, G. Separations, reconciliations, and living mate in cohabiting and marital unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65— Blackwell, D. Mate selection among married and cohabiting couples. Journal of Family Issues, 21— Brown, S. Union transitions among cohabitors: The significance of relationship assessments and expectations.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62— Relationship quality dynamics of cohabiting unions. Journal of Family Issues, 24 dating, — Moving from cohabitation to marriage: Effects on relationship quality. Social Science Research, 331— Cohabitation versus best dating singapore A comparison of relationship quality.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58— Bumpass, L. Population Studies, 5429— The and of cohabitation in declining rates of marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53— Campbell, L. Research on close relationships: Call for an interdisciplinary integration.
Loving Eds. Washington, D. Carlson, M. Union formation in fragile families. Dating, 41— Casper, L. Continuity and change in the American family. Cherlin, A. American marriage in the early twenty-first century. The Future of Children, 1533— Journal of Marriage and Family, 70— Crissey, S. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67— Crowder, K.
A https://telegram-web.online/hookup-places-in-nyc.php marriage squeeze for black women: The role of racial intermarriage by black men. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62— Edin, K. Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. Fields, J. Washington, DC: U. Census Bureau.
Dating and Mate Selection
Forste, R. Sexual exclusivity among dating, cohabiting, mate married women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 5833— Fossett, M. Mate availability and selection structure among African Americans in U. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55— Fu, V. Racial intermarriage pairings. Demography, 38— Gaughan, M. The substitution hypothesis: The impact of premarital liaisons and human capital on marital timing. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64— Gibson-Davis, C. Money, marriage, and children: Testing the financial expectations and family formation theory.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 71— High hopes but even higher expectations: The retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Goldscheider, F. Creating stepfamilies: Integrating children into the study of union formation. Goldstein, J. Marriage delayed or marriage forgone? New cohort forecasts of first marriage for U. American Sociological Review, 66— Graefe, D. Marriage among unwed mothers: Whites, Blacks and Hispanics compared. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 34— Gullickson, A. Education and Black-White interracial marriage.
Demography, 43— Harknett, K. Mate availability and unmarried parent relationships. Demography, 45— Hohmann-Marriott, B. Shared beliefs and the union stability of married and cohabiting couples.
Myth #2 – “Complete Assurance”
Jepsen, L. An empirical analysis of the matching patterns of same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Demography, 39and Kelley, H. Close relationships 1st ed. New York: W. Kenny, D. Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford. Lewis, S. Educational assortative mating across marriage markets: Nonhispanic Whites in the United States.