University of Missouri Department of Human Development and Family Science Better with Age? Patterns...

University of Missouri

Department of Human Development and Family Science

Better with Age? Patterns of Marital Positivity and Negativity Across 20 Years in Two Generations

Christine M. Proulx



Marriage over Time

• Changing marriage trends in the US

• Media attention on marriage

• Evidence for stability• Survivors

• Implication of happiness and success• Carstensen’s socioemotional selectivity theory: with aging

comes a focus on those social relationships that are most meaningful and that best meet our needs

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hospital-reunites-couple-married-68-years-in-beautiful-gesture_55c8aba5e4b0f1cbf1e58073?kvcommref=mostpopular



Theoretical Foundations

• “Honeymoon is over” effect: Marital decline is inevitable after the initial high of the honeymoon years

• Enduring dynamics/maintenance models: Couples enter marriage with characteristics that lead to stability in marital happiness over time



Research on Marriage over the Life Course

• Original research suggested a U-shaped curve (e.g., VanLaningham, Johnson, & Amato, 2001)

• Research using more advanced approaches suggested mostly marital decline, especially across the early years (e.g., DeMaris, Sanchez, & Krivickas, 2012)

• Contemporary work using other advanced methods (i.e., group based, person centered modeling) suggests multiple patterns of change – and stability – are evident (e.g., Lavner & Bradbury, 2010)



The Present Study

• Using data from the Longitudinal Study of Generations:• Examine marital change (or stability) in two

separate generations over 20 years • Examine both positive and negative marital dimensions• What patterns will emerge for each construct, and will

they be the same for each generation?

• Examine predictors of resulting patterns



Longitudinal Study of Generations

Began in 1971 as a cross-sectional study Goal was to find three-generation families in which

the grandchild was between the ages of 16-26 Sample was randomly selected from a population of

840,000 individuals enrolled in a southern California HMO Some selection bias

Ethnic minorities were under-represented Sample was somewhat better educated than general population



LSOG Generations



Current Study Sample

• 7 waves spanning 20 years (1984-2004)

• “Linemember” respondents in Generation 2 or

3 who report being continuously married or in a marriage-like relationship with the same person at each wave• No within-generation relatives in dataset



Sample Characteristics

• Generation 2:• Mean age in 1984: 56.23 (SD = 4.61)• Mean length of marriage: 32.42 years (SD = 8.73);

range = 2 - 45 years• 66% female

• Generation 3:• Mean age in 1984: 32.75 years (SD = 2.70)• Mean length of marriage: 9.15 years (SD = 4.37);

range = 1 - 20 years• 63% female



Measures • Marital quality• Gilford-Bengtson Marital Satisfaction Scale

• 11 total items, with 2 subscales• Positive interaction (5 items; e.g., You and your spouse have

a good time together) and negative sentiment (6 items; e.g., You disagree about something important)

• Depressive symptoms• CES-D

• 20 items assessing depressed mood, guilt and worthlessness, helplessness and hopelessness, psychomotor problems, loss of appetite, and sleep disturbance



Preliminary Analyses

• Began with latent growth curve models on both marital outcomes (positive interaction and negative sentiment) for both generations• This approach estimates the curve or trajectory that best

approximates the sample mean curve

• Results showed little to no significant mean change over time for either generation• “Curves” were relatively flat—sample mean curve provided

evidence for stability over time at relatively high levels of marital quality



Trajectory Analysis

• Trajectory analysis on each generation, for each marital outcome, using SAS PROC TRAJ• This approach looks for naturally occurring clustered

groups of trajectories (e.g., groups of participants whose change/stability in marital qualities is similar)

• Relied on the BIC, AIC, membership probabilities, (and common sense) to determine optimal number of groups



Results

• For all 4 models (2 outcomes x 2 generations), 3 group solutions were optimal

• However, patterns of change in marital qualities differed slightly across generations



Positive Interaction Trajectories

• Generation 2 (mean age of 56.23):• Group 1: low stable positivity (n = 23)• Group 2: mid slight increase in positivity (n = 52)• Group 3: high stable positivity (n = 50)

• Generation 3 (mean age of 32.75):• Group 1: low stable positivity (n = 24)• Group 2: mid slight decrease in positivity (n = 56)• Group 3: high stable positivity (n = 67)



Negative Sentiment Trajectories• Generation 2:• Group 1: low stable negativity (n = 57)• Group 2: mid stable negativity (n = 49)• Group 3: high but decreasing in negativity (n = 19)

• Generation 3:• Group 1: low stable negativity (n = 83)• Group 2: mid stable negativity (n = 51)• Group 3: high and increasing in negativity (n = 13)



Predictors of Group Membership• Tested gender, marital duration, and depressive symptoms

as predictors (RISK command)

• Generation 2: • Positive interaction: none were significant predictors• Negative sentiment: more years married, more likely to be in the

decline in negativity group

• Generation 3:• Positive interaction: none were significant predictors• Negative sentiment: higher depressive scores, more likely to be in

the mid stable or high increase groups



Conclusions

• Evidence primarily for enduring dynamics model—lots of stability in these longer term marriages

• Different generations exhibit slightly different patterns of marital change (or stability)• Older generation has a slight edge in terms of marital

quality groups

• Cannot know if this is a cohort/age effect or a marital duration effect• Selection effects



Future Directions

• What else predicts membership in different trajectory groups?• Possibilities:• Personality factors• Life stressors• Transition points

• Establish what outcomes are associated with group membership• Preliminary results: self-rated health



Thank you!

University of Missouri Department of Human Development and Family Science Better with Age? Patterns...

Documents

Transcript of University of Missouri Department of Human Development and Family Science Better with Age? Patterns...