Non-cohabiting Partners’ Economic Characteristics and the Transition to Living Together in Germany
A Couple-Level Perspective
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11294920 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Valeria Ferraretto (0000-0002-1361-1842, University of Trento), Nicole Hiekel (0000-0002-7180-7931, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, corresponding author), Agnese Vitali (0000-0003-0029-9447, University of Trento) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 41 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 25-25 |
| Publication date | 2025-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | European Journal of Population / Revue européenne de Démographie (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0168-6577 • E-ISSN: 1572-9885 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10680-025-09740-y |
| PMID | 41060530 |
| OpenAlex | W4414931351 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 57 |
Living together marks an important step in the progression of intimate partner relationships. While existing literature highlights the relevance of both partners’ economic characteristics for union formation, it remains unclear whether both partners’ economic characteristics are equally linked to the transition to co-residence, whether one partner’s traits matter more, and how this varies by gender. We address these gaps by examining how the economic characteristics of women and men in non-residential relationships relate to their transition to co-residence. Using 13 waves (2008–2021) of the German Family Panel pairfam and Cox proportional hazards model, we analyse 7165 non-residential relationships, capturing dyadic data on partners’ employment status, contract type, and income. Our findings show that economic factors significantly influence the likelihood of moving in together. Couples with two employed partners are most likely to move in together, while gender plays a role when only one partner works—this transition being more likely when the man is employed. Among employed individuals, higher income increases the probability of moving in together for both men and women. Additionally, temporary employment raises the likelihood of starting a co-residence exclusively for women. Overall, results suggest that men’s employment status plays a pivotal role in this transition and that union formation is socially stratified among young adults, reinforcing gender inequalities in partnership dynamics
Economic inequality · General partnership · German · Inequality · Panel data · Perspective (graphical · Relevance (law · Transition (genetics · Family Dynamics and Relationships · Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving · Work-Family Balance Challenges
Class Differences in Cohabitation Processes
Regression Models and Life-Tables
Globalization, Uncertainty and Youth in Society
Panel Analysis of Intimate Relationships and Family Dynamics (pairfam)
The effect of unemployment on couples separating in Germany and the UK
Migration for co‐residence among long‐distance couples
Neither single, nor in a couple. A study of living apart together in France
Couple Formation is Prolonged not Postponed. New Paths to Union Formation in Contemporary France
Socioeconomic Resources and the Dissolution of Cohabitations and Marriages
The Influence of Men’s Income and Employment on Marriage and Cohabitation
Mating Market and Dynamics of Union Formation
Economic Precariousness and the Transition to Parenthood
Moving in or Breaking Up? The Role of Distance in the Development of Romantic Relationships
The Transition to a Coresidential Partnership
Cohabiting partners’ economic circumstances and marriage
Marriage and Union Formation in the United States
Young Adulthood Relationships in an Era of Uncertainty
The Economic Foundations of Cohabiting Couples’ Union Transitions
Transitions From Sexual Relationships Into Cohabitation and Beyond
A Theory of the Value of Children
Cohabiting and marriage during young men’s career-development process
Nonmarital Childbearing in Russia
Spatial Mobility, Family Dynamics, and Housing Transitions
Why do intimate partners live apart? Evidence on LAT relationships across Europe
Socio-economic resources and first-union formation in Finland, cohorts born 1969-81
Marriage and separation risks among German cohabiters
Uncertain steps into adulthood
Les relations LAT ou living apart together
Leaving and returning to the parental home during Covid times in France, Italy, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom
Union formation under conditions of uncertainty
The diversity in longitudinal partnership trajectories during the transition to adulthood
Uncertain lives
Youth prospects in a time of economic recession
Not truly partnerless
A comparative analysis of leaving home in the United States, the Netherlands and West Germany
Does Sex Matter? The Role of Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction on Living Apart Together Relationship Transitions
From Living Apart to Living Together
The Influence of Relationship Quality on the Participation of Secondary Respondents
Living Apart Together
The Reversal of the Gender Gap in Education and Its Consequences for Family Life
Parents' Partnership Decision Making After Divorce or Widowhood
Partnering Across the Life Course
Unstable employment careers and (quasi-)completed fertility
The female-breadwinner well-being 'penalty
Temporary Employment and Family Formation
Human Capital Investments or Norms of Role Transition? How Women's Schooling and Career Affect the Process of Family Formation
A Theory of Marriage Timing
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |