Study: To boost your odds of a successful marriage, have a big wedding

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Gingersnap
    Resident stylistic consultant
    • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
    • 24058

    #1

    Study: To boost your odds of a successful marriage, have a big wedding

    Study: To boost your odds of a successful marriage, have a big wedding

    By KAREN KAPLAN contact the reporter Human BehaviorScientific ResearchMarriageWeddingsNational Institutes of Health

    The foundation for a high-quality marriage begins years before you meet your spouse, researchers say
    Psychologists examine how one's dating history and wedding ceremony influence the quality of a marriage

    'What happens in Vegas doesn't stay in Vegas, so to speak,' psychologists warn after studying 418 marriages

    To improve your odds of a high-quality marriage, try not to have too many sexual partners before you meet “the one.” And when you do find him or her, consider inviting at least 150 people to your wedding.

    That’s just some of the practical advice offered by a pair of psychology researchers from the University of Denver who have studied 418 people who participated in the Relationship Development Study. All of them were single and between the ages of 18 and 40 when they joined the study in 2007 and 2008, and all of them had tied the knot by the time the researchers checked in with them five years later.

    The goal was to identify patterns of behavior that tended to set people up for successful and fulfilling marriages. The researchers asked study volunteers questions about “marital happiness, confiding in one another, believing things are going well in the relationship, and thoughts of divorce,” according to their report published this week. Those who ranked in the top 40% were considered to have “high-quality marriages.”

    The researchers — Galena Rhoades and Scott Stanley — emphasized that the choices men and women make long before they say “I do” seem to have a strong influence on their marriages years later.

    “What happens in Vegas doesn’t stay in Vegas, so to speak,” they wrote. “Our past experiences, especially when it comes to love, sex, and children, are linked to our future marital quality.”

    For instance, the study volunteers were asked how many sexual partners they had before they got married, and the response (on average) was five. But 23% of them had slept only with the person they married, and they scored higher on the marriage quality test than those who had more experience. In fact, for women, the higher the number of sexual partners, “the less happy she reported her marriage to be,” according to the report.

    People who had already been through a divorce or who had lived with someone before meeting their current spouse were also less likely to have a high-quality marriage. The researchers found that 35% of these people earned that designation, compared with 42% of those who had only lived with their eventual spouse.

    What’s wrong with having a past? “More experience may increase one’s awareness of alternative partners,” Rhoades and Stanley wrote, and “a strong sense of alternatives is believed to make it harder to maintain commitment to, and satisfaction with, what one already has.”

    There’s also the fact that people who have more ex-significant others have been through more breakups. “A history of multiple breakups may make people take a more jaundiced view of love and relationships,” they added.

    The researchers also noted that 24% of the people in the study either had children from a prior relationship by the time they tied the knot or married someone who did. “There is no question that raising children from prior relationships can add stress to a marriage,” the researchers wrote.
    Interesting. I think the number of guests is probably the least important factor in this article. Read the whole thing.

    LA Times
    "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."
  • Celeste Chalfonte
    apostate
    • Saturday, October 5, 2013
    • 27897

    #2
    Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
    Interesting. I think the number of guests is probably the least important factor in this article. Read the whole thing.

    LA Times
    I hope that part was tongue-in-cheek. Without even getting into the size of the study or the methodology, which may have been either impeccable or sloppy, there's a good deal of switching of cause and effect in the way this is written. Assuming the study authors are serious scholars, I doubt they reached exactly the same conclusions as te pop science writer at the LA Times.
    "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

    Comment

    • Gramps
      Junior Member
      • Friday, October 4, 2013
      • 3850

      #3
      Probably written by a wedding planner.
      Robert Francis O'Rourke, Democrat, White guy, spent ~78 million to defeat, Ted Cruz, Republican immigrant Dark guy and lost
      But the Republicans are racist.

      Comment

      • Gingersnap
        Resident stylistic consultant
        • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
        • 24058

        #4
        Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
        I hope that part was tongue-in-cheek. Without even getting into the size of the study or the methodology, which may have been either impeccable or sloppy, there's a good deal of switching of cause and effect in the way this is written. Assuming the study authors are serious scholars, I doubt they reached exactly the same conclusions as te pop science writer at the LA Times.
        I don't think the number of guests at a wedding is the most factor in having a 'high quality' marriage (I have a 'high quality' marriage myself).

        The paper plucked that factor out and used it in the headline because it's not controversial (although it is poor journalism). No tongue-in-cheek intentions needed to make that observation.
        "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

        Comment

        • Lanie
          Finally have my self respect.
          • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
          • 4829

          #5
          Originally posted by Gramps View Post
          Probably written by a wedding planner.
          Yep.

          I keep thinking big weddings are pointless for two reasons.

          First, one's love doesn't need all of that.

          Second, if it ends in divorce, won't you feel stupid for paying all that money?

          Comment

          • Frostbit
            But only once
            • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
            • 22330

            #6
            Originally posted by Lanie View Post
            Yep.

            I keep thinking big weddings are pointless for two reasons.

            First, one's love doesn't need all of that.

            Second, if it ends in divorce, won't you feel stupid for paying all that money?
            Weddings, many times, are for the parents not the wedding couple.
            If it pays, it stays

            Comment

            • Celeste Chalfonte
              apostate
              • Saturday, October 5, 2013
              • 27897

              #7
              Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
              I don't think the number of guests at a wedding is the most factor in having a 'high quality' marriage (I have a 'high quality' marriage myself).

              The paper plucked that factor out and used it in the headline because it's not controversial (although it is poor journalism). No tongue-in-cheek intentions needed to make that observation.
              Correlation is not causation. Most important or least, to suggest that having 150+ wedding guests actually increases your chances of having a good marriage, if not suggested tongue-in-cheek, is just stupid.
              "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

              Comment

              • Gingersnap
                Resident stylistic consultant
                • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                • 24058

                #8
                Originally posted by Lanie View Post
                Yep.

                I keep thinking big weddings are pointless for two reasons.

                First, one's love doesn't need all of that.

                Second, if it ends in divorce, won't you feel stupid for paying all that money?
                Big expensive weddings seem pretty pointless. We had 100 people (more of a mid-sized wedding according to the article) but not an expensive one. I think that a lot of purely working class or middle class couples somehow go insane and order up a wealthy person's "event".

                I can't imagine starting out married life with wedding debt.
                "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

                Comment

                • Gramps
                  Junior Member
                  • Friday, October 4, 2013
                  • 3850

                  #9
                  When my daughter got engaged and we got into the planning stage, being the Father of the Bride and pretty much obliged to foot the bill, I sat my wife and daughter down, put a figure on a piece of paper, had them list every item I would have to cover.

                  The we made out a budget.

                  xxx for this etc.

                  So, getting closer mom and daughter are into the 'buy the gown' phase.

                  They come home one day and announce they have the perfect gown on order.

                  Me... how much

                  Mom...xxxx

                  Me... so how much do you want me to cut off of what items on this budget...

                  fuck it..

                  I caved...
                  Robert Francis O'Rourke, Democrat, White guy, spent ~78 million to defeat, Ted Cruz, Republican immigrant Dark guy and lost
                  But the Republicans are racist.

                  Comment

                  • Gingersnap
                    Resident stylistic consultant
                    • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                    • 24058

                    #10
                    Of all the expenses of a wedding, the gown seemed like one of the least important items to me.

                    We didn't attempt to appear to be different people at our wedding. Mr.Snaps wore a (snappy) 3 piece suit and I had a white gown but my gown was what a young woman in my own circumstances would wear - not what the imaginary me would wear.

                    Let's face it, you aren't going to use it again for anything and the odds of a daughter fitting it AND liking a dated style are pretty slim.
                    "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

                    Comment

                    • Gramps
                      Junior Member
                      • Friday, October 4, 2013
                      • 3850

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
                      Of all the expenses of a wedding, the gown seemed like one of the least important items to me.

                      We didn't attempt to appear to be different people at our wedding. Mr.Snaps wore a (snappy) 3 piece suit and I had a white gown but my gown was what a young woman in my own circumstances would wear - not what the imaginary me would wear.

                      Let's face it, you aren't going to use it again for anything and the odds of a daughter fitting it AND liking a dated style are pretty slim.
                      The gown was sealed in plastic, placed in it's box and stayed under my bed for over 12 years until I moved.
                      Daughter has it now.

                      Told her when I was moving, take it or I'm throwing it out, cause it doesn't fit me.
                      Robert Francis O'Rourke, Democrat, White guy, spent ~78 million to defeat, Ted Cruz, Republican immigrant Dark guy and lost
                      But the Republicans are racist.

                      Comment

                      • Adam
                        The way to a woman's heart is through her taste buds.
                        • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                        • 16885

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
                        I hope that part was tongue-in-cheek. Without even getting into the size of the study or the methodology, which may have been either impeccable or sloppy, there's a good deal of switching of cause and effect in the way this is written. Assuming the study authors are serious scholars, I doubt they reached exactly the same conclusions as te pop science writer at the LA Times.
                        I heard this report on the radio from our afternoon drive guy on Wednesday, I think.

                        He had an hypothesis that I think probably is as good an answer to the study as anything: big weddings almost invariably cost more, and thus respondents are likely ashamed to say, eighteen months into a marriage with the memory of a lot of zeros after a dollar sign still quite fresh, that their marriage is anything less than perfect.

                        Makes sense, really, and there's not really any way to control for that.
                        It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
                        In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
                        Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
                        Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

                        Comment

                        • Gingersnap
                          Resident stylistic consultant
                          • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                          • 24058

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Adam View Post
                          I heard this report on the radio from our afternoon drive guy on Wednesday, I think.

                          He had an hypothesis that I think probably is as good an answer to the study as anything: big weddings almost invariably cost more, and thus respondents are likely ashamed to say, eighteen months into a marriage with the memory of a lot of zeros after a dollar sign still quite fresh, that their marriage is anything less than perfect.

                          Makes sense, really, and there's not really any way to control for that.
                          Hardly any marriages collapse in 18 months whether they are super cheap or ruinously expensive. It's more likely that a wider kinship/friendship group means more personal access to more marriages. You see that your problems are common and usually not deal-breakers and you see what is a deal-breaker really looks like (it may not be what you thought).

                          Some people who have very small weddings aren't doing it because of the financial end, they're doing it because they've had a lot of negative feedback from friends and family about the match.
                          "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

                          Comment

                          • scott
                            Go-to Guru
                            • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                            • 15799

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
                            Correlation is not causation. Most important or least, to suggest that having 150+ wedding guests actually increases your chances of having a good marriage, if not suggested tongue-in-cheek, is just stupid.
                            Originally posted by Adam View Post
                            I heard this report on the radio from our afternoon drive guy on Wednesday, I think.

                            He had an hypothesis that I think probably is as good an answer to the study as anything: big weddings almost invariably cost more, and thus respondents are likely ashamed to say, eighteen months into a marriage with the memory of a lot of zeros after a dollar sign still quite fresh, that their marriage is anything less than perfect.

                            Makes sense, really, and there's not really any way to control for that.
                            Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
                            Hardly any marriages collapse in 18 months whether they are super cheap or ruinously expensive. It's more likely that a wider kinship/friendship group means more personal access to more marriages. You see that your problems are common and usually not deal-breakers and you see what is a deal-breaker really looks like (it may not be what you thought).

                            Some people who have very small weddings aren't doing it because of the financial end, they're doing it because they've had a lot of negative feedback from friends and family about the match.
                            I think it's demographics. The cultural influences that tend to prefer large weddings also value marriage more than individual happiness (for better or worse). There is no cause and effect, and it not necessarily a good thing that these marriages last.
                            "Faith is nothing but a firm assent of the mind : which, if it be regulated, as is our duty, cannot be afforded to anything but upon good reason, and so cannot be opposite to it."
                            -John Locke

                            "It's all been melded together into one giant, authoritarian, leftist scream."
                            -Newman

                            "Grievance groups are playing King of the Hill."
                            -Newman

                            Comment

                            • Frostbit
                              But only once
                              • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
                              • 22330

                              #15
                              Originally posted by scott View Post
                              I think it's demographics. The cultural influences that tend to prefer large weddings also value marriage more than individual happiness (for better or worse). There is no cause and effect, and it not necessarily a good thing that these marriages last.
                              But culturally functional.

                              I remember when I was in grammar school the first dousing in the entire history of both sides of my family tree got divorced. Incredible scandal. It did open the door for a couple others that followed suit in the next few years. Yes we were Catholic.
                              If it pays, it stays

                              Comment

                              Working...