Cohabitation and Romantic Relationship Quality Among Portuguese Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Individuals
Lesbian and gay (LG) individuals are perceived as having poorer relationship functioning than heterosexual individuals, but this negative appraisal is not translated into actual relationship experiences. Indeed, relationship quality outcomes do not vary according to sexual orientation. Cohabitation status may play an important role, because it symbolizes relationship commitment and intimacy particularly for LG individuals. A cross-sectional study (N = 425, 52.9% women; Mage = 28.38, SD = 6.89) with romantically involved LG (38.4%) and heterosexual (61.6%) individuals examined the association between cohabitation and relationship quality outcomes. To isolate the role of cohabitation, cohabiting individuals were compared according to relationship legal status. Results showed that cohabiting (vs. non-cohabiting) LG individuals were more committed, invested, and satisfied, but those who legalized (vs. did not legalize) their union were only more committed. Among heterosexual individuals, no differences were observed. Furthermore, LG (vs. heterosexual) individuals were overall more committed, satisfied, and invested when cohabiting with their partner (especially in legalized unions), whereas heterosexual (vs. LG) individuals were more committed in non-cohabiting relationships. No other differences were found. This suggests that cohabitation may be used by LG individuals as a strategy to strengthen relationship quality and that legal recognition further increases relationship commitment.
KeywordsCohabitation Commitment Lesbian and gay individuals Portuguese context Investment model
The authors would like to thank Carlos Carriço for his help in data collection, and also ILGA Portugal and Rede Ex-Aequo for helping to disseminate the study by sharing the link to the survey in their webpages.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Balsam, K. F., Rothblum, E. D., & Wickham, R. E. (2017). Longitudinal predictors of relationship dissolution among same-sex and heterosexual couples. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 6, 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000091.
- Clarke, V., Ellis, S., Peel, E., & Riggs, D. (2010). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer psychology: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Fingerhut, A., & Peplau, L. (2013). Same-sex romantic relationships. In C. Patterson & A. D’Augelli (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and sexual orientation (pp. 165–178). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- INE. (2017). Estatísticas Vitais, 2016 [vital statistics, 2016]. Lisboa, PT: INE. Retrieved from https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_destaques&DESTAQUESdest_boui=279537018&DESTAQUESmodo=2&xlang=pt.
- Joyner, K., Manning, W. & Bogle, R. (2017). Gender and the stabilityof same-sex and different-sex relationships among young aduls. Demography, 54, 2351–2374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0633-8.
- Kurdek, L. (1995). Lesbian and gay couples. In A. D’Augelli & C. Patterson (Eds.), Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities over the lifespan (pp. 243–261). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Kurdek, L. (2008). A general model of relationship commitment: Evidence from same-sex partners. Personal Relationships, 15, 391–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2008.00205.x.
- Manning, W. D., & Cohen, J. A. (2012). Premarital cohabitation and marital dissolution: An examination of recent marriages. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 377–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00960.x.
- Nadal, K. L., Whitman, C. N., Davis, L. S., Erazo, T., & Davidoff, K. C. (2016). Microaggressions toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and genderqueer people: A review of the literature. Journal of Sex Research, 53, 488–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1142495.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nico, M., & Rodrigues, E. (2013). The organisation of household work in same-sex couples. The Portuguese Journal of Social Science, 12. Retrieved from http://pjss.iscte.pt/index.php/pjss/article/view/76.
- Oliveira, J., Costa, C., & Nogueira, C. (2013). The workings of homonormativity: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer discourses on discrimination and public displays of affections in Portugal. Journal of Homosexuality, 60, 1475–1493. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2013.819221.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Peplau, L., & Fingerhut, A. (2007). The close relationships of lesbians and gay men. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 405–424. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Peplau, L., & Spalding, L. (2000). The close relationships of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals. In C. Hendrick & S. Hendrick (Eds.), Close relationships: A sourcebook (pp. 111–124). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Poeschl, G., da Silva, B. P., & Cardoso, F. T. (2015). Casamento, casamentos? Representações sociais do casamento heterossexual e do casamento homossexual [Marriage, marriages? Social representations of heterosexual and homosexual marriage]. Análise Psicológica, 33, 73–87. https://doi.org/10.14417/ap.886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rodrigues, D., Fasoli, F., Huic, A., & Lopes, D. (2017). Which partners are more human? Monogamy matters more than sexual orientation for dehumanization in three European countries. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-017-0290-0.
- Rosenfeld, M. J. (2014). Couple longevity in the era of same-sex marriage in the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 905–918. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12141.
- Rothblum, E., Balsam, K., Todosijevic, J., & Solomon, S. (2006). Same-sex couples in civil unions compared with same-sex couples not in civil unions and heterosexual siblings: An overview. Lesbian & Gay Psychology Review, 7, 180–188.Google Scholar
- Rusbult, C., Martz, J., & Agnew, C. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Scherpe, J. (2013). The legal recognition of same-sex couples in Europe and the role of the European Court of human rights. Equal Rights Review, 10, 83–96.Google Scholar
- Stanley, S., Rhoades, G., & Fincham, F. (2011). Understanding romantic relationships among emerging adults: The significant roles of cohabitation and ambiguity. In F. Fincham & M. Cui (Eds.), Romantic relationships in emerging adulthood (pp. 234–251). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Zhang, Y. (2017). Premarital cohabitation and marital dissolution in postreform China. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79, 1435–1449. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12419.