RESEARCH PAPER
No licence for love versus same-sex relationships –
partner relations and interpersonal commitment
| 1 | Institute of Psychology, University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland |
Submission date: 2020-10-04
Final revision date: 2021-04-11
Acceptance date: 2021-04-13
Online publication date: 2021-06-21
Publication date: 2021-06-22
Current Issues in Personality Psychology 2021;9(2):101–113
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
the role of personality in interpersonal relations and social behaviorsquality of life and well being
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Like heterosexual ones, homosexual partners strive to fulfil their needs for belonging and love. They also build their relationships in countries where less favourable public opinion exists towards same-sex relationships, due in part to the lack of equivalent legislation between heterosexual and non-heterosexual persons and couples. As opponents of such relationships claim them to be less stable and of lower quality, the current study examines whether the sexual orientation of partners may determine the quality of their relationship and their commitment to it.
Material and methods:
The study was conducted in a group of 530 cohabiting persons, aged 18-44 (230 persons with a homosexual orientation and 300 heterosexual) living in Poland. The participants were tested with three tools: a sociodemographic survey, the Polish version of the Partner Relations Questionnaire by Halhweg, adapted by Janicka, and the Interpersonal Commitment Inventory (KZI) by Janicka and Szymczak: the Polish adaptation of the Commitment Inventory by Stanley and Markman.
Results:
The findings indicate that sexual orientation of women and men may influence their tendencies to change partners and their interpersonal commitment, interpreted as their dedication and obligation to stay in the relationship.
Conclusions:
Some detailed analyses suggest that cohabitations between gay women portend better than those of gay men.
Like heterosexual ones, homosexual partners strive to fulfil their needs for belonging and love. They also build their relationships in countries where less favourable public opinion exists towards same-sex relationships, due in part to the lack of equivalent legislation between heterosexual and non-heterosexual persons and couples. As opponents of such relationships claim them to be less stable and of lower quality, the current study examines whether the sexual orientation of partners may determine the quality of their relationship and their commitment to it.
Material and methods:
The study was conducted in a group of 530 cohabiting persons, aged 18-44 (230 persons with a homosexual orientation and 300 heterosexual) living in Poland. The participants were tested with three tools: a sociodemographic survey, the Polish version of the Partner Relations Questionnaire by Halhweg, adapted by Janicka, and the Interpersonal Commitment Inventory (KZI) by Janicka and Szymczak: the Polish adaptation of the Commitment Inventory by Stanley and Markman.
Results:
The findings indicate that sexual orientation of women and men may influence their tendencies to change partners and their interpersonal commitment, interpreted as their dedication and obligation to stay in the relationship.
Conclusions:
Some detailed analyses suggest that cohabitations between gay women portend better than those of gay men.
REFERENCES (57)
1.
Abramowicz, M. (2010). Wprowadzenie do problematyki raportu [Introduction to the problems of the report]. In M. Zima (Ed.), Tęczowe rodziny w Polsce. Prawo a rodziny lesbijskie i gejowskie [Rainbow families in Poland. Law and lesbian and gay families] (pp. 7–11). Kampania Przeciw Homofobii.
2.
Andersson, G., Noack, T., Seierstad, A., & Weedon-Fekjar, H. (2006). The demographics of same-sex marriages in Norway and Sweden. Demography 43, 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.20....
3.
Bailey, J. M., Gaulin, S., Agyei, Y., & Gladue, B. A. (1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1081–1093. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-....
4.
Baxter, J., Haynes, M., & Hewitt, B. (2010). Pathways into marriage: Cohabitation and the domestic division of labour. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 1507–1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251....
6.
Buss, D. (2001). Psychologia ewolucyjna [Evolutionary psychology]. Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
7.
Brown, S. I., & Booth, A. (1996). Cohabitation versus marriage: a comparison of relationship quality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 668–678. https://doi.org/10.2307/353727.
8.
Cohan, C. L., & Kleinbaum, S. (2002). Toward a greater understanding of the cohabitation effect: Premarital cohabitation and marital communication. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741....
9.
Cross-Barnet, C., Cherlin, A., & Burton, L. (2011). Bound by children: Intermittent cohabitation and living together apart. Family Relations, 60, 633–647. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741....
10.
Cusack, C. E., Hughes, J. L., & Cook, R. (2012). Components of love and relationship satisfaction: Lesbians and heterosexual women. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 17, 171–179. https://doi.org/10.24839/2164-....
11.
Da Silva Mendes, J. C., & Pereira, H. M. (2013). Monogamy and marital adjustment: a study of same sex couples and different sex couples. Psychology, Community & Health, 2, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5964/pch.v2....
12.
Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (1998). Applied regression analysis. Third edition. John Wiley & Sons.
13.
Giddens, A. (2007). Przemiany intymności. Seksualność, miłość, erotyzm we współczesnych społeczeństwach [Transformations of intimacy. Sexuality, love, eroticism in contemporary societies]. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
14.
Givertz, M., Burke, T., Segrin, C., & Woszidlo, A. (2016). Attachment orientation moderates the relationship between dedication and constraint commitment and felt constraint in married couples. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 5, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp000....
15.
Goldberg, A. E., Kashy, D. A., & Smith, J. A. (2010). Preadoptive factors predicting lesbian, gay and heterosexual couples' relationship quality across the transition to adoptive parenthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/a00196....
16.
Goodman, A., & Greaves, E. (2010). Cohabitation, marriage and relationship stability. Institute for Fiscal Studies.
17.
Hahlweg, K. (1996). Fragebogen zur Partnerschaftsdiagnostik (FPD) [Questionnaire for partnership diagnostics]. Verlag für Psychologie.
18.
Holomberg, D., & Blair, K. L. (2009). Sexual desire communication, satisfaction and preferences of men and women in same-sex versus mixed-sex relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/002244....
19.
Huebner, D. M., Mandic, C. G., Mackaronis, J. E., Beougher, S. C., & Hoff, C. C. (2012). The impact of parenting on gay male couples` relationships, sexuality and HIV risk. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 1, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/a00286....
20.
Hsueh, A. C., Morrison, K. R., & Doss, B. D. (2009). Qualitative reports of problems in cohabiting relationships: Comparisons to married and dating relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 236–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/a00153....
21.
ILGA Europe (2019). ILGA Europe annual review. Retrieved from https://www.ilga-europe.org/ra....
22.
Janicka, I. (2008). Stosunki partnerskie w związkach niemałżeńskich [Partner relations in non-marital couples]. Przegląd Psychologiczny, 1, 37–53.
23.
Janicka, I., & Szymczak, W. (2017). Kwestionariusz Zaangażowania Interpersonalnego – polska adaptacja metody [Interpersonal Commitment Questionnaire – Polish adaptation]. Polskie Forum Psychologiczne, 2, 205–218.
24.
Janicka, I., & Szymczak, W. (2019). Can close romantic relationships last? The commitment of partners in married and cohabitant couples. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 7, 203–211. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2....
25.
Julien, D., Chartrand, E., Simard, M. C., Bouthillier, D., & Bégin, J. (2003). Conflict, social support and relationship quality: an observational study of heterosexual, gay male and lesbian couples’ communication. Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3....
26.
Kline, G. H., Stanley, S. M., Markman, H. J., Olmos-Gallo, P. A., Peters, M. S., Whitton, S. W., & Prado, L. M. (2004). Timing is everything: Pre-engagement cohabitation and increased risk for poor marital outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology, 2, 311–318. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3....
27.
Kurdek, L. A. (2004). Are gay and lesbian cohabiting couples really different from heterosexual married couples? Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 880–900. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022....
28.
Kurdek, L. A. (2005). What do we know about gay and lesbian couples? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 251–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963....
29.
Kurdek, L. A. (2008). Change in relationship quality for partners from lesbian, gay male and heterosexual couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 701–711. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3....
30.
Lew-Starowicz, Z., & Lew-Starowicz, M. (2014). Homoseksualizm [Homosexuality]. Wydawnictwo Lekarskie PZWL.
31.
Lichter, D. T., & Qian, Z. (2008). Serial cohabitation and the marital life course. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 70, 861–878. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741....
32.
Majka-Rostek, D. (2012). Osoby LGB w związkach intymnych [LGB people in intimate relationships]. In G. Iniewicz, M. Mijas, & B. Grabski (Eds.), Wprowadzenie do psychologii LGB [Introduction to LGB psychology] (pp. 199–216). Wydawnictwo Continuo.
33.
McClelland, S. I. (2013). What do you mean when you say that you are sexually satisfied? A mixed methods study. Feminism & Psychology, 24, 74–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/095935....
34.
McLanahan, S., & Beck, A. (2010). Parental relationships in fragile families. The Future of Children, 20, 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.20....
35.
Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 674–697. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2....
36.
Mizielińska, J., Abramowicz, M., & Stasińska, A. (2014). Rodziny z wyboru w Polsce [Families of choice in Poland]. PAN.
37.
Mortensen, O., Torsheim, T., Melkevik, O., & Thuen, F. (2012). Adding a baby to the equation. Married and cohabiting women`s relationship satisfaction in the transition to parenthood. Family Process, 51, 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545....
38.
Nave-Herz, R. (2002). Wandel und Kontinuität in der Bedeutung, in der Struktur und Stabilität von Ehe und Familie in Deutschland [Change and continuity in the meaning, structure and stability of marriage and family in Germany]. In R. Nave-Herz (Ed.), Kontinuität und Wandel der Familie in Deutschland [Family continuity and change in Germany] (pp. 45–69). Enke.
39.
Office for National Statistics (2015). Civil Partnerships in England and Wales: 2015. Marriages formed, civil partnerships formed and dissolved, and estimates of the population by marital status and living arrangements. Retrieved from https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplep....
40.
Peplau, L. A., & Ghavami, N. (2009). The relationships of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals. In H. Reis & S. Sprecher (Eds.), The encyclopedia of human relationships (pp. 1–4). Sage Publications.
41.
Pryor, J., & Roberts, J. (2005). What is commitment? How married and cohabiting parents talk about their relationship. Family Matters, 71, 24–31.
42.
Ramirez, O. M., & Brown, J. (2010). Attachment style, rules regarding sex, and couple satisfaction: A study of gay male couples. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 31, 202–213. https://doi.org/10.1375/anft.3....
43.
Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (2006). Pre-engagement cohabitation and gender asymmetry in marital commitment. Journal of Family Psychology, 20, 553–560. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3....
44.
Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (2012). The impact of the transition to cohabitation on relationship functioning: Cross-sectional and longitudinal findings Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 348–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/a00283....
45.
Roisman, G. I., Clausell, E., Holland, A., Fortuna, K., & Elieff, C. (2008). Adult romantic relationships as contexts of human development: a multimethod comparison of same-sex couples with opposite-sex dating, engaged and married dyads. Developmental Psychology, 44, 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1....
46.
Sink, C. A., & Mvududu, N. H. (2010). Statistical power, sampling, and effect sizes: Three keys to research relevancy. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 1, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/215013....
47.
Smock, P. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States: an appraisal of research themes, findings and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1146/annure....
48.
Solomon, S. E., Balsam, K. F., Beauchaine, T. P., & Rothblum, E. D. (2008). Three-year follow-up of same-sex couples who had civil unions in Vermont, same-sex couples not in civil unions and heterosexual married couples. Developmental Psychology, 44, 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1....
49.
Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (1992). Assessing commitment in personal relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 595–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/353245.
50.
Stanley, S. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Markman, H. J. (2006). Sliding versus deciding: Inertia and the premarital cohabitation effect. Family Relations, 55, 499–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741....
51.
Stanley, S. M., Whitton, S. W., & Markman, H. J. (2004). Maybe I do: Interpersonal commitment and premarital or non-marital cohabitation. Journal of Family Issues, 25, 496–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251....
52.
Świder, M., & Winiewski, M. (2017). Sytuacja społeczna osób LGBTA w Polsce. Raport za lata 2015-2016 [The social situation of LGBTA people in Poland. Report for 2015-2016]. Kampania Przeciw Homofobii.
53.
Vanderlaan, D. P., & Vasey, P. L. (2008). Mate retention behavior of men and women heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 572–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508....
54.
Whitton, S. W., Kuryluk, A. D., & Khaddouma, M. (2015). Legal and social ceremonies to formalize same-sex relationships: Associations with commitment, social support, and relationship outcomes. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 4, 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp000....
55.
Whitton, S., Dyar, C., Newcomb, M., & Mustanski, B. (2018). Romantic involvement: a protective factor for psychological health in racially-diverse young sexual minorities. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 127, 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn000....
56.
Winer, B. J., Brown, D. R., & Michels, K. M. (1991). Statistical principles in experimental design. Third edition. McGraw-Hill.
57.
Xu, X., Hudspeth, C. D., & Bartkowski, J. P. (2006). The role of cohabitation in remarriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 261–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741....
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.