Patterns of romantic involvement among emerging adults

Abstract

The present study examined patterns of romantic involvement in 100 Israeli emerging adults (54 males) who were followed from age 22 to 29 years. Analyses of interviews at age 29 yielded four distinctive relational patterns that are associated with different levels of concurrent wellbeing: Intimately committed, Intimate, Non- intimately committed, and Non-stable. Low efficacy, immature dependency and low parental support, measured 7 years earlier, predicted less optimal romantic relational patterns—non-stable or non-intimately committed. Continued pursuit of studies predicted a delay in entering a committed relationship, despite the capability for such a relationship. Findings of the study suggest that personality and family attributes explain the type and quality of relationships in which young people will be involved, while contextual factors only explain postponement of commitment.

Keywords

dating relationship quality romantic relationships youth

Emerging adults were described as having difficulties taking the first steps into the adult world (Arnett, 2004; Settersten & Ray, 2010). Fewer young people can be found in long-lasting and committed relationships. Many are in and out of relationships, while an increasing number tends to engage in short-term relationships or casual encounters. Instabilities were mainly understood from a deficit model (Arnett, 2004; European Group for Integrated Social Research [EGRIS], 2001). However, it is possible that due to their pursuit of other tasks, such as education or work, an increasing number of young people deliberately postpone romantic commitment (Caspi, 2002; Shulman & Connolly, 2013). To better understand young people’s relational involvements, it is important to examine the ability of individuals to become intimately involved and remain committed. Employing a multi-method approach, the current study aims to explore the patterns of integrating intimacy and commitment, and the extent to which a relational pattern is adaptive or maladaptive. In addition, the study examines the individual and contextual precursors of the romantic relational patterns.

Statistics and demographic studies from industrialized countries have shown that the period during which young people assume adult responsibilities, gain economic independence and marry has moved to the end of the third decade of life (Arnett, 2004, Settersten & Ray, 2010). Observation of the lives of the majority of young people shows that they may move between transitory and inconsistent states with regard to relationships, similar to observations regarding occupation or residence (EGRIS, 2001). For example, relational instabilities such as “hooking up” and “friends with benefits” have recently appeared as common forms of romantic engagement among emerging adults (Gute & Eshbaugh, 2008; Paul & Hayes, 2002; Puentes, Knox, & Zusman, 2008). Even cohabitation, which in the past often led to commitment and marriage, has become just an additional form of a non-stable relational pattern for many young people (Manning & Smock, 2005).

Considered together, the romantic lives of emerging adults reflect a general pattern of fluidity in life task commitments. Yet, fluctuations during this developmental stage might not necessarily indicate a developmental drawback (Raley, Crissey, & Muller, 2007). Young people are faced with more age-specific tasks and life decisions than at any other stage of their lives (Caspi, 2002; Grob, Krings, & Bangerte, 2001). They have to make decisions about romantic relationships, as well as about their careers, studies and work. Further complicating these intertwined decisions, the lives of emerging adults nowadays are characterized by increased social and economic uncertainties, and decisions taken are not necessarily connected with outcomes (Leccardi, 2006).

This might be especially relevant to our sample, which comprised mainly young people aspiring for higher education. Educational attendance delays attainment of financial independence, as a person becomes more focused on career development (Cohen, Kasen, Chen, Hartmark, & Gordon, 2003). In turn, delayed financial security has a significant influence on commitment and marriage, as women and men see financial stability as a prerequisite for commitment (Smock, Manning, & Porter, 2005). Thus, young people possibly feel less confident to settle down and make commitments due to the changing social and economic contexts, and increased years of schooling (Côté, 2000).

A young person may deliberately decide not to become romantically committed, or even to opt out of a lasting relationship and rather invest in issues related to career, studies or work (te Riele, 2004; Shulman & Connolly, 2013). In contrast, involvement in a long-term, committed relationship may not necessarily indicate greater romantic competence. A young person may “slide” into a relationship that is not necessarily optimal, yet provides some sense of security and economic stability (Rhoades, Stanley, & Markman, 2006). This calls for a more extensive understanding of romantic involvement among emerging adults than whether or not a person is involved in a relationship.

Two theoretical approaches direct our conceptualization of the nature and quality of romantic involvements among young people. The first follows Orlofsky’s (1993) conceptualization that originates from the Eriksonian theory (Erikson, 1968), while the second follows the recent developments in romantic stage theories (Brown, 1999; Connolly & McIsaac, 2009, Seiffge-Krenke, 2003). Erikson (1968) described the crisis of Intimacy versus Isolation in which, as a central task of young adults, individuals are expected to develop intimate relationships with others without fear of losing their identity. Positive outcomes of this stage are the development of close, intimate, loving and sexual relationships. Fear of losing one’s autonomy might lead to repeated disappointment in relationships, resulting in involvement in superficial relationships, or staying lonely.

According to Erikson, intimacy is the establishment of a healthy balance of closeness and individuality, as well as reference to the ability to commit oneself to a relationship (Marcia, 2002), and therefore is especially relevant to our study. In a similar vein, the romantic stage theories also suggest that establishing intimacy precedes commitment to a relationship (Brown, 1999; Connolly & McIsaac, 2009, Seiffge-Krenke, 2003). Following the establishment of both intimacy and commitment, a relationship can turn into the most important source of support as is expected among adults (Connolly & McIsaac, 2009).

Elaborating on Erikson’s conceptualization, Orlofsky (1993) suggested that in assessing a person’s romantic relationships, it is important to consider whether one is involved in a superficial or a deep and intimate relationship, as well as a person’s ability for involvement in an enduring and committed relationship. In healthy relationship development, as in other domains of development such as career, individuals tend to explore and experience a number of possible involvements prior to reaching a more nuanced conception of what suits them best (Marcia, 2002). Subsequently, they are expected to gradually make personal commitments to deep and intimate relationships. Thus, the capability of integrating intimacy and commitment is a better indication of the quality of young people’s romantic involvements than whether they are romantically involved at a given point in time.

The emphasis on intimacy and commitment, and the ability to integrate between the two, is likely to differ between women and men. Socialization theorists have long argued that women place greater value on intimate relationships, whereas men are more likely to focus on their work (Almeida, 2002; Jordan, 2004). Starting from adolescence, females were found to report on higher intimacy than males in their romantic relationships (Shulman, Walsh, Weisman, & Schleyer, 2009), and are more likely to be involved in stable relationships of longer duration; whereas males are more likely to be observed in non-stable or short duration relationships (Carver, Joyner, & Udry 2003; Shulman, Walsh, et al., 2009). Similar gender differences were found among young adults. Compared to men, women tend to be more invested in their romantic relationships (Bartoszuk & Pittman, 2010), feel more committed and make greater efforts to maintain these relationships (Canary & Wahba, 2006), and are less likely to be involved in casual relationships (Dahl, Sengupta, & Vohs, 2009). Yet, more recently the intensity of these differences has been questioned (Perrin et al., 2011) suggesting that women and men behave similarly in their close relationships. Thus, while it is possible that young women will be more likely to be involved intimate, long lasting and committed relationships than young men, the extent of this difference is questionable.

The ability to establish a deep, intimate and committed relationship with a partner is not only related to current societal contexts and gender, but can also be related to personality and relationships with parents (Blatt, 2008; Conger, Cui, Bryant, & Elder, 2000). Experiences in the family of origin set the model for interaction with significant others later in life. Conger and colleagues (2000) demonstrated that adolescents reared in nurturing and supportive families displayed more supportive and less hostile behaviors toward their romantic partners in young adulthood. When parents give their blessing, and support their offspring becoming “separate” adults (Shulman, Kalnitzky & Shahar, 2009), children develop a better ability to balance the needs of self and other. Previous studies have shown that continued availability of parental support, combined with increased personal capabilities of the young person, is essential for meeting developmental tasks and establishing future adaptive relationships as these serve as models for future relationships (Scharf, Mayseless, & Kivenson-Baron, 2004; Seiffge-Krenke, Overbeek, & Vermulst, 2010). Lack of parental support may also lead to lack of validation of true thoughts, feelings, and aspirations, and the development of a self that is oriented toward pleasing the other at the expense of self-assertion, or refraining from establishing relationships that are too close (Harter, Bresnick, Bouchey, & Whitesell, 2007).

According to Blatt, optimally-developing individuals are able to become involved in relationships without losing their sense of self, and strive for achievement and self-definition without neglecting interpersonal relationships. In contrast, individuals who are likely to emphasize interpersonal relatedness, at the expense of self-definition, develop a dependent personality style and their actions may not be autonomously motivated. Efficacy, an adaptive aspect of self-definition in Blatt’s theory, is claimed to be associated with elevated autonomous regulation which, in turn, was found to predict more positive events and better functioning (Blatt, 2008). Thus, it is reasonable to assume that efficacious and interpersonally mature individuals are more able to pursue their own needs and have the confidence to establish intimate and committed relationships. In contrast, highly dependent individuals who are low on efficacy will be less able to commit to a relationship. Alternatively, they may slide into relationships that are less than optimal, even though they are long-lasting.

Establishing an intimate and committed romantic partnership signifies achievement of the developmental task. Emerging adulthood is a time for formulating, adopting and clarifying life goals (Krings, Bangerter, Gomez, & Grob, 2008; Scharf & Mayseless, 2010). Successful completion of expected societal developmental milestones prompts a positive feeling and better ability to cope with subsequent tasks, while failures induce sadness and difficulties in coping with later tasks (Scharf & Mayseless, 2010). Intimate romantic relationships provide a source of emotional support and contribute to emotional, social, and psychological well-being (Meier & Allen, 2009). The benefits of romantic relationships to individuals’ well-being has been demonstrated in previous research (Furman & Shaffer, 2003; Zimmer-Gimbeck & Gallaty, 2010). Achieving life goals and establishing intimacy and commitment may then provide young people with a sense of direction and meaning that promotes well-being and life satisfaction (Luyckx et al., 2006).

The current study examines the study questions in an Israeli sample. Israel is a developed, industrialized and Western culture that emphasizes individualistic values (Schwartz, 1994). Yet, unlike other Western countries, young Israeli adults are subjected to compulsory military service. The vast majority of Jewish youngsters are recruited to service at the age of 18 for a period of 2–3 years. Despite this distinction, statistics suggest that postponement of marriage is similar to that in other industrialized countries (Israel Central Bureau of Statistics, 2011) and young Israeli adults cope with the tasks of emerging adulthood in a similar manner to their counterparts in other developed countries (Shulman & Ben Artzi, 2003). Of note, postponement of marriage among Israeli young people is a wide phenomenon and does occur only among those who pursue higher education (Israel Central Bureau of Statistics, 2011).

The study is aimed at identifying the patterns of integrating intimacy and commitment among emerging adults. We expect to find different constellations of balancing intimacy and commitment, which will represent adaptive and less adaptive patterns. In line with the gender-role socialization model (Jordan, 2004), we also explore whether young women are more likely to be observed in stable and committed relationships, while men will be more represented in the non-committed patterns.

Considering the increasing difficulties nowadays in coordinating relational commitment and pursuit of studies and work, we hypothesize that young people who are still pursuing their careers, and are not yet fully committed to their careers, are less likely to be involved in committed relationships. In addition, we hypothesize that personality attributes (personal efficacy and low dependency) and family support (assessed 7 years earlier) will further contribute to the likelihood of integrating intimacy and commitment. Finally, we hypothesize that young adults who are intimately involved and committed will exhibit higher levels of concurrent psychosocial functioning (that is, life satisfaction, goal attainment and fewer psychological symptoms) compared to those whose relational involvement is not intimate or committed, and compared with those who are in and out of relationships.

Method

Participants and procedure

Participants in the first assessment were 285 Israeli emerging adults (154 men and 131 women; Mean age = 23.01, SD = 1.71) enrolled in two preparatory academic programs located at two different colleges, one in central Israel and one in the south of Israel. The preparatory academic programs are government sponsored and aim to promote academic studies among young people who aspire for higher education but have not completed successfully their high school education, or not attained a high school diploma. Mean level of parental education was 11.92 years of schooling (SD = 2.55) for fathers and 11.52 years of schooling (SD = 2.50) for mothers. Thus, the sample represents mainly a low middle-class background. The vast majority of the sample was unmarried (95.7%). After obtaining the approval of the academic programmes, consent of the participants was requested. We were able to secure voluntary participation of 96% of students at this stage.

This sample was re-assessed at three later times. In the current study, we report on data collected at the first, third (3.5 years later) and fourth (2.5 years after the third assessment) assessments. The fourth assessment included a random sub-sample of 100 participants who were assessed in-depth interviews capturing their romantic status. At the fourth assessment, 68% reported romantic involvement, among them 35 reported to be married while two reported that they had divorced.

Participants completed demographic data including gender, age, education, work hours, residence, marital status and whether or not they were currently in a relationship. In addition, they completed a battery of inventories. In the current study we refer to personality indices and parental support as assessed at T1, and number of work hours and study hours per week collected at T3. At T4 the romantic status was assessed via in-depth interviews. In addition, information about attainment of goals, life satisfaction and number of depressive and anxiety symptoms was also collected at the fourth assessment. The sub-sample of the 100 interviewees at T4 did not differ from the rest of the sample on demographic and personality indices.

Measures

All the measures were administered in Hebrew, the native language of this sample, and all have been widely used with Hebrew-speaking participants in the past. The psychometric properties of the Hebrew versions are good. No inventory was translated for this study.

T1 assessment

Personality

Participants’ personality was assessed by the 66-item Depressive Experience Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, D’Afflitti, & Quinlan, 1976) rated on a 7-point scale. Two scales from the DEQ were used in the current study: Immature dependency that reflects a wish to be cared for, loved and protected, as well as a fear of being abandoned (e.g., “Without the support of others who are close to me, I would be helpless”), and Efficacy that represents personal resilience and inner strength (e.g., “I have many inner resources”). Cronbach’s alphas for immature dependency and efficacy were .73 and .79, respectively.

Parental support

The Network of Relationship Inventory, (NRI; Furman & Buhrmester, 1985) assessed perceived parental support. For the each parent participants rated (from 1 = low to 5 = high) the quality of support across 8 items (i.e., “I can rely on …”). Cronbach’s alphas for perceived support from mother and father were .91, .89 respectively. Due to the high correlation between maternal and paternal support, r = .67, the two were combined into one index of parental support.

T3 assessment

Study and work hours

Participants indicated the number of hours per week for study and work. A higher number of studying indicates that a person is still pursuing his or her career. In contrast, a higher number of working is assumed to indicate that a person has already settled down.

T4 assessment

Psychosocial functioning

Personal goals

A modified version of Little’s Personal Project Analysis (Little, 1983) was used to assess goal progress. Participants were asked to list three personal projects and appraise each project along four dimensions (using a 7-point Likert scale), to assess their sense of progress in the pursuit of personal goals (i.e., “to what extent have you made progress realizing this project”). For the current study, the comprised score of Goal Progress across different domains of listed goals was computed; Cronbach’s alpha was .89.

Mental health

Using the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI; Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983), participants rated the frequency of their symptoms on a five-point scale, ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely) with regard to the subscales of depression and anxiety symptoms (six items each). Cronbach’s alphas for the depression and anxiety subscales were .92 and .89, respectively.

Life satisfaction scale

An adapted version of the Life Satisfaction Scale–College version (Zullig, Huebner, Patton, & Murray, 2009) was used, consisting of 13 items more typical for young people in their late 20s, and including different domains such as family, friends, work, mood, and financial status. Participants were asked to rate the items on a scale from 1 = not satisfied to 5 = very satisfied. Internal consistency of the scale was .86.

Intimacy status interview

The Orlofsky Intimacy Status Interview (Orlofsky, 1993; Orlofsky & Roades, 1993) is a semi-structured interview lasting 60–90 minutes, designed to examine individuals’ inter-personal attitudes and behavior, and their capacity for intimacy in romantic relationships (all but two participants reported heterosexual romantic relationships). Participants were asked about emotional closeness, conflict resolution, involvement and autonomy, satisfaction and commitment in their relationships with past and/or present romantic partners. The interview assesses the capacity for intimacy based on past and present relationships, even if the respondent is not currently in a romantic relationship, and captures optimal ability, not necessarily current characteristics. For example, with regard to self-disclosure the rater assesses the extent to which such disclosure was apparent based on the quality of past and present relationships. The interviews were audio-taped and rated, according to the manual (Orlofsky & Roades, 1993), on nine scales (ranging from 1 = the low end of the scale to 5 = the high end): commitment(duration and quality); communication (intra-and inter-personal); caring/affection; knowledge of partner’s traits; perspective-taking; power/decision-making; maintaining own interest; acceptance of partner’s separateness; and dependency/detachment. To establish reliability, 25 interviews were coded by both raters. Inter-rater reliabilities ranged from .84 to .91.

Based on scale scores, participants were classified by two raters into one of the following intimacy statuses (Orlofsky & Roades, 1993): Isolates, who had not had any romantic relationship with a partner; Stereotypes, who lacked open communication and emotional closeness in their relationships and had not established any long-term commitment; Pseudo-intimate participants, who lacked closeness in their relationships yet had established a long-term commitment; Mergers/committed who had established long-term relationships but were highly dependent on their partners to the extent of waiving their own interests and sense of separateness; Mergers/uncommitted also characterized by high enmeshment but in a non-committed relationship; Pre-intimates, who are currently, or had been, involved in an affectionate, deep and mutually respecting relationship yet are, or were, not committed to this relationship; and Intimates, whose relationships are optimal, as those of the pre-intimates, but they are highly committed to their relationships. The Orlofsky Intimacy Status Interview was used in the past with late adolescents and college students. The current study, conducted on older emerging adults, yielded an additional status of relationships; participants who were involved in a long lasting and committed relationships, though of very low quality. We termed this status Conflictual but committed. There was 96% agreement between two different raters on 25 interviews.

Results

We first identified different patterns of romantic involvement at age 29, and looked at their distribution across gender. Next, we examined the contextual and personal-familial predictors of different romantic involvement patterns. Finally, level of psychosocial functioning of participants from different groups was compared.

Patterns of romantic involvement

In line with the literature reviewed above on romantic intimacy (Erikson, 1968) and the romantic stage theories (Brown, 1999; Connolly & McIsacc, 2009), we collapsed the eight Orlofsky (Orlofsky & Roades, 1993) statuses into four patterns capturing the extent that intimacy and/or commitment was attained in a relationship:

Non Stable – (low on intimacy and commitment) included the following statuses: Isolates, Stereotypes and Mergers/uncommitted, and refers to individuals who have difficulties establishing relationships and maintaining these for longer than two months.

Non-intimate commitment included individuals who reported involvement in lasting relationships, however these relationships were not intimate and mutually respecting. This pattern included the Pseudo-intimate, Mergers/committed and Conflictual but committed statuses.

Intimate included individuals who are, or were, involved in an intimate relationship but could not indicate commitment and future plans. This pattern included the Pre-intimate status.

Intimately committed refers to involvement in an intimate and mutually satisfying relationship with high commitment to the relationship, and included the Intimate status.

Frequencies of the four romantic statuses showed that 28% of our 100 participants were intimately committed and an additional 13% were involved, or had the capacity to be involved, in an intimate relationship but were not committed (Intimate), and 26% were involved in long lasting relationships that were not truly balanced and intimate (Non-intimate commitment). The rest, 33%, had either not been romantically involved for extended periods of time or were more likely to be in and out of relationships (Non-stable). Tabulation of patterns of romantic involvement across gender showed that young women were significantly more likely to belong to the Non-intimate commitment pattern (20 out of 26) compared to young men. In contrast, young men were significantly more likely to belong to the Intimate but not committed pattern compared to women (11 out of 13); χ ² (df = 3) = 10.02, p < .001.

Predictors of patterns of romantic involvement during emerging adulthood

The longitudinal data allowed us to examine the predictors of membership in the different relational patterns. For this purpose, a multinomial regression analysis was conducted to predict membership in the different patterns of romantic status. Following our hypotheses, indices of efficacy, immature dependency and parental support measured at T1 were entered as predictors. In order to examine whether status of work or studies also affects romantic status, we planned to enter number of work and study hours per week at the third assessment, as hypothesized. However, inspection of the data suggested that while number of study hours indicated continuation of studies, there were young people who were still studying while also working for a significant number of hours per week to support themselves. Thus, number of work hours per week could not indicate full involvement in a career. For this reason, only the number of study hours per week at the third assessment was entered into the equation.

Results showed that romantic patterns were significantly predicted by personality, parental support and number of study hours per week, χ² (12) = 42.92, p < .001. The Cox value was .38. As can be seen from Table 1, members of the Non-stable romantic pattern scored two and a half times higher on immature dependency at the first measurement, compared to members of the Intimately-committed pattern. In addition, their level of efficacy was half that reported by the members of the intimately-committed pattern. Finally, they also reported a low level of parental support. Members of the non-intimately committed pattern reported a level of parental support that was a third of that reported by members of the intimately-committed pattern. In addition, they were more likely to report a higher level of immature dependency though this tendency was only marginally significant. Members of the intimate and intimately-committed patterns did not differ on personality attributes and parental support. However, as can be seen in Table 1, members of the intimate pattern were three times more likely than members of the intimately committed pattern to still be in a full study program at the third assessment.

Table 1.

Results of the multinomial regression analysis predicting membership in relationship patterns (comparisons of the three alternative patterns to the intimately committed pattern)

	Non-stable			Non-intimate commitment			Intimate
	B_b	Wald	OR	B_b	Wald	OR	B_b	Wald	OR
T1 Efficacy	−.80	7.16**	.49	−.33	1.21	.27	−.54	1.66	.58
T1 Immature dependency	.93	6.87**	2.52	.60	2.99+	1.82	.80	2.70	2.29
T1 Parental support	−1.19	6.70*	.30	−1.10	5.76*	.33	−.47	.57	.63
T2 Educational involvement	.04	.06	.81	.06	.11	.75	1.19	5.54*	3.23

Note. + p < .10; * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

Patterns of romantic involvement and psychosocial functioning

A MANOVA was conducted to compare indices of psychosocial functioning across the four patterns of romantic involvement. This revealed a significant difference across the four groups, with a moderate effect size; Wilks (df [12, 230]) = 3.68, p < .0001, η ² = .14. For means, standard deviations, univariate F levels and effect sizes, see Table 2). A closer inspection of the univariate comparisons showed that the members of the Non-stable romantic pattern reported a lower level of goal progress compared to members of the other three romantic patterns. In addition, members of the Non-stable and the Non-intimately committed patterns reported a higher level of depressive symptoms compared to the two intimate patterns: committed and non-committed.

Table 2.

Levels of wellbeing across the four intimacy statuses: Means, SDs, F values and effect sizes

	Non-stable	Non-intimate commitment	Intimate	Intimately committed	F	η ²
Life satisfaction	3.48 (.76)	3.41 (.69)	3.91 (.60)	3.81 (.79)	2.05	.06
Goal attainment	4.36_a (1.35)	5.52_b (.72)	5.14_b (1.03)	5.61_b (.73)	8.88***	.23
Depressive symptoms	.1.26_a (1.14)	1.04_a (.86)	.47_b (.55)	.49_b (.53)	4.88**	.14
Anxiety symptoms	.1.14 (1.03)	1.12 (.88)	1.00 (.54)	.86 (.68)	.60	.02

Note. * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

Different subscripts indicate statistically significant differences between types at the p < .05 level.

Discussion

By analyzing in-depth interview data, and guided by Erikson’s (1968) theory and the romantic stage models (Brown, 1999; Connolly & McIsaac, 2009; Seiffge-Krenke, 2003) we found young people’s romantic involvement could be characterized by different constellations of integrating intimacy and commitment. The majority of our participants are characterized by patterns indicating a variety of difficulties in successfully integrating intimacy and commitment. A substantial part of our sample had difficulties either developing intimacy becoming committed. Almost a third of the sample had difficulties both developing intimacy entering commitment, and had either not been romantically involved for an extended period of time or were more likely to be in and out of relationships. The rest revealed two different constellations of the intimacy and commitment dialectics. One group was involved in intimate relationships lacking commitment, while the other group was committed to their relationships, although these were not necessarily intimate or adaptive. Only 28% of our participants had reached the optimal integration of intimacy and commitment and were intimately committed. Our findings are in line with the documented recent tendency of postponing romantic commitment and of relational fluctuations (Arnett, 2004; Meier & Allen, 2009). Yet, our findings provide a more comprehensive understanding about the quality of relationships of those who are romantically involved, and the ability for involvement and commitment among those who were not romantically involved at the time of assessment.

According to Erikson’s theory (1968), as well as to the recent developmental theories (Brown, 1999; Connolly and Goldberg, 1999; Connolly & McIsaac, 2009; Seiffge-Krenke, 2003), commitment optimally follows the establishment of deep and intimate relationships. The intimately-committed pattern represents progression on both dimensions, whereas the intimate but not committed pattern represents those young people who have not yet reached the stage of commitment (Brown, 1999; Connolly & Goldberg, 1999). The question is how some young people have become committed despite the lack of intimacy.

When partners are unable to balance self and other needs and establish intimacy, some may enter into superficial or unstable relationships (Erikson, 1968). However, as Wynne (1984) suggested, others may compromise for the sake of security and remain in relationships that are not optimal. Thus, there may be two patterns of committed relationships. The intimately committed have successfully negotiated issues of closeness and individuality that lead to the establishment of intimacy and true mutuality (Wynne, 1984), and on this basis, commitment was consolidated. The non-intimately committed are involved in relationships that are not very close and supportive, or where one of the partners was highly-controlling of or dependent upon the other. Nevertheless, they were committed to the relationship. This process of consolidating a relationship that has not progressed through true exploration or negotiation with a partner, recalls the “foreclosure” construct described in the Eriksonian theory. It is possible that among those who are unable to achieve true intimacy with a partner, a substantial number may settle down for the sake of stability and security (Marcia, 2002).

Gender differences emerged related to belonging to two different romantic status patterns. Women were more likely to be found in the non-intimately committed pattern, while men were over-represented in the intimate but non-committed pattern. Women place high emphasis on relationships and are probably more willing to waive personal preferences in order to have and maintain a relationship intact. Previous theory and research suggests that women are in greater need of continued connection (Jordan, 2004), while men have a greater need to establish feelings of competence, self-definition and autonomy. Men, contrary to women, perhaps deliberately tend to postpone their commitment until they have completed their studies and can be more competent in providing for a family (Almeida, 2002). This gender distinction also fits the sexual strategies evolutionary theory (Buss & Schmitt, 1993), stating that men are more inclined to short term relationships while women, in contrast, prefer long term relationships. Interestingly, no gender differences were found in the most optimal pattern, the intimately committed, and the least optimal pattern, the non-stable. It is possible that the effect of distinct gender role socialization appears more in the “in-between” patterns, whereas the solidified patterns are more affected by individual and contextual factors, as will be outlined below.

In line with our additional hypotheses, our findings showed that personality, family support and contextual factors collected seven years earlier explain why some young people became involved in adaptive or less-adaptive relationships. Immature dependency, and the lack of confidence to assert oneself within a relationship and waive personal preferences, combined with lower parental support, could lead young people to look for and commit to non-intimate relationships that were characterized by either elevated fusion or distance between partners. This finding is in line with the large corpus of research suggesting that a non-autonomous state of mind or insecure attachment history, combined with low family support, predicts involvement in unhealthy relationships (Conger, Cui, Bryant & Elder, 2000; Mayseless & Scharf, 2007; Oriña et al, 2011; Scharf et al., 2004). In a similar vein, the combination of these deficiencies, and a lower sense of efficacy, is likely to be associated with greater involvement in non-stable romantic encounters, as was found among the members of the non-stable pattern.

Personality and family variables did not predict belonging to the intimate but non-committed pattern. We found that members of this pattern were more likely to pursue their studies, which probably led to postponement of their commitment, although they were capable of intimate involvement. Pursuing one’s career has an impact on the feasibility of a romantic relationship and commitment (Manning, Giordano, Longmore, & Hocevar, 2011). This is particularly relevant under the current conditions of uncertainty, which lead young people to postpone starting a family (Mills & Blossfeld, 2009), and might be especially salient among young people who aspire for higher education, such as those in our sample (Schoon, Ross, & Martin, 2009).

In line with these findings, we would suggest that personal and contextual variables have different effects on relational timetables and outcomes. Personal deficiencies such as low efficacy, immature dependency and low parental support affected the quality of peoples’ relationships, leading either to relational instabilities or commitment to non-adaptive relational patterns. In contrast, contextual factors such as the need to complete one’s studies before starting a family led young people to postpone commitment, but did not affect the quality of their relationships. As we have shown, these young people were able to establish, and be involved in, intimate relationships for an extended period of time.

Some support for this suggestion can be found by comparing members of the different relational patterns on indices of psychosocial functioning. In line with our last hypothesis, we found that those who were involved in non-stable relationships reported lower levels of goal progress and more depressive symptoms compared to those who were involved in more optimal relational patterns: the intimately committed and the intimate. The members of the non-intimately committed pattern fell in between. On the one hand they described having progressed in their goal pursuit, similarly to those in the optimal patterns. Being in a stable relationship, regardless of its quality, probably enhances the sense of goal attainment. On the other hand, they also reported more depressive symptoms, similar to the level reported by members of the non-stable relational pattern. It is likely that not being able to make the transition to a truly intimate relationship is associated with a lower level of mental health (Englund, Kuo, Puig, & Collins, 2011; Lee & Gramotnev, 2007). In contrast, the ability to become intimately involved, even prior to commitment (due to contextual circumstances), was associated with better psychosocial functioning. It is likely that among these young people, not being committed represents a postponement of settling down that is driven by contextual factors rather than by personality difficulties.

Although the results provide a new understanding of the nature and quality of romantic relationships among emerging adults, the study has some limitations. The sample represents a particular group that aspired to obtain a college education, and consisted mainly of young people from lower middle class families. Young people from more privileged backgrounds have more resources available, and their romantic timetables might differ from those who are less privileged (Schoon et al., 2009). This study was conducted on young Israeli adults. As outlined above, Israel is a Western culture and when making the transition to adulthood, young Israelis face dilemmas and uncertainties similar to those of their counterparts in other Western countries (Mayseless & Scharf, 2003). However, there are also findings suggesting that despite these similarities, different sexual behavior trajectories among males and females are found in different cultures, including Israel (Shtarkshall, Carmel, Jaffe-Hirschfield, & Woloski-Wruble, 2009). Future studies could indicate whether the pattern of our findings would be replicated in a different culture and in upper middle class families.

Using in-depth interviews enabled a more comprehensive understanding of the romantic involvements of emerging adults. Learning about young people’s capabilities to integrate intimacy and commitment in their relationships is more indicative of their romantic status and functioning than whether they are romantically involved at a specific point in time. In addition, our longitudinal data indicate that increase in years of schooling contributes to the postponement of romantic commitment, but is less likely to affect the quality of romantic involvement. In contrast, personal attributes and family support play a dominant role in the quality of relationships in which young people become involved. Thus, contextual and personal attributes can explain the recent changes in the romantic involvements of emerging adults, although each has a distinctive role in this process.

Footnotes

Funding

This study was supported by the Israeli Science Foundation, ISF - Grant # 1016/05.

References

Almeida

D. M.

(2002).Using daily diaries to assess temporal friction between work and family. In Crouter

A. C.

Booth

(Eds.), Work-family challenges for low income parents and their children (pp. 127–136). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Arnett

J. J.

(2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Bartoszuk

Pittman

J. F.

(2010). Profiles of identity exploration and commitment across domains. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 19(4), 444–450.

Blatt

S. J.

(2008). Polarities of experience, relatedness and self-definition in personality development, psychopathology, and the therapeutic process. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Blatt

S. J.

D’Afflitti

J. P.

Quinlan

D. M.

(1976). Experiences of depression in normal young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 95, 383–389.

Brown

B. B.

(1999). “You’re going out with whom?” Peer group influences on adolescent romantic relationships. In Furman

Brown

B. B.

Feiring

(Eds.), The development of romantic relationships in adolescence (pp. 291–329). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Buss

D. M.

Schmitt

D. P.

(1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232.

Canary

D. J.

Wahba

(2006). Do women work harder than men at maintaining relationships? In Dindia

Canary

D. J.

(Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed, pp. 359–377). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Carver

Joyner

Udry

J. R.

(2003). National estimates of adolescent romantic relationships. In Florsheim

(Ed.), Adolescent romantic relations and sexual behavior: Theory, research, and practical implication (pp. 23–56). Mahvah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

10.

Caspi

(2002). Social selection, social causation, and developmental pathways: Empirical strategies for better understanding how individuals and environments are linked across the life-course. In Pulkkinen

Caspi

(Eds.), Paths to successful development: Personality in the life course (pp. 281–301). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Cohen

Kasen

Chen

Hartmark

Gordon

(2003). Variations in patterns of developmental transitions in the emerging adulthood period. Developmental Psychology, 39(4), 657–669.

12.

Conger

R. D.

Cui

Bryant

C. M.

Elder

G. H.,

Jr (2000). Competence in early adult romantic relationships: A developmental perspective on family influences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(2), 224–237.

13.

Connolly

Goldberg

(1999). Romantic relationships in adolescence: The role of friends and peers in their emergence. In: Furman

(Eds.), The development of romantic relationships in adolescence (pp. 266–290). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

14.

Connolly

McIsaac

(2009). Adolescents’ explanations for romantic dissolutions: A developmental perspective. Journal of Adolescence, 32(5), 1209–1223.

15.

Côté

J. E.

(2000). Arrested adulthood: The changing nature of maturity and identity. New York: New York University Press.

16.

Dahl

D. W.

Sengupta

Vohs

K. D.

(2009). Sex in advertising: Gender differences and the role of relationship commitment. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 215–231.

17.

Derogatis

L. R.

Melisaratos

(1983). The Brief Symptom Inventory: An introductory report. Psychological Medicine, 13, 595–605.

18.

Englund

M. M.

Kuo

S. I.-C.

Puig

Collins

W. A.

(2011). Early roots of adult competence: The significance of close relationships from infancy to early adulthood. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(6), 490–496.

19.

Erikson

E. H.

(1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.

20.

European Group for Integrated Social Research [EGRIS] (2001) Misleading trajectories: Transition dilemmas of young adults in Europe. Journal of Youth Studies, 4, 101–118.

21.

Furman

Buhrmester

(1985). Children’s perceptions of the personal relationships in their social networks. Developmental Psychology, 21(6), 1016–1024.

22.

Furman

Shaffer

(2003). The role of romantic relationships in adolescent development. In Florsheim

(Ed.), Adolescent romantic relations and sexual behavior: Theory, research, and practical implication (pp. 3–22). Mahvah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

23.

Grob

Krings

Bangerte

(2001). Life markers in biographical narratives of people from three cohorts: A life span perspective in its historical context. Human Development, 44(4), 171–190.

24.

Gute

Eshbaugh

E. M.

(2008). Personality as a predictor of hooking up among college students. Journal of Community Health Nursing, 25(1), 26–43.

25.

Harter

Bresnick

Bouchey

H. A.

Whitesell

N. R.

(1997). The development of multiple role-related selves during adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 9(4), 835–853.

26.

Israel Central Bureau of Statistics. (2011). Working paper series No. 63 – The relationship between education and successful marriage. Jerusalem, Israel: Central Bureau of Statistics – The Chief Scientist Department.

27.

Jordan

J. V.

(2004). Toward competence and connection. In Jordan

J. V.

Walker

Hartling

L. M.

(Eds.), The complexity of connection: Writings from the Stone Center’s Jean Baker Miller Training Institute (pp. 11–27). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

28.

Krings

Bangerter

Gomez

Grob

(2008). Cohort differences in personal goals and life satisfaction in young adulthood. Evidence from historical shifts in developmental tasks. Journal of Adult Development, 15(2), 93–105.

29.

Leccardi

(2006). Facing uncertainty, temporality and biographies in the new century. In Leccardi

Ruspini

(Eds.), New youth? Young people, generations and family life (pp. 15–40). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

30.

Lee

Gramotnev

(2007). Life transitions and mental health in a national cohort of young Australian women. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 877–888.

31.

Little

B. R.

(1983). Personal projects: A rationale and method for investigation. Environment and Behavior, 15, 273–309.

32.

Luyckx

Goossens

Soenens

(2006). A developmental contextual perspective on identity construction in emerging adulthood: Change dynamics in commitment formation and commitment evaluation. Developmental Psychology, 42, 366−380.

33.

Manning

W. D.

Giordano

P. S.

Longmore

M. A.

Hocevar

(2011). Romantic relationships and academic/career trajectories in early adulthood. In Fincham

F. D.

Cui

(Eds.), Romantic relationships in emerging adulthood (pp. 317–333). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

34.

Manning

W. D.

Smock

P. J.

(2005). Measuring and modeling cohabitation: New perspectives from qualitative data. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 989–1002.

35.

Marcia

J. E.

(2002). Identity and psychosocial development in adulthood. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 2(1), 7–28.

36.

Mayseless

Scharf

(2003). What does it mean to be an adult? The Israeli experience. New Directions in Child Development, 100, 5–20.

37.

Mayseless

Scharf

(2007). Adolescents’ attachment representations and their capacity for intimacy in close relationships. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 17(1), 23–50.

38.

Meier

Allen

(2009). Romantic relationships from adolescence to young adulthood: Evidence from the national longitudinal study of adolescent health. Sociological Quarterly, 50(2), 308–335.

39.

Mills

Blossfeld

H.-P.

(2009). Uncertain and unable to commit: A fourteen-country comparison of the impact of globalization on the early life course. In Schoon

Silbereisen

R. K.

(Eds.), The Jacobs foundation series on adolescence. Transitions from school to work: Globalization, individualization, and patterns of diversity (pp. 95–117). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

40.

Oriña

M. M.

Collins

W. A.

Simpson

J. A.

Salvatore

J. E.

Haydon

K. C.

Kim

J. S.

(2011). Developmental and dyadic perspectives on commitment in adult romantic relationships. Psychological Science, 22(7), 908–915.

41.

Orlofsky

J. L.

(1993). Intimacy status: theory and research. In: Marcia

(Ed.), Ego Identity: A Handbook for Psychological Research (pp. 111–133). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.

42.

Orlofsky

J. L.

Roades

L. A.

(1993). Intimacy status interview and rating scales. In Marcia

J. E.

(Ed.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychological research (pp. 334–358). New York, NY: Springer.

43.

Paul

Hayes

(2002). The casualties of “Casual” sex: A qualitative exploration of the phenomenology of college students’ hookups. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19(5), 639–661.

44.

Perrin

P. B.

Heesacker

Tiegs

T. J.

Swan

L. K.

Lawrence

A. W.

Jr Smith

M. B.

Mejia-Millan

C. M.

(2011). Aligning Mars and Venus: The social construction and instability of gender differences in romantic relationships. Sex Roles, 64 (9 –10), 613–628.

45.

Puentes

Knox

Zusman

M. E.

(2008). Participants in “friends with benefits” relationships. College Student Journal, 42(1), 176–180.

46.

Raley

R. K. E.

Crissey

S. A.

Muller

C. H.

(2007). Of sex and romance: Late adolescent relationships and young adult union formation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(5), 1210–1226.

47.

Rhoades

G. K.

Stanley

S. M.

Markman

H. J.

(2006). Pre-engagement cohabitation and gender asymmetry in marital commitment. Journal of Family Psychology, 20(4), 553–560.

48.

Schwartz

S. H.

(1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In Kim

Triandis

H. C.

Kağıtçıbaşı

Ç.

Choi

S. C.

Yoon

, G. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism (pp. 85–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

49.

Scharf

Mayseless

(2010). Findings the authentic self in a communal culture: Developmental goals in emerging adulthood. New Directions in Child and Adolescent Development, 130, 83–95.

50.

Scharf

Mayseless

Kivenson-Baron

(2004). Adolescents’ attachment representations and developmental tasks in emerging adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 40(3), 430–444.

51.

Schoon

Ross

Martin

(2009). Sequences, patterns, and variations in the assumption of work and family-related roles: Evidence from two British birth cohorts. In: Schoon

Silbereisen

R. K.

(Eds.), Transitions from school to work: Globalization, individualization, and patterns of diversity, The Jacobs foundation series on adolescence (pp. 219–242). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

52.

Seiffge-Krenke

(2003). Testing theories of romantic development from adolescence to young adulthood: Evidence of a developmental sequence. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27(6), 519–531.

53.

Seiffge-Krenke

Overbeek

Vermulst

(2010). Parent–child relationship trajectories during adolescence: Longitudinal associations with romantic outcomes in emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 33(1), 159–171.

54.

Settersten

R. A.

Jr Ray

(2010). What’s going on with young people today? The long and twisting path to adulthood. The Future of Children, 20(1), 19–41.

55.

Shulman

Ben-Artzi

(2003). Age-related differences in the transition from adolescence to adulthood and links with family relationships. Journal of Adult Development, 10(4), 217–226.

56.

Shulman

, & Connolly. (2013). The challenge of romantic relationships in emerging adulthood: Reconceptualization of the field. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 1–13.

57.

Shulman

Kalnitzki

Shahar

(2009). Meeting developmental challenges during emerging adulthood: The role of personality and social resources. Journal of Adolescent Research, 24(2), 242–267.

58.

Shulman

Walsh

Weisman

Schelyer

(2009). Romantic contexts, sexual behavior, and depressive symptoms among adolescent males and females. Sex Roles, 61 (11–12), 850–863.

59.

Shtarkshall

R. A.

Carmel

Jaffe-Hirschfield

Woloski-Wruble

(2009). Sexual milestones and factors associated with coitus initiation among Israeli high school students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(4), 591–604.

60.

Smock

P. J.

Manning

W. D.

Porter

M. J

. (2005). “Everything’s there except money”: How money shapes decisions to marry among cohabitors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 680–696.

61.

te Reiele

(2004). Youth transition in Australia: Challenging assumptions of linearity and choice. Journal of Youth Studies, 7(3), 243–257.

62.

Wynne

L. C.

(1984). The epigenesis of relational systems: A model for understanding family development. Family Process, 23, 297–318.

63.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

Gallaty

K. J.

(2006). Hanging out or hanging in: Young females’ socioemotional functioning and the changing motives for dating and romance. In Columbus

A. M.

(Ed.), Advances in psychology research, Vol. 44 (pp. 87–112). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

64.

Zullig

K. J.

Huebner

E. S.

Patton

J. M.

Murray

K. A.

(2009). The brief multidimensional students’ life satisfaction scale–College version. American Journal of Health Behavior, 33(5), 483–493.