Volume 48 - Article 23 | Pages 641–680 Author has provided data and code for replicating results

Adult children’s union type and contact with mothers: A replication

By Martin Kreidl, Zuzana Žilinčíková

Print this page  Facebook  Twitter


Date received:19 Oct 2022
Date published:05 May 2023
Word count:8080
Keywords:cohabitation, intergenerational contacts, marriage
Additional files:readme.48-23 (text file, 1 kB)
 demographic-research.48-23 (zip file, 23 kB)


Background: Several studies show that cohabiting adult children have less frequent contact with their mothers than married adult children. We argue that these findings might be spurious due to confounding.

Objective: Our aim is to replicate earlier research using more robust statistical instruments from the family of multi-level models with fixed effects, which are known to offer better control of omitted-variable bias. We also want to show the extent to which union-type effects vary across countries and by parenthood status.

Methods: We use data from the SHARE survey. Mothers are the primary respondents and report on contact with all their children as well as on their children’s union type. We apply mother-level fixed effects (i.e., within-mother comparisons) to see if the frequency of contact depends on the child’s union type (distinguishing marriage and unmarried cohabitation).

Results: We find no overall association between the adult child’s union status and the frequency of intergenerational contact with the mother. While there are some differences across countries in this effect, these are uncorrelated with the prevalence of unmarried cohabitation, any typology of family systems, or the prevailing type of unmarried cohabitation.

Conclusions: We failed to replicate previously reported associations between children’s union type and frequency of intergenerational contact. We conclude that the earlier findings are spurious and cannot be interpreted causally.

Contribution: Unmarried cohabitations should not be seen as ‘incomplete institutions.’ Cohabitors are not excluded from family networks and intergenerational exchanges on the basis of their union status.

Author's Affiliation

Martin Kreidl - Masarykova Univerzita, Czech Republic [Email]
Zuzana Žilinčíková - Universität zu Köln, Germany [Email]

Other articles by the same author/authors in Demographic Research

» Who moves out and who keeps the home? Short-term and medium-term mobility consequences of grey divorce in Belgium
Volume 45 - Article 9

» Parental separation and children’s education in a comparative perspective: Does the burden disappear when separation is more common?
Volume 36 - Article 3

Most recent similar articles in Demographic Research

» A register-based account of period trends in union prevalence, entries, and exits by educational level for men and women in Finland
Volume 48 - Article 14    | Keywords: cohabitation, marriage

» Socioeconomic preconditions to union formation: Exploring variation by migrant background
Volume 45 - Article 32    | Keywords: cohabitation, marriage

» Recent trends in the Chinese family: National estimates from 1990 to 2010
Volume 44 - Article 25    | Keywords: cohabitation, marriage

» Stable cohabitational unions increase quality of life: Retrospective analysis of partnership histories also reveals gender differences
Volume 40 - Article 24    | Keywords: cohabitation, marriage

» Joint lifestyles and the risk of union dissolution: Differences between marriage and cohabitation
Volume 39 - Article 15    | Keywords: cohabitation, marriage