Relationship science has traditionally occupied itself with the characteristics of satisfying relationships along with the antecedents and consequences of relationship dissolution. Yet, even in its genesis, relationship science has been critiqued for neglecting the changing environments that relationships exist within (Berscheid, Reference Berscheid1999). According to Berscheid (Reference Berscheid1999), relationship science must transcend individual, monodisciplinary perspectives in order to be a “cohesive force” in identifying aspects of the environment that support and undermine relationship functioning. More than two decades later, how far have scholars come? What aspects of historical context and what cohort effects have relationship scholars examined and overlooked? This chapter discusses historical and cohort effects in romantic relationships in relation to sociohistorical events. In doing so, we review extant research and highlight the interplay between the historical context that relationships operate within and the interactions of romantic partners.

Much of scholars’ understanding of the historical context of marriage comes from the work of family historians. These scholars highlight the lack of novelty in the ways we do family, while underscoring the novelty of co-occurring family forms. For example, Coontz (Reference Coontz2016) describes families as “the way we never were,” highlighting the inconsistencies in idealistic views of traditional family structure and realities of modern family structure. Although diverse family structures are not new, Coontz describes a “rapidly changing and diversifying family environment” that has influenced the social role of marriage (Coontz, Reference Coontz2015, p. 10). Historically, marriage was a central social institution that organized political and economic rights in society and provided a structure for the transfer of assets within families (Coontz, Reference Coontz2004). Today, marriage is less central to economic and political rights – although married individuals have access to certain rights, privileges, and responsibilities that unmarried people do not – a phenomenon deemed the “deinstitutionalization of marriage” (Cherlin, Reference Cherlin2004). The changing social and political environment of marriage has created a social landscape where multiple ways of coupling exist simultaneously, even if they are not all legally recognized. Notably, rather than experiencing uncertainty around the norms governing marriage, individuals may question whether they should squeeze their way of doing partnering into the institutionalized version of marriage (Lauer & Yodanis, Reference Lauer and Yodanis2010).

Alongside changes in how people “do” marriage came adjustments in what individuals expected from romantic partners. Rather than seeking a partner to secure basic needs like security, people began to seek partners for emotional fulfillment (Coontz, Reference Coontz2004). These increased demands came with more satisfying relationships, as long as partners were able to meet higher order needs (Finkel et al., Reference Finkel, Hui, Carswell and Larson2014). Notably, there is wide variation in how individuals may (or may not) rely on intimate partnerships to meet higher order needs (Pietromonaco & Perry-Jenkins, Reference Pietromonaco and Perry-Jenkins2014). Although couples with the capacity to meet higher expectations may experience greater satisfaction within their relationships (McNulty, Reference McNulty, Olson and Zanna2016), data capturing what individuals desire from their romantic partnerships across relationship structures (e.g., monogamous vs. pluralistic partnering), lifespan, culture, and other critical intersectional social positions is slim. Understanding contemporary expectations of intimate partnerships requires a multi-pronged approach. Scholars must employ several tools in the researchers’ toolbox, including qualitative data, within-group analyses, and prospective and retrospective assessments – all while considering social, political, and historical context.

Although family historians have made great strides in examining how the meaning, structure, and functions of romantic partnering have changed (and stayed the same) across time, less is understood about how aspects of the historical context continue to impact romantic partnering. The historical intertwinement of marriage with social and political systems should also make marriage susceptible to the influences of the macro-system. Thus, the idea that marriage, as an institution and the dynamics within it, can be influenced by historical events is neither novel nor surprising. What is surprising, given the standing acknowledgment of historical influences, is the lack of empirical research examining how characteristics of the macro-system trickle down to individuals’ experiences within their relationships. On one hand, scholars have considered various cohort effects in family life. This research describes how a specific group of individuals experience different trajectories based on a specific event. For example, scholars have examined reasons for staying in abusive relationships among women who matured during the women’s rights movement. Findings suggest that compared to the younger women in the sample, older women expressed more commitment to marriage as an institution and had unique concerns around their ability to acquire employment and thus, provide for themselves economically (Zink et al., Reference Zink, Regan, Jacobson and Pabst2003).

Alternatively, we discuss historic effects as events that become a part of shared knowledge and maintain lingering effects within and across generations. From this perspective, cohort effects become historic effects. One event may simultaneously be a cohort effect for individuals in one developmental period and an historic effect for individuals in another developmental period. Relative to historic effects, cohort effects are likely greater in intensity and contribute to more observable associations and testable hypotheses. In this chapter, we discuss events that have likely transitioned from being cohort effects to a historic context that influences romantic partnering. Specifically, we suggest that scholars should examine relationships within historical context by considering the psychological meaning attributed to socio-historical events. We argue that discrete historical events and those with significant psychosocial meaning are encased within systems of power and have the capacity to influence decision making within relationships. In addition, we urge scholars to consider that the hypotheses and research questions regarding the cohort effects associated with a particular event may need to be shifted as it transitions into a historic event.

Theoretical and Conceptual Considerations

Symbolic interactionism (LaRossa & Reitzes, Reference LaRossa, Reitzes, Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm and Steinmetz2009) and life course theory (Elder, Reference Elder1994) lend credence to the linkages between historical events and lived experiences within romantic relationships. Symbolic interactionism suggests that human behavior relies on meanings created through social processes and the interaction between individual freedom and societal constraint. Individuals apply shared symbols and create meanings that contribute to identities, roles, and behaviors (LaRossa & Reitzes, Reference LaRossa, Reitzes, Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm and Steinmetz2009). Individuals present their roles and identities when moving through everyday life and simultaneously make inferences about others and the ways in which they respond to this presentation. The context, community, and social location of an individual are vital when examining the connection between shared meanings and actions (Stryker, Reference Stryker2008). Context is especially relevant to socio-historical events as it refers to the societal and cultural settings within which individuals interact with the roles and identities of others (LaRossa & Reitzes, Reference LaRossa, Reitzes, Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm and Steinmetz2009).

Life course theory (Elder, Reference Elder1994) is also useful in assessing the relevance of sociohistorical context to romantic relationships. Its primary thesis is that families operate within a macrosocial context of society and history. Two components of life course theory specifically inform how scholars can examine relationships in a sociohistorical context: linked lives and historical embeddedness. The concept of linked lives references how events that one person experiences may influences others in their networks (Gee et al., Reference Gee, Walsemann and Brondolo2012). Research on racial discrimination provides an example of linked lives, indicating that one person’s experience of discrimination can affect their romantic partner’s mental health (McNeil Smith et al., Reference McNeil Smith, Williamson, Branch and Fincham2020) and relationship satisfaction (Jenkins et al., Reference Jenkins, Fredman, Le, Sun, Brick, Skinner and McHale2020). Related to the concept of linked lives is that of historical embeddedness and changes across time (Elder & George, Reference Elder, George, Shanahan, Mortimer and Kirkpatrick Johnson2016). Relationships develop across ontogenetic (i.e., individual development) and historical (i.e., broader social context) time (Bengston & Allen, Reference Bengston, Allen, Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm and Steinmetz1993). Groups of individuals who simultaneously experience historical events during similar developmental periods can be defined as distinct cohorts. Young adulthood (approximately ages 18–30) may be a particularly impactful developmental period for defining cohorts relevant to relationship development. Bühler and Nikitin (Reference Bühler and Nikitin2020) argue that aspects of the social environment, including historical events, are especially formative in young adulthood as individuals establish their identity and roles within society. At the same time, life course theory emphasizes how shared history may define how people experience linked lives and historical embeddedness (Bengston & Allen, Reference Bengston, Allen, Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm and Steinmetz1993; Elder, Reference Elder1994). When combined with the ecological focus on macro time (i.e., changing values, expectations, and events in society; Bronfenbrenner, Reference Bronfenbrenner1986) and the intersectional emphasis on historical events and institutions that designate (dis)advantage (Crenshaw, Reference Crenshaw1991; Few-Demo, Reference Few-Demo2014) across social positions, theoretical significance of historical and cohort effects cannot be overlooked.

The concept of historical trauma helps describe the relevance of historical context to experiences within romantic relationships. Historical trauma references the collective traumatic events experienced by individuals who share a group identity or affiliation (Evans-Campbell, Reference Evans-Campbell2008). From this perspective, events that occurred in the past are viewed as parts of a single trajectory, facilitating the interpretation of contemporary experiences through the lens of historical events. Thus, historical events are expected to have complex, ongoing influences on individual and family health and identity (Evans-Campbell Reference Evans-Campbell2008; Gone, Reference Gone2013). Historical trauma is characterized by widespread events (i.e., affecting several individuals), generate collective distress, and are inflicted by outsiders with “purposeful and often destructive intent” (Evans-Campbell, Reference Evans-Campbell2008, p. 321). Historical context becomes relevant to contemporary romantic partners who interpret current experiences within their relationships through the lens of historic events and those who have a shared history. Relationship maintenance may be especially important for community resilience and coping among historically marginalized groups. For example, Stamps and colleagues (2021) collected open-response data from 410 Black individuals on shifts in relational dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings indicate that Black individuals displayed collective resilience and coping in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic by gathering virtually, engaging in ritual celebrations (e.g., birthdays) from a distance, and meeting the material needs of family and community members (e.g., meal sharing, grocery deliveries). These seemingly mundane relationship maintenance behaviors may have enhanced significance when considered in the context of Black Americans’ historical trauma in the United States.

From this view, the historical mistreatment of Black individuals in the United States may contribute to the type of relationship maintenance strategies that romantic partners use. Yet, responses to historical trauma within romantic relationships has received little explicit empirical attention. Extant research indicates that Black romantic partners have engaged in gendered power dynamics to facilitate respect (Cowdrey et al., 2009) in part, to avoid replicating the race-based devaluation that partners experience in other environments (work, community). Moreover, contemporary experiences of discrimination can act as reminders of the historical mistreatment. For example, Black partners with a shared understanding of the historical context of slavery are intentional about responding to their partners’ disclosure of discrimination with affirmation and support (Rice, in pReference Riceress). Thus, the discussion that proceeds is intended to be illustrative rather than exhaustive.

Cohort and Historic Influences in (Contemporary) Romantic Partnering

The relationship experiences of any given cohort are shaped by ongoing and historical conditions in the environment. According to the Pew Research Center, 9/11 was reported as the most important historical event across four generations: silent generation (1928–1945), baby boomers (1946–1964), generation X (1965–1980), and millennials (1981–1998) (Pew Research Center, 2016). Little research in the fields of family and relationship science assessed how the significance of this historical event translated to experiences within romantic relationships. However, symbolic interactionism and life course perspectives would suggest that the meaning individuals attributed to the salience of these events may emerge from their interactions with close others and societal intuitions. For example, the September 11, 2001 attacks on the world trade center may be considered collective trauma for individuals who were emerging adults or older. Those in romantic partnerships at the time may have experienced shifting or discrepant values in response to the event that influenced couples’ decisions. For instance, decisions around residential proximity to large cities may have been a source of strain for partners. Younger cohorts of couples may have partnered within an increasingly polarized sociopolitical environment, which may further elevate the importance of concordance in values and decision making. Research assessing the significance of the election of Donald Trump on relationships indicates that partners who voted differently from one another had lower levels of relationship maintenance and communal orientation (Afifi et al., Reference Afifi, Davis, Merrill, Coveleski, Denes and Shahnazi2018). Although some individuals reported feeling closer, Bayne and colleagues’ (Reference Bayne, Impellizzeri, Michel, Dietlin and van Doorn2020) found that the election was also a source of tension for people in politically divided relationships. Participants reported avoiding political discussion, withdrawing from relationships, and attempting change their partners’ political opinions. Of note, such discrete events may be experienced as a cohort effect (with more direct implications for navigating romantic relationships) for individuals in one developmental period and experienced as an historic influence – and thus having indirect implications on relationships – for individuals in different developmental periods. In the sections that follow, we discuss illustrative cohort and historic influences romantic relationships.

Examining Cohort and Historic Effects in Romantic Partnering: Challenges and Possibilities

The challenges and possibilities that come with examining the impact on historical and other macro-social events on interpersonal relationships are not mutually exclusive. On one hand, historical events may be so distal that their theoretical and practical influence on relationships can be difficult to capture (Kelley, Reference Kelley1992). Yet scholars must wrestle with identifying the theoretical and practical significance of understanding how historical context shapes experiences within romantic relationships. Doing so may help direct scholars to questions that advance knowledge. One way to address this issue is by having scholars examine contemporary consequences of historical events within a modern, and relevant, context. Simply acknowledging the historical context of modern social phenomena may be a fruitful opportunity for understanding historical and cohort effects on romantic relationships (e.g., Awosan & Hardy, Reference Awosan and Hardy2017; Rice, in pReference Riceress). Other examples may include examining how the legal prohibition of interracial relationships created a social landscape of fear that continues to influence how couples present themselves and interact with one another; how the women’s rights movement shifted the expectations people have of romantic relationships; and contemporary legislation around abortion and trans rights may shift the social, and eventually interpersonal, landscape around what individuals value in romantic partners and seek from their relationships. Given that social issues have become so closely intertwined with political issues, assessing a partner’s stance and response to highly debated topics (e.g., abortion rights) may be of critical importance for younger cohorts that are increasingly socially conscious. Notably, our discussion of historical context and romantic relationships primarily focused on relationship initiation and maintenance. We encourage future theorizing around how historical context may influence relationship dissolution across the lifespan.