IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dem/wpaper/wp-2026-010.html

From dating to marriage: changes in short-term fertility intentions across partnership transitions

Author

Listed:
  • Philipp Dierker

    (Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany)

  • Ariane Ophir
  • Nicole Hiekel

    (Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany)

Abstract

Objective: This study examines how short-term fertility intentions evolve before and after transitions between relationship stages. Background: Prior research has primarily compared fertility intentions across partnership statuses, while giving less attention to within-person dynamics surrounding partnership transitions and the question of whether shifts reflect anticipatory selection or post-transition changes. Method: Using longitudinal data from the German Family Panel (waves 2008–2022), we apply an event-centered fixed effects design to estimate changes in fertility intentions up to three years before and after transitions to dating, cohabitation, and marriage. Stratified analyses assess variation by gender, age, and subsequent relationship stability. Results: Entry into dating from singlehood is followed by a within-person increase in fertility intentions, indicating that dating functions as a turning point activating fertility planning. Entry into cohabitation is associated with rising intentions prior to the transition and sustained increases thereafter, suggesting that cohabitation consolidates fertility plans. Marriage transitions are characterized by anticipatory increases in fertility intentions. Fertility intentions increase after entry into dating only in relationships that persist, underscoring the role of stability in consolidating early adjustments. Men and older individuals enter marriage with high fertility intentions, while women report higher intentions before cohabitation. Conclusions: Different partnership stages act as distinct mechanisms for the evolution of fertility intentions over the life course. Dating is an activation stage where fertility planning emerges, while cohabitation reinforces and consolidates plans and marriage reflects anticipatory selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Philipp Dierker & Ariane Ophir & Nicole Hiekel, 2026. "From dating to marriage: changes in short-term fertility intentions across partnership transitions," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2026-010, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:wpaper:wp-2026-010
    DOI: 10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2026-010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/papers/working/wp-2026-010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2026-010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria Iacovou & Lara Patrício Tavares, 2011. "Yearning, Learning, and Conceding: Reasons Men and Women Change Their Childbearing Intentions," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 37(1), pages 89-123, March.
    2. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    3. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Nora Sánchez Gassen, 2012. "How Similar Are Cohabitation and Marriage? Legal Approaches to Cohabitation across Western Europe," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 38(3), pages 435-467, September.
    4. Elise Aerts & Ive Marx & Zachary Parolin, 2022. "Income Support Policies for Single Parents in Europe and the United States: What Works Best?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 702(1), pages 55-76, July.
    5. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Michaela Kreyenfeld & Wendy Sigle-Rushton & Renske Keizer & Trude Lappegård & Aiva Jasilioniene & Caroline Berghammer & Paola Di Giulio, 2012. "Changes in union status during the transition to parenthood in eleven European countries, 1970s to early 2000s," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(2), pages 167-182, July.
    6. S. Philip Morgan & Heather Rackin, 2010. "The Correspondence Between Fertility Intentions and Behavior in the United States," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 36(1), pages 91-118, March.
    7. Zuzanna Brzozowska & Eva Beaujouan, 2021. "Assessing Short-Term Fertility Intentions and Their Realisation Using the Generations and Gender Survey: Pitfalls and Challenges," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 37(2), pages 405-416, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chiara Ludovica Comolli, 2023. "Social Climate, Uncertainty and Fertility Intentions: from the Great Recession to the Covid-19 Crisis," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 39(1), pages 1-57, December.
    2. Petra Buhr & Johannes Huinink, 2017. "Why Childless Men and Women Give Up on Having Children," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 585-606, October.
    3. Julia Mikolai & Ann Berrington & Brienna Perelli-Harris, 2018. "The role of education in the intersection of partnership transitions and motherhood in Europe and the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(27), pages 753-794.
    4. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    5. Nicole Hiekel & Aart Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2014. "Understanding Diversity in the Meaning of Cohabitation Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 391-410, November.
    6. Karen Benjamin Guzzo, 2014. "New Partners, More Kids," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 654(1), pages 66-86, July.
    7. Christine Schnor, 2014. "The Effect of Union Status at First Childbirth on Union Stability: Evidence from Eastern and Western Germany," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(2), pages 129-160, May.
    8. Endale Kebede, 2019. "The Relative Importance of Female Education on Fertility Desires in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Multi-Level Analysis," VID Working Papers 1909, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    9. Natalie Nitsche & Sarah R. Hayford, 2020. "Preferences, Partners, and Parenthood: Linking Early Fertility Desires, Marriage Timing, and Achieved Fertility," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(6), pages 1975-2001, December.
    10. Sebastian Klüsener, 2015. "Spatial variation in non-marital fertility across Europe: recent trends, past path dependencies, and potential future pathways," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2015-001, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    11. Janetta Nestorová Dická & Filip Lipták, 2024. "Regional fertility predictors based on socioeconomic determinants in Slovakia," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 1-43, September.
    12. Maryam Moeeni & Arash Rashidian & Akbar Aghajanian, 2018. "Women’s relative status and childbearing intentions: Empirical evidence from Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-10, April.
    13. Bassford, Micaela & Fisher, Hayley, 2016. "Bonus babies? The impact of paid parental leave on fertility intentions," Working Papers 2016-04, University of Sydney, School of Economics.
    14. Zuzanna Brzozowska & Isabella Buber-Ennser & Bernhard Riederer & Michaela Potancokova, 2018. "Didn’t plan one but got one: unintended and sooner-than-intended births among men and women in six European countries," VID Working Papers 1805, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    15. Natalie Nitsche & Sarah Hayford, 2018. "Preferences, Partners, and Parenthood: Linking Early Fertility Desires, Union Formation Timing, and Achieved Fertility," VID Working Papers 1810, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    16. Jennifer Holland, 2017. "The timing of marriage vis-à-vis coresidence and childbearing in Europe and the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(20), pages 609-626.
    17. Laure Spake & Susan B. Schaffnit & Rebecca Sear & Mary K. Shenk & Richard Sosis & John H. Shaver, 2021. "Mother’s Partnership Status and Allomothering Networks in the United Kingdom and United States," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-25, May.
    18. Monika Mynarska & Anna Baranowska-Rataj & Anna Matysiak, 2014. "Free to stay, free to leave: Insights from Poland into the meaning of cohabitation," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(36), pages 1107-1136.
    19. Vida Maralani & Samuel Stabler, 2018. "Intensive Parenting: Fertility and Breastfeeding Duration in the United States," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1681-1704, October.
    20. Mengni Chen & Paul S. F. Yip, 2017. "The Discrepancy Between Ideal and Actual Parity in Hong Kong: Fertility Desire, Intention, and Behavior," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 36(4), pages 583-605, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:wpaper:wp-2026-010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Wilhelm (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.