IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Intergenerational contact across marriage and cohabitation in Italy. Something new?

As far as cohabitation became increasingly popular as a form of union beside marriage, scholars started to question if this alternative way to form a romantic union shapes differently intergenerational ties. Empirical literature generally offered proofs that the type of union is negatively associated with intergenerational contacts, especially in traditional societies. Past research for the Italian context was in line with this assumption. We intend to assess the effects of choosing cohabitation relative to marriage on the frequency of contact with mother in contemporary Italy, a country where the strong family system is still exercising a main role within the society, but where the force of change in family behaviours is increasing year after year. Using data from a large, nationally representative survey, we study the frequency of contact mother-adult child across marriage and cohabitation, considering three measures of contact: face-to-face contact, telephone contact and mixed contact. In order to overcome endogeneity and selectivity problems, we adopt a simultaneous equation approach. Our findings prove that adult Italians cohabitors of the end of 2000s have a lower probability to meet personally their mother on daily basis relative to marrieds, but they are more likely to have frequent phone calls with her; no differences across marrieds and cohabitors appear when considering a composite indicator of mixed contact. We advance that when face-to-face contact is blocked for some reasons, for instance geographical distance, it is replaced by telephone contact, suggesting a potential compensation among children who live further away from parents. Cohabitors may have a non-traditional vision of the family and of family roles; nevertheless, they stay in touch with their family of origin changing the method of contact. In conclusion, our results do not lead to the indication of deteriorated contacts mother-child for cohabitors. This paper expands and updates previous findings on this issue, illustrating the association between union type and various indicators of contact mother-child in contemporary Italy. We interpret the novelty of these results suggesting that the slow yet incessant diffusion of cohabitation in 2000s has probably contributed to open the route to an increasing acceptance by the old generations, relaxing the parental negative attitude towards their children’s cohabitation decisions.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://local.disia.unifi.it/wp_disia/2016/wp_disia_2016_07.pdf
File Function: First version, 2016-09
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti" in its series Econometrics Working Papers Archive with number 2016_07.

as
in new window

Length: 24 pages
Date of creation: Sep 2016
Handle: RePEc:fir:econom:wp2016_07
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Viale G.B. Morgagni, 59 - I-50134 Firenze - Italy

Phone: +39 055 2751500
Fax: +39 055 2751525
Web page: http://www.disia.unifi.it/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. Anna Baranowska-Rataj, 2014. "What Would Your Parents Say? The Impact of Cohabitation Among Young People on Their Relationships with Their Parents," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1313-1332, December.
  2. Jenjira Yahirun & Dana Hamplová, 2014. "Children’s union status and contact with mothers: A cross-national study," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 30(51), pages 1413-1444, May.
  3. Alessandro Rosina & Romina Fraboni, 2004. "Is marriage losing its centrality in Italy?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 11(6), pages 149-172, September.
  4. Diane Lye & Daniel Klepinger & Patricia Hyle & Anjanette Nelson, 1995. "Childhood Living Arrangements and Adult Children’s Relations with their Parents," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 32(2), pages 261-280, May.
  5. Elisabetta Santarelli & Francesco Cottone, 2009. "Leaving home, family support and intergenerational ties in Italy: Some regional differences," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 21(1), pages 1-22, July.
  6. Aart Liefbroer & Edith Dourleijn, 2006. "Unmarried cohabitation and union stability: Testing the role of diffusion using data from 16 European countries," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 43(2), pages 203-221, May.
  7. Daniele Vignoli & Silvana Salvini, 2014. "Religion and union formation in Italy: Catholic precepts, social pressure, and tradition," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(35), pages 1079-1106, November.
  8. Paola Di Giulio & Alessandro Rosina, 2007. "Intergenerational family ties and the diffusion of cohabitation in Italy," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 16(14), pages 441-468, May.
  9. Valarie King & Maggie Ledwell & Jennifer Pearce-Morris, 2013. "Religion and Ties Between Adult Children and Their Parents," Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Gerontological Society of America, vol. 68(5), pages 825-836.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fir:econom:wp2016_07. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Francesco Calvori)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.