Have You Had a 2-Body Problem? [Poll]

We're asking for your help again this year to find out more about the challenge that couples face when they both seek good jobs in the same city

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When a physicist wants to determine the motion of two stars orbiting one another, it's called a two-body problem. This same term also refers in some egghead circles to two people in a relationship who are both trying to find satisfying jobs in the same location. Referring to high-achieving partners simply as "bodies" is a little crude, we admit. Maybe it should be called the "two-star problem."

Whatever you call it, the problem is especially prevalent in academia, where a disproportionate number of couples are both scholars, with many of them even working in the same field. A 2008 study from Stanford University found that almost three quarters of academics had employed partners, 36 percent of whom were also an academic.

We're interested in updating these numbers and finding out more about the two-body problem. So last year, in the spirit of Valentine's Day, we published a survey enlisting our readers to help us answer some questions. (Because what is more romantic than discussing difficult decisions that could possibly ruin your relationship?)


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


A few highlights from last year's results:

  • 3,074 people responded

  • 74 percent worked in academia or the sciences

  • 90 percent had experienced or expected to experience the two-body problem

  • 47 percent of females said they would move for their partner's job versus 56 percent of males

  • 33 percent of females had actually moved for their partner's job versus 20 percent of males

 

This year we're asking you to help us again. Below is a slightly updated version of the survey. Filling out the final question helps give us insight into issues you're facing that our multiple choice survey questions can't address. We may quote from these responses in our follow-up post discussing the results, so please include your name and location if you don't mind sharing those.

We appreciated your responses and comments last year; they helped make this year's survey better! The survey will be open until Saturday, February 28. Thanks for your help!

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe