New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Why Dating Doesn't Predict Marital Success

Scientists confirm what may seem obvious to some: what satisfies us in dating, does not predict how happy we'll be in marriage. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[Below is the original script. But a few changes may have been made during the recording of this audio podcast.]

Many of us learn, most likely the hard way, that what brings happiness during dating is quite different from what satisfies us “until death do us part". The critical difference is how your perception of commitment changes once you are married.

This comes from a survey of 92 dating couples and 77 married couples, to be published this summer in the journal, Psychological Science.


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.


For both types of couples, the primary predictor of happiness is your perception of whether your partner motivates you to live up to your aspirations and supports you in pursuit of your dreams.

But in marriage there is one additional type of support that does not appear to be a big deal in dating. In marriage, not surprisingly, there is a strong need to think your partner is actively helping you fulfill your current responsibilities and obligations.

The significant finding, the researchers say, is that we often believe that if our dating partner gives us support to follow our dreams, they’ll probably support other parts of our life, namely our immediate responsibilities. But the ability to inspire a partner is not an accurate predictor of support for the more mundane and immediate obligations. And this can sometimes lead to a rude awakening when the church bells ring.

So it’s true. For both men and women, a little help hauling out the garbage goes a long way towards marital bliss.

—Christie Nicholson

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe