Explaining the Gender Differences in Iranian Marital Paradigms

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor PhD, Department of History and Sociology, Faculty of Social Science, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Insitute for Humanities and Social Studies. ACECR. Tehran. Iran

Abstract

Objective: Given that cultural perceptions regarding marriage are shifting and the pathways to marriage are more complex, scholars interested in marital rela­tionships have recently focused their attention on understanding the individual’s attitudes, values, and beliefs regarding marital transitions and relationships, and how those beliefs may alter individual and relational behaviors. In this article we have tried to rely on various theoretical approaches to explain marital meaning - particularly the theory of symbolic interactionism and concept of "Marital Paradigm" as the central concept of the study - to create an appropriate model that provides a different explanation for differences in individual’s marital paradigms.
Methods: The model explains the marital paradigm using four groups of factors. Our basic idea was marital paradigm which was a production of encountering four groups of factors including personal, structural, cultural and commutative factors. The model was tested by a secondary analysis - based on dataset from a survey conducted in 2016 in Tehran - and has been confirmed by results of this study.
Results: The results showed that variables such as religiosity, age, income, marriage duration and gender directly affect the marital paradigms of Iranian people.
Conclusion:  Given that paradigm differences may be the root of many marital problems, the present study introduces a new form of homogamy called "paradigmatic homogamy” as a solution. This concept considers the paradigmatic coordination of couples as an important factor in marital strength, and suggests that individuals learn about the partner's paradigmatic characteristics before entering into marriage. These characteristics can be traced to the six dimensions of the marital paradigm that we discussed in this study.

Keywords

References

Boxer, C. F., Mary C. Noonan and Christine B. Whelan. (2013). “Measuring Mate Preferences: A Replication and Extension.” Journal of Family Issues 36(2): 163–187. Doi:10.1177/0192513X13490404
Campbell, L & Wilbur C. J. ( 2009). “Are the Traits we Prefer in Potential Mates the Traits they Value in Themselves? An Analysis of Sex Differences in the Self-concept.” Self and Identity 8: 418-446. Doi:10.1080/15298860802505434
Carroll J. S., Brian Willoughby, S., Badger, L., Nelson J., & Carolyn M. B. (2007). “So Close, Yet So Far away: The Impact of Varying Marital Horizons on Emerging Adulthood.”  Journal of Adolescent Research 22(3):  219-247. Doi:10.1177/0743558407299697
Hall, S. (2006). “Marital Meaning: Exploring Young Adults’ Belief Systems about Marriage.” Journal of Family Issues 27(10): 1437-1458. Doi:10.1177/0192513X06290036
Jahani Dolatabad E. (2014). Sociological Study of Marital Conflict; Causes and Contexts, Associate Research Center: University of Tehran.
Lauer, S. R. & Carrie Y. (2010). “The deinstitutionalization of marriage reconsidered: New institutional approach to changes in marriage.”  Journal of Family Theory and Review 2(1): 58-72. Doi:10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00039.x
Shackelford, K., Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2005). “Universal Dimensions of Human Mate Preferences.” Personality and Individual Differences 39: 447-458. Doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.023
Sprecher, S., Quintin S. & Hatfield. E. (1994). “Mate Selection Preferences: Gender Differences Examined in a National Sample.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66(6): 1074-1080. Doi:10.1037//0022-3514.66.6.1074
South, S. J. (1991). “Sociodemographic Differences in Mate Selection Preferences.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53: 928-940. doi:10.2307/352998
Thornton, A. & L. Young-DeMarco (2001).  “Four Decades of Trends in Attitudes Toward Family Issues in the United States: The 1960s Through the 1990s.”  Journal of Marriage and the Family 63(4): 1009-1037. Doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01009.x
Turner, J. H. (1999). “Toward A General Sociological Theory of Emotions.” Journal for the Social Behaviour 29(2): 133-62. Doi:10.1111/1468-5914.00095
Whitehead, B. and Popenoe, D. ( 2001). Who Wants to Marry a Soul Mate? New survey Finding on Young Adults’ Attitudes about Love and Marriage.  NJ: National Marriage Project: New Brunswick.
Wilcox, B. W. & Marquardt. E. (2011). The State of Our Unions. VA: National Marriage Project: Charlottesville.
Wilcox, B. W. & Dew, J. (2010). “Is Love a Flimsy Foundation? Soulmate Versus Institutional Models of Marriage.” Social Science Research  39(5):  687-699. Doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.05.006
Willoughby B. J., Hall S. & Luczak H. P. (2013).  “Marital Paradigms: A Conceptual Framework for Marital Attitudes, Values, and Beliefs.”  Journal of Family Issues 36(2): 188-211. Doi:10.1177/0192513X13487677
Willoughby, B. J. (2010). “Marital attitude trajectories across adolescence.”  Journal of Youth and Adolescence 39(11): 1305-1317. Doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9477-x
Journal of Family Relations Studies
Volume 3, Issue 8 - Serial Number 8
January 2023
Pages 13-23

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 03 October 2021
  • Revise Date: 10 January 2023
  • Accept Date: 20 March 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics