The Economics of Love & Relationships: Marriage rates have declined due to economic factors, but this shift may lead to more pre-commitment and personal growth. Economic and data-driven approaches are gaining acceptance in the realm of love and relationships.
Marriage is not just about preferences and love, but also a market that is influenced by the set of people one has met before. Economic factors play a role in relationship building and maintenance, leading to the decline of marriage rates in recent years. However, this decline may be a positive shift towards more pre-commitment and personal growth before settling down. Helen Fisher's research highlights these trends and her role as Match.com's chief science advisor indicates the growing acceptance of economic and data-driven approaches to love and relationships.
The Benefits and Challenges of Marriage in the Modern World.: Longer courtships and later marriages can result in more stable relationships and less chance of divorce. Marriage can also lead to better health and financial outcomes, as well as positive outcomes for children. However, the decision to marry remains personal, and love can be difficult to measure. While marriage rates are declining globally, it is uncertain whether marriage will remain relevant in the future.
Longer courtship and later marriages lead to more durable relationships and lower divorce rates, according to divorce data from 1947 to 2011. Additionally, while it can be challenging to prove causality, marriage has substantial benefits, including improved health and wealth outcomes and better outcomes for children. Marriage also remains an autonomous decision-making process involving a search for a partner, despite the use of the term 'marriage market.' While love is a critical element in marriage, it can be challenging to measure. Regardless of cultural differences, marriage rates continue to decline globally, and it remains to be seen whether marriage will remain relevant in the future.
The Changing Landscape of Marriage and Dating Preferences.: Cohabitation is on the rise while marriage rates decline in Europe. Assortative matching among highly educated individuals is becoming more common, though preferences for partners still vary based on different factors.
Marriage rates in Europe have halved since the 1960s, leading to a rise in cohabiting couples. Women who attend more elite colleges are less likely to marry, but when they do, they're more likely to marry men who are highly educated, leading to assortative matching. Studies on dating apps and speed-dating experiments show a preference for assortative matching, but it's challenging to disentangle whether it's a true preference or a reflection of the market. Marriage and long-term relationships require more careful consideration than dating, where there's more experimentation. American singles polled by Match.com showed varying preferences in partners based on age, ethnicities, and geography.
The Importance of Assortative Mating in Human Behavior and Its Implications on Income Inequality: People are attracted to partners with similar backgrounds and values, but this does not guarantee love. Assortative mating also contributes to income inequality, which can cause social and economic instability. Addressing income inequality is crucial for a fair and stable society.
Assortative mating, or the tendency to be drawn to people with similar backgrounds and values, is a fundamental aspect of human mating behavior. While people often prioritize partners who share their political views, ethnic and religious backgrounds, socioeconomic status, intelligence, good looks, education, and reproductive and economic goals, this is not a guarantee of falling in love. Assortative mating is also an important factor in income inequality, as high-income people tend to marry other high-income people. Understanding and addressing income inequality is crucial, as extreme concentration of wealth and income can distort important political processes in society and lead to social and economic instability.
The High-Stakes London Season for Aristocratic Marriages: In 19th-century England, parents arranged marriages within the aristocracy, with land ownership and income being key factors. Studying this exclusive market can help address wealth inequality.
The London Season in 19th-century England was the world's most exclusive marriage market, with a finite set of players and clear incentives for parents and children. While arranged marriages were no longer acceptable, parents ensured that their children only met the 'right sort of people,' preferably within the high aristocracy and peerage, and with large amounts of land ownership and high income. The English aristocracy kept impeccable records of their children's social engagements, providing valuable data for economists like Marc Goñi of the University of Bergen. Understanding the determinants of inequality in such exclusive markets is important for addressing wealth monopolization in society.
The Queen's Central Role in the Marriage Market of the Season of Aristocracy: The Queen had the power to choose who would be presented and invited to parties, which played a critical role in the marriage market. Her absence during her mourning period greatly impacted the activity of the Season.
The Queen played a central role in the marriage market during the Season of aristocracy by choosing who would be presented at the court and invited to parties. The marriage market was essentially a closed system where aristocrats of marriageable age attended only parties that included others in their social sphere. However, this closed system temporarily opened up during Queen Victoria's three-year interruption due to her mother and husband's unexpected deaths. The activity was greatly reduced as the Queen was not coordinating it, showing how important her role was in the Season.
Class-Diverse Marriages in 19th Century London: A Shift towards Love and Personal Preference?: The interruption of London's Season in the 19th century resulted in more diverse marriages. Marrying outside of social standing may have led to happier marriages, as measured by the number of children born.
The interruption of London's Season in the 19th century led to fewer marriages within the aristocracy and more 'class-diverse marriages.' Despite the decline in prestige and wealth, this may have led to more marriages based on love and personal preference. While measuring love and happiness in marriages is rather difficult, the number of children born after the production of an heir can serve as a proxy for marital happiness. Although marrying outside of one's social standing was frowned upon, it may have resulted in happier marriages overall.
The Impact of 19th Century Marriage Interruption on Society and Education: The interruption of the marriage market in 19th century England had a positive impact on reducing inequality and expanding state education. Marrying outside one's peer group can have significant political and economical implications.
The interruption of the marriage market in 19th century England resulted in a decrease in peer-commoner intermarriage, and reduced sorting along landed wealth, leading to a reduction in political power of the aristocracy. As a result, the state education system was expanded due to a decrease in aristocratic influence, which they opposed fearing the educated labor force would emigrate. The three-year interruption had a negative effect on the aristocracy, but it was a positive move towards reducing inequality. Before the modern dating apps, people used to meet only a few people throughout their life. The consequences of marrying outside one's peer group can have significant political and economical implications, as seen from the London season marriage market.
The Relevance of Shakespearean Adaptations in Examining Modern Relationships: Shakespeare's portrayal of courtship and marriage in Romeo and Juliet emphasizes the impact of social status and limited opportunities on relationships. Today, technology has expanded our options for finding love.
Shakespeare's plays, adapted for modern audiences, remain relevant today in exploring themes of courtship and marriage. In Romeo and Juliet, the importance of wealth and social class is highlighted through the characters' conflicts. Juliet's father seeks to marry her to County Paris, an aristocrat, in order to move up in the social hierarchy. The play also sheds light on the marriage markets of Elizabethan times, where many people remained unmarried due to limited opportunities for meeting potential partners. Today, technology has revolutionized the way we connect with others and expanded our options for finding love.
The Dominance of Online Dating in Creating Romantic Relationships: Online dating is not just for casual flings; it is a viable option for individuals seeking committed, long-term relationships. The industry is becoming more specialized, catering to specific groups such as age and ethnicity.
The digital marketplace is now the clear leader in romantic relationships, with about 40% of singles having met their last partner on the internet. Those who met through online services are more likely to be well-educated and fully employed, and seeking committed long-term partnerships. While the introduction services offered by the Match Group and other dating sites are not limiting the sorts of people who consort with each other, different sites do take on certain kinds of personalities. Additionally, the industry is becoming more segmented with sites catering to specific groups, such as Black People Meet and J-Date. OurTime, a dating site for people over 50, is also becoming increasingly popular.
The Consequences of Matching Technology on Marriage & Inequality: Though dating apps attempt to match users based on specific characteristics, it can perpetuate social inequality, similar to how traditional institutional arrangements of historical settings determined marriages. Matching technology has significant consequences for marriages.
Today's dating apps try to replicate the exclusivity of the past by creating matches around specific characteristics. However, the institutional arrangements of historical settings were important in determining marriages and perpetuated inequality. Matching technology in the modern era, such as dating apps, may have similar consequences beyond preferences. While some settings like universities may sort people without an explicit intention to find a partner, other settings like bars may be more explicit marriage markets. Digital tools may help us find needles in haystacks, but they also allow us to sort very specifically. Ultimately, matching technology can have important consequences for marriages and perpetuate social inequality.
The Pros and Cons of Assortative Matching on Dating Apps: Dating apps can provide more dating opportunities, but the algorithm may limit the people you meet to those who are similar to you. This concentration of similar people in marriages can lead to both positive and negative effects on society.
Dating apps can facilitate meeting more people and considering more options before settling down, but the algorithm may also restrict the set of people you meet to those who are more similar to you. The concentration of similarly educated individuals in marriages may perpetuate distributional differences, but there is also the potential for brilliant children to be produced. The idea of assortative matching is a complex issue, with both positive and negative implications for society. Ultimately, the way in which we meet and choose our partners, whether through dating apps or other means, has the power to shape our future families and communities.
511. Why Did You Marry That Person?
Economists point to 'assortative mating' as reason why social status and income equality lead to unpleasant consequences for society, using evidence from Bridgerton to Tinder.
Freakonomics Radio
794 Episodes
Recent Episodes from Freakonomics Radio
609. What Does It Take to Run a Cannabis Farm?
Chris Weld worked for years in emergency rooms, then ditched that career and bought an old farm in Massachusetts. He set up a distillery and started making prize-winning spirits. When cannabis was legalized, he jumped into that too — and the first few years were lucrative. But now? It turns out that growing, processing, and selling weed is more complicated than it looks. He gave us the grand tour. (Part three of a four-part series.)
- SOURCES:
- Chris Bennett, operations manager at Berkshire Mountain Distillers.
- Luca Boldrini, head of cultivation at The Pass.
- Yasmin Hurd, director of the Addiction Institute at Mount Sinai.
- Chris Weld, founder and owner of Berkshire Mountain Distillers.
- RESOURCES:
- "As America’s Marijuana Use Grows, So Do the Harms," by Megan Twohey, Danielle Ivory, and Carson Kessler (The New York Times, 2024).
- "Evaluation of Dispensaries’ Cannabis Flowers for Accuracy of Labeling of Cannabinoids Content," by Mona M. Geweda, Chandrani G. Majumdar, Mahmoud A. ElSohly, et al. (Journal of Cannabis Research, 2024).
- "The Complicated, Risky — but Potentially Lucrative — Business of Selling Cannabis," by James R. Hagerty (The Wall Street Journal, 2023).
- "Marijuana Content Labels Can’t Be Trusted," by Shira Schoenberg (CommonWealth Beacon, 2022).
- "Growing Cannabis Indoors Produces a Lot of Greenhouse Gases — Just How Much Depends on Where It’s Grown," by Jason Quinn and Hailey Summers (The Conversation, 2021).
- "Blood and Urinary Metal Levels Among Exclusive Marijuana Users in NHANES (2005-2018)," by Katlyn E. McGraw, Anne E, Nigra, Tiffany R. Sanchez, et al. (Environmental Health Perspectives, 2018).
- "The Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production," by Evan Mills (Energy Policy, 2012).
- EXTRAS:
- "Cannabis Is Booming, So Why Isn’t Anyone Getting Rich?" by Freakonomics Radio (2024).
- "Is America Switching From Booze to Weed?" by Freakonomics Radio (2024).
Abortion and Crime, Revisited (Update)
With abortion on the Nov. 5 ballot, we look back at Steve Levitt’s controversial research about an unintended consequence of Roe v. Wade.
- SOURCES:
- John Donohue, professor of law at Stanford Law School.
- Steve Levitt, professor emeritus of economics at the University of Chicago and host of People I (Mostly) Admire.
- Jessica Wolpaw Reyes, professor of economics at Amherst College.
- RESOURCES:
- “The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime Over the Last Two Decades,” by John J. Donohue and Steven D. Levitt (The National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019).
- “The Demise of the Death Penalty in Connecticut,” by John J. Donohue (Stanford Law School Legal Aggregate, 2016).
- “Environmental Policy as Social Policy? The Impact of Childhood Lead Exposure on Crime,” by Jessica Wolpaw Reyes (The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 2007).
- “The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime,” by John J. Donohue and Steven D. Levitt (The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2001).
- “State Abortion Rates: The Impact of Policies, Providers, Politics, Demographics, and Economic Environment,” by Rebecca M. Blank, Christine C. George, and Rebecca A. London (The National Bureau of Economic Research, 1994).
- EXTRAS:
- "John Donohue: 'I’m Frequently Called a Treasonous Enemy of the Constitution,'" by People I (Mostly) Admire (2021).
608. Cannabis Is Booming, So Why Isn’t Anyone Getting Rich?
There are a lot of reasons, including heavy regulations, high taxes, and competition from illegal weed shops. Most operators are losing money and waiting for Washington to get out of the way. In the meantime, it’s not that easy being green. (Part two of a four-part series.)
- SOURCES:
- Jon Caulkins, professor of operations research and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University.
- Adam Goers, senior vice president of The Cannabist Company and chairperson of the Coalition for Cannabis Scheduling Reform.
- Precious Osagie-Erese, founder and C.E.O. of Precious Canna Co.
- Nikesh Patel, C.E.O. of Mammoth Distribution.
- Nikesh Patel, director of the San Francisco Office of Cannabis.
- Tom Standage, deputy editor of The Economist.
- RESOURCES:
- "Most Americans Favor Legalizing Marijuana for Medical, Recreational Use," (Pew Research Center, 2024).
- "Whitney Economics U.S. Legal Cannabis Forecast - 2024 - 2035," by Beau Whitney (Whitney Economics, 2024).
- "Beer Sellers Use a Loophole to Break Into Weed Drinks Market," by Redd Brown (Bloomberg, 2024).
- "Cannabis Producer Seeks Boston Beer Merger," by Lauren Thomas (The Wall Street Journal, 2024).
- "California's 'Apple Store of Weed' Declares Bankruptcy With $410M in Debt," by Lester Black (SFGate, 2024).
- "Is the State Democratic Chair Influencing Who Can Sell Legal Weed in this N.J. City?" by Jelani Gibson (NJ.com, 2023).
- "When Prohibition Works: Comparing Fireworks and Cannabis Regulations, Markets, and Harms," by Jonathan P. Caulkins and Kristina Vaia Reimer (International Journal of Drug Policy, 2023).
- "Did Minnesota Accidentally Legalize Weed?" by Paul Demko (Politico, 2022).
- EXTRAS:
- "Is America Switching From Booze to Weed?" by Freakonomics Radio (2024).
- "The Economics of Sports Gambling," by Freakonomics Radio (2019).
607. Is America Switching From Booze to Weed?
We have always been a nation of drinkers — but now there are more daily users of cannabis than alcohol. Considering alcohol’s harms, maybe that’s a good thing. But some people worry that the legalization of cannabis has outpaced the research. (Part one of a four-part series.)
- SOURCES:
- Jon Caulkins, professor of operations research and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University.
- Yasmin Hurd, director of the Addiction Institute at Mount Sinai.
- Michael Siegel, professor of public health and community medicine at Tufts University.
- Tom Standage, deputy editor of The Economist.
- Ryan Stoa, associate professor of law at Louisiana State University.
- RESOURCES:
- "Cannabis Tops Alcohol as Americans’ Daily Drug of Choice," by Christina Caron (The New York Times, 2024).
- "Deaths from Excessive Alcohol Use — United States, 2016–2021," by Marissa B. Esser, Adam Sherk, Yong Liu, and Timothy S. Naimi (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2024).
- "Nixon Started the War on Drugs. Privately, He Said Pot Was ‘Not Particularly Dangerous,'" by Ernesto Londoño (The New York Times, 2024).
- "A Brief Global History of the War on Cannabis," by Ryan Stoa (The MIT Press Reader, 2020).
- Craft Weed: Family Farming and the Future of the Marijuana Industry, by Ryan Stoa (2018).
- "How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat," by Anahad O’Connor (The New York Times, 2016).
- "The Perils of Ignoring History: Big Tobacco Played Dirty and Millions Died. How Similar Is Big Food?" by Kelly D. Brownell and Kenneth E. Warner (The Milbank Quarterly, 2009).
- A History Of The World In Six Glasses, by Tom Standage (2005).
- "Cancer and Coronary Artery Disease Among Seventh-Day Adventists," by E. L. Wynder, F. R. Lemon, and I. J. Bross (Cancer, 1959).
- EXTRAS:
- "Why Is the Opioid Epidemic Still Raging?" series by Freakonomics Radio (2024).
- "Daron Acemoglu on Economics, Politics, and Power," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2024).
- "Let’s Be Blunt: Marijuana Is a Boon for Older Workers," by Freakonomics Radio (2021).
- "What’s More Dangerous: Marijuana or Alcohol?" by Freakonomics Radio (2014).
606. How to Predict the Presidency
Are betting markets more accurate than polls? What kind of chaos would a second Trump term bring? And is U.S. democracy really in danger, or just “sputtering on”? (Part two of a two-part series.)
- SOURCES:
- Eric Posner, professor of law at the University of Chicago Law School.
- Koleman Strumpf, professor of economics at Wake Forest University.
- RESOURCES:
- "A Trump Dictatorship Won’t Happen," by Eric Posner (Project Syndicate, 2023).
- The Demagogue's Playbook: The Battle for American Democracy from the Founders to Trump, by Eric Posner (2020).
- "The Long History of Political Betting Markets: An International Perspective," by Paul W. Rhode and Koleman Strumpf (The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Gambling, 2013).
- "Manipulating Political Stock Markets: A Field Experiment and a Century of Observational Data," by Paul W. Rhode and Koleman S. Strumpf (Working Paper, 2007).
- "Historical Presidential Betting Markets," by Paul W. Rhode and Koleman S. Strumpf (Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2004).
- EXTRAS:
- "Has the U.S. Presidency Become a Dictatorship? (Update)," by Freakonomics Radio (2024).
- “Does the President Matter as Much as You Think?” by Freakonomics Radio (2020).
- "How Much Does the President Really Matter?" by Freakonomics Radio (2010).
Has the U.S. Presidency Become a Dictatorship? (Update)
605. What Do People Do All Day?
EXTRA: Roland Fryer Refuses to Lie to Black America (Update)
604. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 2)
603. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 1)
Related Episodes
155. Why Marry? (Part 1)
The myths of modern marriage.
Cohabitation - Br. Wayne Austin, Healing Place Church
Episode #65 - Cohabitation: Br. Wayne Austin, Associate Pastor of Pastoral Care joins us to talk about biblical wisdom concerning cohabitation.
Family & Citizenship Q&A
(April 12, 2013) Dr J travels to Grove City, Pennsylvania, to speak at Grove City College's Vision & Values Conference on The Government's Duty to Marriage. This is the Q&A session after the talk--if you missed it, be sure to check out the previous podcast.
How Family Breakdown Affects Vocation
(November 4, 2016) The Serra Club is a national Catholic organization of men and women who encourage and support vocations to the religious life. Here Dr J is speaking at the Serra Club of Lake Charles; her topic is "How Family Breakdown Affects Vocation."