The aim of this paper is to describe different theories that try to explain, why individuals respectively couples decide to dissolve their marriage.
These theories try to detect determinants and processes, which are responsible for the stability or instability of a marriage. Divorce has become an important topic in sociological research, because over the last decades, there has been a huge increase in the number of divorces. As Wagner & Weiß state in their paper of a Meta research on German divorce research, there are various existing theories concerning marital dissolution. Apart from the exchange theory, they mention the microeconomic theory of marital dissolution, to be the most used theory in German research.
Therefore I decided to give a detailed description of Gary Becker´s microeconomic theory and compare it with Esser´s theory of Reframing and South´s macrostructural opportunity model, we discussed in class. In the next part of this paper, I will first describe each theories essentials and their predictions concerning divorce risk. Whereas in the second part, I will discuss the theories concerning similarities and differences and use additional literature on marital dissolution, to give recommendation for further research.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Theories and Determinants of marital dissolution
2.1. Microeconomic theory of marital dissolution
2.2. Macrostructural opportunity model
2.3. Theory of (Re-) Framing
3. Discussion
4. Bibliography
Objectives and Topics
This paper aims to compare three prominent sociological theories regarding marital dissolution to understand the determinants and processes that lead to the stability or instability of marriages. The research seeks to evaluate how different academic frameworks account for divorce risks, specifically analyzing the intersection of economic calculations, macro-structural contexts, and individual normative decision-making processes.
- Comparison of Gary Becker's Microeconomic Theory with contemporary approaches.
- Examination of the Macrostructural Opportunity Model and the impact of spousal alternatives.
- Analysis of Hartmut Esser’s Theory of (Re-) Framing regarding marriage stability.
- Evaluation of how social context, normative norms, and economic variables influence divorce.
- Critical discussion on the complexity of marital dissolution research and potential for further study.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1. Microeconomic theory of marital dissolution
One of the most important theories explaining divorce with economic means, is the microeconomic theory by Gary Becker. In general, his theory of marriage is based on the assumption that households produce nonmarket commodities, with each individual trying to find a partner, who maximizes wealth and utility from these commodities. Commodities in this context refer to a variety of assets like children, house property, love, companionship and market respectively nonmarket skills (Becker et al.1977; Hill/Kopp 1990).These assumptions connote that individuals marry, if the expected utility from marriage is higher than the utility gained by remaining single. Consequently, the risk of divorce is higher, the smaller the gains the individual can expect from marriage (Becker et al. 1977). Nevertheless, it has to be acknowledged that the previously described assumptions only consider the judgements about marriage gains of one partner, but these judgement can differ between partners. Hence a couple will dissolve their marriage only, if their combined wealth when being separated, will be greater than the combined marital wealth (Becker et al. 1977).
In general, the search of a partner maximizing marriage utility, is a search for right traits, whereby the microeconomic theory distinguishes between complement and substitutive traits. Complement traits are those kind of traits that, if they are positively correlated, have a positive effect on the production of the commodities (Hill/Kopp 1990). Strictly speaking, complement traits should be similar between the partners, in order to produce a high marriage gain. In contrast substitutes, are traits that are negatively related, and have a positive effect on marriage gain, if they differ between individuals. An example for a substitute trait is the income of the partners, because a high deviation in the income level between the partners, offers the possibility of a specialisation on market respectively non-market work (Becker, 1977; Hill/Kopp, 1990).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the rising prevalence of divorce and establishes the paper’s goal to compare three major sociological theories explaining marital dissolution.
2. Theories and Determinants of marital dissolution: Provides a detailed description of the Microeconomic theory, the Macrostructural opportunity model, and the Theory of (Re-) Framing, focusing on their core mechanisms.
2.1. Microeconomic theory of marital dissolution: Details Gary Becker’s approach, emphasizing marriage as a utility-maximizing pursuit influenced by complement and substitute traits and marriage-specific capital.
2.2. Macrostructural opportunity model: Explains how social contexts, sex ratios, and the availability of attractive alternatives in the environment increase the risk of divorce.
2.3. Theory of (Re-) Framing: Presents Hartmut Esser’s model, which connects normative and rational aspects to explain how marriages move through different frames and potential crisis points.
3. Discussion: Synthesizes the theories, contrasting their focus on alternatives and economic gains, and addresses limitations in current sociological research.
4. Bibliography: Lists the academic sources and empirical studies referenced throughout the paper.
Keywords
Marital dissolution, Divorce risk, Microeconomic theory, Gary Becker, Macrostructural opportunity model, Theory of (Re-) Framing, Hartmut Esser, Social context, Marriage gain, Marriage specific capital, Sociology of the family, Divorce determinants, Spousal alternatives, Marriage stability, Reflexion threshold.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines why individuals choose to dissolve their marriages by comparing three influential theories: the Microeconomic theory of marital dissolution, the Macrostructural opportunity model, and the Theory of (Re-) Framing.
What are the central themes discussed in the text?
Key themes include the role of marriage-specific capital, the impact of spousal alternatives, economic utility, social context, and the framing of marital expectations.
What is the research goal of this paper?
The goal is to provide a detailed comparison of these theories to understand their predictions regarding divorce risk and to evaluate their effectiveness in explaining contemporary marital instability.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The paper performs a theoretical review and comparative analysis, synthesizing existing literature to assess the coherence and explanatory power of various sociological frameworks.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body breaks down each theory into its essentials, discussing specific parameters like "complementary traits," "reflexion thresholds," and the influence of social networks on decision-making.
How would you characterize the keywords of this work?
The keywords highlight the intersection of rational choice theory and structural sociology in the context of family research.
How does the Microeconomic theory define the risk of divorce?
It suggests that the risk of divorce increases when the expected utility from remaining in the marriage falls below the utility of being single or the utility expected from an alternative partner.
What does the Macrostructural opportunity model claim regarding sex ratios?
It argues that an imbalance in sex ratios in a person's social or workplace environment increases their divorce risk by providing more opportunities for encountering alternative spouses.
How does Hartmut Esser define the "reflexion threshold"?
The reflexion threshold represents the point at which perceived costs and opportunities cause an individual to consciously reflect on the marriage, potentially leading to a "Reframing" and eventual dissolution.
Why does the author argue that marital dissolution research is complex?
The author concludes that because existing macro-level studies often show conflicting results, researchers must integrate micro-level variables and individual context to fully explain the complexities of divorce.
- Citation du texte
- Annika Frings (Auteur), 2016, Theorizing marital dissolution. A comparison of the Microeconomic Theory, the Macrostructural Opportunity Model and the Theory of (Re-) Framing, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/437667
