Making a Case for Premarital Education.

By S. Stanley. 2001

221 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Demography, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ca41f2ae6bd4d2c694210adc452dd9817390dc56

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Demography

1. Galena K. Rhoades
2. H. Markman
3. S. Brotherson
4. W. Duncan
5. S. Stanley
6. A. J. Hawkins
7. Jason S. Carroll
8. P. Cowan

In Social Psychology

1. Galena K. Rhoades
2. H. Markman
3. S. Stanley
4. S. Brotherson
5. W. Duncan
6. A. J. Hawkins
7. Jason S. Carroll
8. P. Cowan

In Sociology and Political Science

1. H. Markman
2. Galena K. Rhoades
3. S. Stanley
4. S. Brotherson
5. W. Duncan
6. A. J. Hawkins
7. Jason S. Carroll
8. V. Blanchard

Citations in the corpus

• Do premarital education programs really work? A meta-analytic study. (2010, background): “In addition, even if premarital education programs do not produce significant positive effects for participants in terms of relationship quality, they may still have merit in that practitioners have documented that some couples make an informed decision not to marry as a result of what they learn in”
• Rebinding the ties that bind: Government efforts to preserve and promote marriage (2004, background): “like Marriage Encounter, or more recent efforts such as Marriage Savers and Promise Keepers (McManus, 1993; Stanley, 2001).”
• Sliding Versus Deciding: Inertia and the Premarital Cohabitation Effect. (2006, methodology): “We describe Stanley and Markman’s (1992) commitment model because it has the most straightforward application to research on the cohabitation effect.”