Relationship satisfaction and outcome in women who meet their partner while using oral contraception

Citation

Roberts SC, Klapilova K, Little A, Burriss R, Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Petrie M & Havlicek J (2012) Relationship satisfaction and outcome in women who meet their partner while using oral contraception. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279 (1732), pp. 1430-1436. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.1647

Abstract
Hormonal variation over the menstrual cycle alters women's preferences for phenotypic indicators of men's genetic or parental quality. Hormonal contraceptives suppress these shifts, inducing different mate preference patterns among users and non-users. This raises the possibility that women using oral contraception (OC) choose different partners than they would do otherwise but, to date, we know neither whether these laboratory-measured effects are sufficient to exert real-world consequences, nor what these consequences would be. Here, we test for differences in relationship quality and survival between women who were using or not using OC when they chose the partner who fathered their first child. Women who used OC scored lower on measures of sexual satisfaction and partner attraction, experienced increasing sexual dissatisfaction during the relationship, and were more likely to be the one to initiate an eventual separation if it occurred. However, the same women were more satisfied with their partner's paternal provision, and thus had longer relationships and were less likely to separate. These effects are congruent with evolutionary predictions based on cyclical preference shifts. Our results demonstrate that widespread use of hormonal contraception may contribute to relationship outcome, with implications for human reproductive behaviour, family cohesion and quality of life.

Keywords
mate choice; contraceptive pill; attractiveness; heterozygosity; relationship satisfaction; divorce

Notes
Supplementary material is available in the STORRE record.

Journal
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences: Volume 279, Issue 1732

• Roberts et al.pdf
• Roberts_ESM.pdf