I think this article is very interesting and ties into what we have been discussing in class regarding the duration of marriages today in the United States and the likelihood for divorce in the United States as well. I find it interesting that the higher divorce rates are either related to spending an extraordinary amount on a ring or on the other hand, not spending enough on an engagement ring. I see the reasoning more for not spending enough on an engagement ring but I find it harder to understand spending too much leads to higher divorce rates. The only assumption that I can make is that maybe because the buying of an expensive ring may be a sign of impulsiveness and not really caring about thinking through the cost of the ring. I also think that this fact can be easily seen in celebrity weddings where they spend an extreme amount on a ring but often have a very short marriage.
I think a possible explanation for the correlation with very expensive rings is that the marriage could be less about love and more about money. For example, maybe the woman was only marrying the man because he was very rich and she wanted his economic benefits, but later decided she couldn't be with somebody she didn't love. So, extremely expensive rings could be the indication of a superficial marriage with the man "buying" the woman's love.
That's interesting. I feel like if a golddigger is any good at what she does, though, her fiance would be buying her rings that cost much more than $4000. I agree with you that couples who pay less than $1000 for a ring are more practical (because rings have very low resale value) and invest more money in a house. They live in the house all the time, and can have joint custody of the house, so that can cement their marriage.
Perhaps another reason that the moderately priced rings lead to longer lasting marriages is attributed to the sentimental value linked to the ring itself. A more expensive ring will began to appear as a monetary value and will contain most of its value in its price. However, a ring between $500-$1000 will contain more sentimental value to both partners involved.
Nicola Konigkramer I agree with the first comment, in response to your question about correlation. The values in the marriage are clearly swayed toward money or resources rather than love or commitment. On the other hand, a more expensive ring or purchase could represent a larger commitment to an individual.
The biggest takeaway from this article post is not the actual ny daily news article, but the research that led to the article's claims. Firstly, this article has no link directly to the original research findings. Rather the nydailynews website leads the reader a huffington post article and only from there can one access Dr. Francis' findings. Dr. Francis' paper uses a number of popular news sources rather than scholarly journals and his paper is not published in any sort of peer reviewed source/journal. As such, it is difficult to analyze his findings in a factual setting as there is no surety to the ethicality and legitimacy of his claims.
I agree, if a real statistician analyzed this data I would expect a lot of holes. I thought this article was kind of a "floozy" to begin with because predicting marriage success by ring size is ridiculous and irrelevant. Only very shallow people would base their happiness on ring size and those people really shouldn't be getting married in the first place. Completely agree with you.
This article was definitely interesting and seems sound at first glance. However, there is a high possibility that the researchers manipulated correlation to become causation. These variables could have been correlated in some manner, however to actually imply causation, they would have had to test this out experimentally which would have been impossible to manipulate. Furthermore, even the relationship of these variables seem spurious at best. The researchers could have also failed to account for the external factors/variables that could have affected the overall findings in their research.
It is interesting to think about the amount of money spent on a wedding/ring in comparison to the length of the marriage lasting. I do not think these factors decide if there will be a divorce within a marriage or not, however based upon certain monetary value there can be insight to the relationship. Spending an over the top amount of money on a ring and ceremony can be an indicator of superficiality and therefore lead to a divorce if the couple are not completely invested in each other. Spending too little money also showed an increase in divorce rate, which can be due to a lack of investment in the other person as well. Overall however, it may just be a correlation trend with no causation being the actual reason for the divorce.
This is a very interesting study considering the odd correlation between rings and divorce rates. I feel like there's one variable missing from this study that links the price of engagement rings with divorce rates because the to variable are so different from each other. Also, I find it ironic that men who can afford to buy more expensive rings have shorter marriages because their economic status should ensure marital happiness with their wives. Nevertheless, I feel like the hypothesis needs to be more clarified.
I like how you talked about the correlation, rather than saying the ring price caused the short marriage. Correlation does not equal causation, so there may very well be a third variable that affects both of the phenomena.
This entire article is very dubious and I feel that it is just something that would come up during conversation as gossip masquerading as a scientific article. As you said, the two things being studied here, rings and divorce rates, are very different and an in depth study would have to be performed. The article wasn’t clear as to how they decided whether a marriage was successful or likely to end in divorce. They also didn’t come up with a solid conclusion. They said that “marriage duration is [EITHER] not associated or inversely associated with spending on the engagement ring and wedding ceremony”. As far as having a substantial amount of money and being divorced goes, I think that it is the product of superficiality. Wives may expect that lavish gifts and treats will increase as their marriage extends, but what they fail to understand is that the luxuries peak at the wedding. From there on, its not so much about what you have. It’s about how much you’re willing to give. So when it comes to time face reality, if the couple isn’t interested in each other enough to stay together, they will file for a divorce.
I've never thought about marriage and divorce in this context before. I can understand the ideology behind an expensive engagement ring and divorce rates. Specifically, in my family expensive engagement rings are frowned upon, because it is wiser to invest in a house. I can see that thy article may be hinting at a problem with marriages today, which is prioritizing. Financial burdens are leading causes of divorce. It can also touch how some women may emphasize a certain ring size minimum they want, which can be an indicator in their investment in the marriage. Showing a greater interest in materialistic objects can become problematic when things get financially tough in a marriage. I.M.
I think the article is interesting because not only does it say that overly expensive rings lead to higher divorce rates, but also overly inexpensive rings have the same effect. This leads me to believe these people have unrealistic views of the union they are about to enter in to. For the overly extravagant buyers, it makes me think that they have a romanticized view of marriage and about the token of a ring and are not ready for the hard work and tough parts of marriage. On the other hand, buying a really inexpensive ring makes me think the person is not taking the union seriously or maybe it is not very important to them. Both have unrealistic views and it makes sense that they could ultimately lead to weak unions and divorce.
It's interesting how the correlation between the cost of engagement rings can lead to divorce. I disagree about how men who spend $2,000 to $4,000 on engagement rings and women spending $20,000 or more on their wedding are likely to get a divorce because it doesn't happen to every couples. But I do agree that the engagement rings can be very expensive to pay for but men shouldn't try to buy a really expensive engagement ring or women spending a lot of money for their wedding because it will end up being a waste of money if their marriages are cut short. However, marriages can lead to financial problems and the cause of failed marriages.
To me this is a tricky article to decipher. As we learned in class, a lot of factors go into whether a couple will stay married or not. It seems silly to try to predict the success of a marriage based on how much the man spends on the engagement ring or how much the wedding cost overall. There have to be more variables looked at such as cohabitation before marriage, children, careers, etc. Money cannot decide everything in a marriage.
When it comes down to it, this article just doesn't have enough concrete data to be interpreted as legitimate. It offers various points of correlation between ring cost and the likelihood of divorce, but correlation does not prove causation. As much as i'd like to believe that couples who value love over wealth and material possessions are more likely to stay together, I don't think that this data regarding divorce and ring costs offers enough proof to support this claim. This is because there are numerous factors to take into consideration that could've affected the results of this study, and it is not a topic that can be truly "experimented" so to speak.
Ryan Muscatella Even though the two economist studied 3,000 couples in this study, by only judging them on the size of the ring does not tell the reader enough information on why people are actually getting divorced. Even though money acts as a great factor in a marriage, other sociological aspects, such as where people live, who they live with, and their occupation, all help form different types of people. Therefore, judging the divorce rate based on then size of a ring may be a fair judgement for some cases, however, not all cases are directly related to this statement. Sociologists state that all situations are unique and different and as a result people can not stereotype marriages based on the size of the ring.
This article was difficult for me to completely understand. A lot of factors go into deciding that you have found the right person to marry(i think thats true, considering I'm not married), i dont think a study based on the size and price of the ring can be a good indicator of marriage. i just think its a crazy coincidence based on the sample. if your marriage is based on money then chances are it won't work anyways
I think this article was very interesting, though I'm skeptical about how accurate it actually is. I think the price of a ring is correlated with how much one makes (salary). So maybe the article is saying that people with more of a middle class income are less likely to get divorced than a lower class or upper class family. I don't think that we can necessarily say this is true, but it is definitely interesting to think more about.
I think the article could be more specific about the sampling method used. These particular kinds of studies can be ambiguous because there is uncertainty in the other auxiliary assumptions related to the data. These assumptions may actually have an influence on the results of the study. Although it is an interesting idea to consider, I am not sure in the validity of the study. -12keys
While I think the article raises a valid point of interest, I think it needs to be researched more. The article stated it surveyed married people- so how did they figure the rate of divorce if only talking to currently married couples? They also say "We find that marriage duration is either not associated or inversely associated with spending on the engagement ring and wedding ceremony." but give no indication to how they found this. I do like the point it raises towards the end, how the trends of wedding planning have become more extravagant and pricey. It seems now a days that people are judged off how much they spend on a wedding or wedding ring, as if that shows how much you care. Just as we learned in class that marriage trends are changing, so too are wedding trends.
This article is seriously lacking in accuracy and credibility. The article does not provide a citation for the research performed by the two professors, whose fields of study aren't very related to the premise of the topic. Additionally, the article ignores an important aspect of the case study performed by the researchers, the sampling method. Besides the validity of the research cited, there are many other reasons and conditions that contribute to whether a divorce occurs or not, such as age at marriage, the number of remarriages, and socioeconomic class of the bride and groom. It's very hard to believe that a simple item's value solely can influence whether a married couple divorce.
I think this article is interesting, considering what we've been talking about in class. The article says that the amount you spend on a ring, between $500 to $1000 dollars, the less likely you are to get divorced, and the more you spend on a ring, between $2000 to $4000 dollars, the more likely you are to get married. However, in class, we've been talking about age and marriage: saying that the younger a couple is, the more likely they are to get divorced. Nowadays, people are waiting until their later twenties to get married, resulting in less risk for divorce, as both have probably gained their education and have or are establishing income somewhere in their life. But those younger people getting married, who are apparently more likely to get divorced, are probably spending closer to around $500, or between $500 and $1000, which in the article were said to have longer lasting marriages. In class we said that the older people are to get married, the less likely they are to get a divorce. But at this time, they should have decent jobs and maybe are more likely to spend anywhere from $2000 to $4000 dollars, because they're able to afford a little nicer ring. However, in the article it says that people who spend anywhere between this range have higher divorce rates. So I thought it was interesting how our class discussion and this article are inversely related.
My first thought when it comes to expensive rings is: older men are able to afford more expensive rings. In class, we talked about how the older you are when you get married, the more stable the marriage is. That could explain why the cheap rings are correlated with high divorce rates: younger men buy them. It's curious to see that after a certain point, spending more on a ring doesn't improve marriage length. Perhaps by that point the men are just compensating for something else.
A lot of times when people get married to someone rich, it's for the money and not for the emotional connection between the two of them. These people will likely marry for the money and then later on realize they don't love their spouse, or even go into the marriage knowing that they just want to divorce to try to get a lot of their spouse's money. The more money in a relationship, the less true love there actually is. Colleen Snitzer
I find this article to be quite interesting. I do not believe there is a real correlation between the price of a ring and the length of the marriage. For instance, a low-income male may not be able to afford a high-priced ring and would have to settle for a more reasonable priced ring. This does not mean his marriage will last longer than that of a rich man who is able to afford a high-priced ring. Other factors contribute to marriage lengths rather the price of a ring. However, I can see other classmates' points of views about age relating to what the man can buy, but other factors besides age can be relevant to what the man can buy as well. -Kiana Smith
I believe that a low income male or female may do a payment plan on a ring that cost a lot of money and eventually in the marriage, it may affect the husband and wife's finances. A lot of women, today, want rings that would cost more than their rent or mortgage. I feel like that's being too materialistic. It's okay to have a nice ring, but does a man really have to break their bank in order to actually get the ring the woman wants? I don't think so. It's okay if the man knows he can really afford it and won't have to suffer financially, later.
I agree with this. I think that going into debt or stretching your finances for something like a ring is not a smart thing to do. It is already creating problems in the relationship that do not have to be there. Why create problems and extra stress when you don't have to and can have total control over the situation. -Moose
Even though this article has an eye catching title there is no actual proof that high ring/wedding costs case higher divorce rates. The article does not even provide any evidence for the correlation besides a simple survey conducted by the researcher. I would never take this article seriously until I do my own research.
I agree with the previous comments. There must be multiple variables that are not being fully disclosed in the article. It sounds much more sensational if the price of the ring is charged with the length of a marriage. Obvious variables (age, demographic, education, number of marriages) must be discussed in the population before such a blanket statement is made.
I find this an interesting article about the relationship with the amount a ring costs and the time a married couple stay together. I believe that the amount one spends on a ring should not affect a marriage if a couple really do love each other. I believe that people are paying more attention to things such as a price on a ring or wedding, rather then their actual marriage itself.
This article deals with the correlation between marriage and divorce. Many couple that spend more money on a ring, may be getting married for superficial reasons. An engagement shouldn't be about the ring size or the diamond but about the person you will be spending your life with. If the ring size is a large factor in the engagement then that may show that the couple probably won't work out because they aren't solely about getting married for love but for money or fashionable things.
That is the same exact thing I thought when I read the article. I feel like that plays a big part in getting marry. Some people maybe just be getting married for the expensive ring and it effects them in the long run but then again how accurate is the information in the article. I do think the article is only showing a snippet of the problem and thats not good because then people automatically assume every person who has an expensive ring will later get an divorce.
Similar to the discussions we had in class regarding the correlation between marriage and divorce, this article introduces a new variable that we normally would not associate between marriage and divorce, engagement ring costs. This does overlap some bit with wealth. I agree with some comments above that those couples who spend larger than normal amounts of money on an engagement ring could very well be getting married for all the wrong reasons. And while this should not be the case, I think it is become increasingly more problematic today. I think that in instances like this, there is more likely cause for eventual issues over things like money and love, which could very likely lead to divorce. However, I do not think that everyone who spends more money on an engagement ring will end up in this predicament, I just think that it is definitely something that is more prevalent today. On a separate note, I agree with a few other classmates, that we could question the accuracy of this article and how this was determined, but I do definitely see it as a possibility.
Ring size doesn't automatically determine whether or not the couple will get a divorce. Some people don't care about ring size because they aren't materialistic or even care that much about the objects within the relationship rather than the actual emotions behind it. But some people are materialistic and want something big and nice to show off to people. Regardless, a big or small ring doesn't determine divorce because lots of factors go into play when it comes to divorce, like age at marriage, cohabitation, and more. - Sarah Sakhi
Ring size does not directly affect the divorce rate. It may be that a majority of people engaged spend more on wedding rings now and the people who are getting divorced are apart of that majority. -Christina Asare
This is another instance where correlation does not mean causation. The amount spent on a ring is most likely related to the income of the man at the time rather than the divorce rate. Although, if this could be proven somehow, it could be because if less than $500 is spent on the ring then the couple might not be economically stable enough to be married and if over $2000 is spent then the couple may be more concerned with material things and status rather then their love.
This article was interesting. My first thought was divorce rates and ring size correlate because ring size and income correlate. People with higher incomes can afford to get divorced. They have enough money to live comfortable without a second income to help them. Couples that purchase smaller rings probably rely on each other more, and try harder to stay together. Richer individuals don't need another person the way someone with less money does. Celia Reilly
This article relates to our discussion on the duration of marraige in the US and the divorce rates as well. I find this article very interesting because it examines the amount of money, either to much or too little, on an engagement ring can affect whether or not it results in divorce. Society has turned marriage into such an important event that it takes away from the actual reasons behind someone gets married. It makes sense that if you spend to much or too little the rates of divorce are higher. A more expensive ring is usually bought by someone with more money who can afford divorce or requires more payments which can lead to financial issues. If someone spends too little on an engagement ring, it may cause the spouse to think that their person didn't care enough or is not as financially stable, which can also lead towards financial problems. One of the major reasons couple fight or get divorced surrounds the aspect of money. -Foofie
I think this relates to our discussion in class, where we talked about how marriage is a symbol of status. It also reflects how people go into marriages with different expectations.
Large, elaborate rings and weddings tend to cost astronomical amounts of money, and tend to be more of a show of wealth, rather than a show of love for the other person. Those ceremonies also tend to happen with marriages where the priority is appearing rich, or of a special social status.
Conversely, simpler rings tend to happen in relationships where the important thing is the feelings and the formalization of the relationship, where the priority is the couple's emotions rather than their social status, since if the marriage is based of love and contentment, a 10 carat diamond starts to look like just a big waste of money.
It is not surprising that there is a correlation with ring size and the divorce rate. However, the research conducted and represented through this source does not seem credible so the following interpretations may be calculated through this unreliability. On television, and particularly in reality shows, elaborate weddings and rings are popularized. This is not limited to reality shows but celebrities as well. Oftentimes, on television viewers see relationships/marriages develop and devour faster than their engagement period. Also, it seems that those who are very wealthy are able to divorce or separate from their spouse faster and easier than those who are not. This could explain why celebrities and reality stars are oftentimes married several times. Additionally, the more money an individual has the more likely they are able to support themselves if divorced or separated from their partner. These are some spurious relationships. In the Emory University’s researchers conclusion of their research, they have said, ”The wedding industry has consistently sought to link wedding spending with long-lasting marriages. We find that marriage duration is either not associated or inversely associated with spending on the engagement ring and wedding ceremony.” (Emory University, 2014) Essentially, they have concluded that the relationship between the engagement ring and marriage may or may not be associated with each other and if they are it would be inversely. In the main article by Daily News, the writer makes it seem that there is a profound and certain conclusion made about the relationship but as revealed by the researchers they are not certain but believe there may be an inverse relationship between marriages and engagement ring cost. Furthermore, the wedding industry much like majority of other industries attempts to plant the idea that there is a linkage between a long-lasting marriage and the cost of a ring. This attempt is tantamount to how cigarette companies use models in their commercials/ads to make viewers believe that it makes them “happy,” and “beautiful.” This all comes back to ethics. The researchers purpose or reasoning as to why they should conduct this research was to determine whether or not it is true that the wedding industry’s claims exist. Ultimately, the researchers were unable to completely find out if marriage duration is either associated with directly or not with the cost of an engagement ring but they found that there may be an inverse association or no association at all. The writer of this article fails to portray the researcher’s full conclusion that they are not certain about the existence of an inverse or non-existing association.
I thought this article was very interesting and agree with many of the comments above. I think that the reason that a correlation was found between marriage and ring size is because the people who have very expensive rings may be getting married to the person for their wealth instead of for the right reasons. Although it is important to acknowledge that just because someone buys an expensive ring, does not mean that there going to get divorced.
I think that the correlation between price of engagement ring and divorce rates is logical. As the price of the ring goes up, the couple is more well off, more focused on materialistic things, and therefore more likely to divorce due. However, the converse is true as well, the lower the price of the ring, the higher the divorce rate because it could be an elopement or vegas wedding, or just significant of a poor couple which means they will have economic strains and therefore a harder marriage.
so, the ring size may not have to do with how long your marriage last but maybe it has to do with people fiances. Maybe a married couple with a lot of money are to busy with working they don't spend enough quality time together and the poor people who have to work hard for just a little bit of money barley spend time together with there significant other. But getting a average ring cost may mean you are middle class and you have a balance amount of money and time spend to work on your marriage.
I stumbled upon this article one day and found it incredibly fascinating. So many people rush into marriages to seek some sort of financial security and the fact that the marriages in which the ring was larger ended up being much shorter than marriages with smaller rings. I think this illustrates the fact that many times, marriages are superficial and a large ring has teh power to make things seem like they are falling into place whereas in relatity, there may be many issues beneath the surface.
i found this article interesting regarding money spent on weddings and rings being correlated with length of marriage. people throw around their money in place of affection and this is probably one of the leading reasons why marriages don't last. they don't truly love each other, they simply use there money to buy the other ones love and in time the marriage is seen for what it really is, a fake. -Bryce Young
Ring size obviously does not single handedly determine the success of a marriage. I do however believe that the correlation makes lots of sense. On one extreme, people that spend a ridiculous amount on an engagement ring may be financially well off, sure. But it could also be a superficial way to make a relationship seem and feel better than what it actually is. On the opposite extreme, people that spend less than $500 on an engagement ring can either not be as secure about their relationship as they should be or simply aren't as financially well off as they should be. Still, just because a couple spends $500-$1000 on an engagement ring, it does not mean that they won't get divorced. -Tita
Obviously, it is not about the actual price of the ring that causes higher or lower divorce rates. It is about why couples get married; the motives behind the marriages. For example, young couples that get married around their 20s will get rings cheaper than $500 and will be more likely to divorce. Not because of the ring, but because their age. Same thing with over expensive rings; people might get married not because of love, but for the money of their ‘significant other’.
I find this article particularly interesting because my sister did just get engaged previously this year over the summer. My sister and her boyfriend decided to not invest too much in a ring with the hope that one day they could renew their vows and spend more money on a nicer ring if that's what seems right down the road. I feel as if this is a very healthy incentive for couples today to see marriage as something more than just a materialistic gratification but as something that is life long.
The article definitely shows a correlation between the ring cost and the length of the marriage. According to the article, the expensive wedding rings don't lead to longer marriages. But thus irony can be easily falsified by stating the fact that this article has no credible sources of information. Also, as we have learnt in the class that people in their mid twenties tend to get married than they tend do so in other age groups. As a result, it may happen that due to the financial status of the bride and groom, they decide upon buying a cheaper wedding ring as people in thier twenties are relatively less financially stable as people in their thirties or higher. People who buy expensive wedding rings and get divorce early actually never understand each other. They might not love each other that much and might have just got married to show thier extravagant nature to the society.
This article shows that there is some sort of relationship between price of engagements rings and likelihood of divorce in some marriages. It can make sense in some circumstances, as some people get married for financial reasons before love. In these cases, the engagement ring would probably be very expensive. I believe that, for the most part, marriages only last if they are based on love. So, it makes sense that there would be a correlation between price of engagement rings and likelihood of divorce. Also, when an engagement ring costs less than 500 dollars, there is a greater likelihood of divorce. This makes sense as well because, when two people get engaged but are not financially ready, they could get married prematurely. This can lead to conflicts and issues in relationships, leading to divorces. -Simon Chang
There is more to marriage than a ring. Though a ring is representational of devotion and commitment to a relationship, ultimately, it is not the relationship itself. What this study perhaps shows is that a ring can sometimes distract couples from the essence of their communion. Though luxury goods are enjoyable, in the long run, money cannot buy happiness. On the contrary, the finding that an inexpensive ring also leads to high divorce rates posits that lack of money can bring about unhappiness. A middle ground of understanding must be reached. In class we discussed how marriage carries symbolic significance as a marker of prestige. This is further supported by the reality of the expensive rings being handed out these days. The ring is an obvious mark of prestige, but it is not and cannot be the only driving force in a marriage. Important to note, however, that there is most definitely something else at play in cases of divorce aside from the cost of the ring. Correlation, as it has been drilled into our heads, is not causation. While the ring might play some role in marriage, it is only one part of a much broader entity.
I think that there is correlation between the price of the ring and divorce rates. If the bridegroom can afford a ring that costs thousands of dollars, most likely he is rich. It is known that there is sort of women who get married because of their husband's bank account. In these cases, the marriages are most likely not to last for a long time, because there is no honest intimacy, understanding ,real care of each other (and not the care of his money) and love.
Before even finishing this article I had a thought. Someone who feels the need to buy the most expensive ring possible (especially if its way out of their price range) has some major trust issues already. Obviously you want to get your wife the best ring possible, but if you are with a girl that will be pissed if the ring isn't big enough, you're with the wrong girl. I wonder if there is a correlation between percentage of income and price of ring and what that says about different demographics of relationships.
According to this article, the size/ worth of the ring and wedding ceremony is indicative of the length of the marriage. While the article makes no attempt to explain this, a possible answer is that a couple that uses more expansive things such as this is that if a couple feel the need to express their love through physical objects have a less stable relationship, but convince themselves otherwise and go forward with the marriage. This less than perfect matrimony will then lead to divorce. -Matthew Glazer (11/27/14)
I think it is very interesting to read this article and learn that either there is no correlation between wedding spending and wedding length, or the two are inversely related. I definitely would have thought the opposite of this. I think after reading this I realized that the less you spend on the ring, as long as it's over $500, the more couples value each other over physical objects. It's possible that when there is too much spending that couples are not focusing on each other and their lives together, but instead focusing on the social aspects of getting engaged and married, and how other will view their lifestyles and what they own/can afford to spend.
I found this article extremely interesting. The author claims that the more the wedding and the engagement ring cost, the shorter the marriage will be. On the other end, the less the wedding and the engagement ring cost, the shorter the marriage will be (higher divorce rate). So, no one should be spending too much or too little on weddings and engagement rings because the chances are that the relationship will end up in divorce. Again, each couple and relationship is different. This article is just saying in general it will lead to ending the marriage earlier. But to be honest, if you truly love someone and spend a lot on the wedding and engagement ring, you will not end up getting a divorce. There are a lot of factors that lead to divorce.
This article makes a correlation between the amount of money spent on an engagement ring and the length of the marriage. I believe the length of the marriage is influenced by the relationship of the couple, not the price of the ring. I can think of a few reasons why the correlation brought up by the author exists. If the relationship exists because of expensive gifts, and not true love, then the marriage is bound to end at some point. I can also imagine someone going into their second marriage, planning on "outdoing" their first by making the entire event (proposal and marriage) as extravagant as possible. This would lead into misguided motives for the marriage.
This articles summarizes a study done thats brings a new perspective on the length of a marriage. According to the professors, the more expensive an engagement ring and wedding is, the shorter it will more likely be. This is interesting because most people would think the opposite because of the investment into the marriage. However, it seems if the marriage begins off too materialistic then perhaps it will stay that way. A reason the study might prove to be true is if the marriage is only happening because of the economic backgrounds between the parties involved, then there is less assurance that the relationship will last. However, if the wedding ring is not irrefusable and the decision is solely based on the parties' values instead of economic background. The marriage then might be able to last longer. Additionally, if the party purchasing the engagement ring is spending an outrageous amount of money, then he might already doubtful from the beginning. Lastly, if the parties are spending a lot on the wedding, the purpose of the wedding might be to impress others instead of it being a statement of their love. All of these reasons could lead a marriage to failure and prove serve to prove the professors right.
I found this article to be oddly amusing to me. The article describes the correlation of a spending more on a larger wedding ring to the increasing divorce rates. I do think each individual situation is different, and it is possible to have a marriage last despite this generalization. However that being said, I do think the type of people who care about the size of the ring also reflects their personality and the things they find important in a relationship. If someone cares about having a huge wedding ring, it shows that the material items are important in their overall relationship, which I think can shorten the overall longevity for most couples. -Lakshmi Subramanian
The underlying message of this article is something that we can all apply to many decisions we make in our everyday life and also with major long-tern decisions. The message is that we should do things in moderation. Beth Stebner talks about how people who spent an outrageous amount on engagement rings have a higher divorce rate. Likewise, those who spent under five hundred dollars also have higher divorce rates. The people with the lowest divorce rates are those who found the "happy medium" price of engagement rings. This is obviously not the only factor influencing divorce, but it is an interesting one to observe.
I found this article funny. I feel like our society is obsessed with material items, but clearly through this study, these items to do not necessarily equal happiness. Finding the balance between too much and too little is an important concept to apply to life in general, and this study is a perfect example of it. Too much or too little spent on an engagement ring correlated to higher divorce rates. But the happy medium had much lower rates. Its an interesting factor in divorce i never thought about before.
Even though I think that weddings are a fun way to celebrate and can be meaningful to families, I believe that an actual wedding ceremony is not necessary at all to have a successful marriage. There are so many couples that forego a wedding and still have lasting marriages. But the reason they did not have a wedding is also important (if for practical reasons, I am inclined to think the marriage will last longer). I am skeptical that there can be any correlation between engagement ring size and the duration of a marriage just because people have so many unique circumstances and motivations when buying rings that I think the data cannot even be compared to each other. In the end, I think that societal forces that we discussed in class regarding the occurrence of divorce is what has the biggest impact on the length of marriages- apart from the couple’s actual feelings for each other, of course! 0601
Although the title of this article is not necessarily false, it is misleading and designed to grab the attention of readers. What we see here is the presence of a spurious relationship. Perhaps when a couple spends more on an engagement ring and wedding, they are getting married for financial reasons rather than because they are actually in love or compatible. This leads to a higher divorce rate among couples who spend more. The price of a ring does not impact a marriage. - Drew Brees
I find this article an interesting read. To simply summarize, there is an "inverse relationship" between the size of wedding rings and the marriage duration. There are many factors as to why couples split with expensive rings. Some of these factors may be how to couple may find wealth as there source of happiness much less than actual love. Another reason why may be that the quality and cost of the ring may woe and persuade women to accept the marriage. So it makes sense that marriages tend to be shorter as the ring size grows larger
The article paints a picture of a Gaussian curve where ring price corresponds to length of marriage. However, it seemed very unnecessary and stupid in my opinion. The fact that our society has placed such an incredible amount of significance to a piece of jewelry is confusing. I've argued with this topic with my friends and family for a while now. Ring price should have no correlation to marriage duration if the individuals are fully committed to each other and love each other unconditionally. The only reason why a relationship is seen is because of various confounding variables.
This article definitely got my attention because it taught me a few things about wedding ring spending. According to the data these researchers found, if one spends under $500 on a wedding ring, they are more likely to have a shorter marriage and higher divorce rate. I'm assuming this could be because there isn't much money among the partners and with low income comes a lot of money related problems. The data also shows that those who spent thousands of dollars on a ring also experienced similar problems. Clearly, if these individuals can afford to spend that much on a ring, then they are not that strapped for cash. However, one can assume that because they spent an outrageous amount on a ring, they bought it impulsively and thought that that simple gesture in itself could ensure a long lasting marriage. The researches included that the best way to go is to meet in the middle because couples that spent only a few thousand or less had the longest lasting marriages.
I was quite interested in this article, and a little surprised, as I would have expected that those who spent more on a wedding band would have happier marriages if only for the fact that they probably have more disposable income than the average person and I subscribe to the notion that money CAN buy happiness. According to the article however, I am a bit wrong. I also found this article to be interesting because of the fact that I never thought to draw any connections between ring spending and success of the marriage, although I also believe that it's important to be cautious when reading these sort of studies, because of the fact that correlation does not equal causation. Just because there is a correlation between ring size and divorce rates, doesn't necessarily mean that either one of them causes the other.
I don't agree with what the article talks about, there is no relation between the cost of the ring and the length of marriage.Also I think there is a reason why the result of the study is the more expensive the ring is the shorter the marriage sustain: maybe they did research on a certain type of people. I think a boy will be willing to spend a lot of money on a ring if he loves the girl or in some cases the boy spends a lot of money on other things and has not enough money for an expensive ring. -Qiao Mi
I don't necessarily disagree with the research but I feel that sometimes it isn't always even legitimate to say the ring has anything to do with the marriage. I understand that you can build better confidence intervals the higher your sample size is, but many couples I know that have yet to divorce even once were poor. They were couples who made their proposals with $5 plastic rings because not everyone at the time these people got married could afford more expensive rings. But on the other hand, I also know many other couples too who have yet to get a divorce and have expensive rings and other jewelry. The same way that Martin Luther King felt to judge a man you should know the content of his character and not the color of his skin, I feel a marriage and whether or not it will end should be determined by the quality of the bond it was founded on and not the money spent on it. Kenny P
It is surprising how more expensive rings lead to less happy marriage. My interpretation of the data is: people that buy expensive rings are people with certain lifestyle (pop stars, business people etc.), and those are the people with a lifestyle that may lead to a higher divorce rate. The study also pointed out that couples with a very cheap wedding ring have a big chance of divorce, probably because they will have some financial problems. So as I see from the result, normal middle class couples have a more stable relationship because the lifestyle they have is healthier for marriage. Li
The correlation between the price of rings and the longevity of marriages is surprising. It's interesting that many people want nicer, more expensive rings with larger diamonds to symbolize the extent of their love, yet, those with costly taste are the people who experience higher rates of divorce among couples. I find it ridiculous to spend that much money on something like an engagement ring. I think the same of couples who spend extensive amounts on the wedding ceremony. In my opinion, weddings and rings are luxuries for the benefit of other people. Engagement rings tell people of your status of being in a committed relationship, they do nothing for the person wearing them who already know how their relationship is doing. Buying expensive rings is like trying to put a price on a relationship or trying to show the other partner how much they are worth to the other. -Paige Willingham
Well, I believe it depends on the relationship and how the couple implicitly or explicitly expresses their love. Personally' I'm nowhere near marriage and inevitably never researched the price of most wedding rings. It's nice to know there are studies that support me not having to incur further debt in order to purchase a wedding ring. Apparently, some people believe the more costly the memory, the more of an impression the memory leaves in ones in mind. There is way to much debt floating around, i try my best not to catch it. That will be a lot harder to explain to my mysterious future wife to be. Everything has a price. Yes, everything has a price, evidently even love. Will that price be monetary? I believe it will be more indirectly than anything. --Bl@k Thought
I think that it is not purely the amount of money one spends on a ring, but why they are spending that amount that would cause the shorter marriage. For example, if the buyer is spending less than 500 dollars on a ring, then maybe they are very young, have financial problems, and/or do not think marriage is particularly important. All of these factors I can see leading to a shorter marriage.
I agree with this notion that the reasons behind their spending choices are what may be an indicator of higher or lower divorce rates. You touched on the reasons behind couples spending little money on a ring, but did not talk about the reasons behind spending an outrageous amount. I think some of these reasons could potentially include that the couple is financially very well off and often times extremely wealthy people have really high divorce rates. They also could be trying to prove their love to their partner and if a big ring is how you show love then that is not the healthiest relationship.
The article states that “spending between $2,000 and $4,000 on an engagement ring was associated with a higher divorce rate.” The way this research finding is presented is very much flawed and shows illogical reasoning. I do not believe that the cost of the engagement ring directly causes higher rates of divorce. This logic seems very outlandish. Other factors linked to the purchase of a cheaper engagement ring may be at blame for the higher rates of divorce. Such factors may include age at which people get married and poverty. For example, a young man let’s say age 18, who decides to get married, may not be well established in his profession and thus may only be able to afford a cheaper engagement ring for his wife. His marriage is more likely to end in divorce because studies have shown that the higher the lower the age of marriage, the higher the probability of disruption. Therefore, it may appear that purchasing cheaper wedding rings is causing a higher rate of divorce, which is not the case.
These finding by Emory University are surprising to me because I would probably have never thought of this, but they are not shocking. If you think about it in (with my cynical outlook) then it makes sense. I think a relationship based on spending is not ideal. Lots of people are superficial and dumb. Not to be sexist but more often then not, a woman will mistake a man spending lots of money on her as a sign of love, but it isn't. At the same time, some men are convinced that the only way to show a woman love, is to spend a lot of money on her. So in superficial relationships like these, one where the man will buy a ridiculously expensive ring, of course there will be a larger rate of divorce. What did shock me was that when less than $500 was spent on a ring, there was higher divorce rates as well. As we've studied in class, financial issues are the number one reason why people get divorced, and spending less than $500 on a wedding ring may indicate financial issues, which is why there is a high divorce rate.
This was a very interesting article. It demonstrates how marriage in the U.S. has become a prestigious act. It feeds into the stereotype that some women marry for money, because that is almost what it seems like. The costlier the engagement and wedding, the more likely it might be that the woman is marrying for money rather than love. However, I also think it's funny that men who "don't spend enough" on a ring also create a higher risk of divorce. Is it because he doesn't care enough about her, or does she care about the money, too? It's hard to know. Regardless, this confirms my belief that people are beginning to take weddings more seriously than the actual marriages.
The article presents an interesting story on how the expenses spent on wedding relate to divorce rate. However, I’m a little skeptical about the information. First of all, the article does not cite properly, or provide a direct link to the actual study. Second, high divorce rate in families that spend thousands on wedding or wedding rings does not mean these two aspect have a connection. There are multiple reasons for a couple to divorce, not to mention researchers must take into account their backgrounds; and maybe coincidentally a high percentage falls into the ones who lavish. Couples who spend less can divorce too!
I agree with your point, the article didn't provide enough investigations, and therefore, it's not credible enough. The connections between ring size and divorce rate is a illogical reasoning that does not consider the other factors which might lead to high divorce rate for richer couples. - Jialun Lin
The article is amusing to me because of it's use of illogical reasonings. It suggested that buying expensive rings are associated with higher rate of divorce. The size and price of wedding rings did suggested the income level of the couple, which implies that richer people are more likely to get divorce. However, this is not always true, because it does not mean that middle-class people don't afford a more expensive ring. The article brings up a interesting idea, but it lacks credibility since it is not looking at all the perspectives that leads to divorce.
Although an interesting article to read, I found the claim that the more costly the ring, the less likely that marriage would last was an example of illogical reasoning. Perhaps providing the reader with more statistics about the study they conducted could have made the claim more credible, however, that is not the case. Illogical reasoning, the idea in which the cause and effect do not make sense and are not associated, is somehow supposed to make men think they should not spend too much or too little, but the right amount of money on a ring in order to have a long marriage. Rings are only symbols; marriage deals with trust, honesty, love, etc…not the cost of a ring.
I agree with your interpretation of this article as illogical reasoning. I do not think that the cost of a ring would severely impact the longevity of a marriage. I believe that there must be some intervening variables in this study.
This article relates to some of the topics discussed in class regarding marriages and the increase of divorce within the US society. America’s wealth has grown considerably since the more traditional periods of marriage where matrimony was viewed more sacred then trendy as it is today. The increasing US economy has led people to consume more and live materialistically. Marriage has become a tool more so for status and financial stability compared to earlier generations that was secured by stronger values of love, honesty, and commitment. People in society today care more about the presentation of being married more than they do actually being together for the long term.
Just like any competitive business industry, the wedding industry associates expensive weddings and rings to longer lasting marriages in order to promote growth and spending. The industry is looking to gain as much revenue as possible on events that typically happen once in a persons lifetime. This article raises an important question though: does spending extravagant amounts of money on a wedding lead to a superficial and materialistic marriage? The article claims that those who spent over $2,000, and conversely under $500, had shorter lived marriages on average.
This article is about how the size of a ring and how much it costs can really damage a marriage. The whole idea sounds silly because there is no good reasoning towards it. However, it does relate to factors of failed marriages that we have discussed in class how money is important in a marriage. This also relates to gender because some women feel that they need expensive things to be able to show off to their friends. Who would want to tell their friends that their fiancee spent $100 on a ring he bought from a back of a truck rather than a +$1,000 ring at Tiffany's. Since our economy has grown over the past few decades, people are willing to spend more especially on expensive goods. When it comes to engagement rings, they are making the point that men shouldn't spend too little on a ring or too much.
Correlation does not imply causation. Maybe it is not the amount of money someone spends on a ring that decides how long their marriage will last, but instead the modern day culture that is putting emphasis on materialism which then leads to increased divorce rates and more money spent on rings. -Glen Coco
As interesting as the first few sentences sounded none of their findings seemed to be based in any reliable sources. And let's be honest a ring is forever. Take some pride in what you buy. It's not the size of the ring that matters it's the pride you put in it.
I think it is important to note where the writer is coming from in this piece. the New York Post is quite often considered a "rag", with journalistic integrity left up to the readers themselves. Being a New Yorker myself, we often take articles from the Post at face value. Thus, I feel that they are attempting to imply causation from a simple correlation in the amount that someone spends on the ring. To many people, the amount that is spent is not significant; a ring is simply our society's way of signifying marriage. This article does not look at the underlying causes for the ring purchase, and attempts to further the overall materialistic consumer culture of America. I do not think that this article is a good gauge on the causation it is attempting to imply regarding divorce rates and marriage duration.
One thing that's important to note with this article is the fallacy of causation that can occur from results such as this. When you take into account that couples with less money perhaps have less material things and thus spend more time with each other. Or perhaps expensive rings and weddings can lead to early debt that can place strain on a marriage. That said this was one of my favorite articles.
I think this article is very interesting and ties into what we have been discussing in class regarding the duration of marriages today in the United States and the likelihood for divorce in the United States as well. I find it interesting that the higher divorce rates are either related to spending an extraordinary amount on a ring or on the other hand, not spending enough on an engagement ring. I see the reasoning more for not spending enough on an engagement ring but I find it harder to understand spending too much leads to higher divorce rates. The only assumption that I can make is that maybe because the buying of an expensive ring may be a sign of impulsiveness and not really caring about thinking through the cost of the ring. I also think that this fact can be easily seen in celebrity weddings where they spend an extreme amount on a ring but often have a very short marriage.
ReplyDelete-Chelsea Pudimott
Alanna Rothman:
DeleteI think a possible explanation for the correlation with very expensive rings is that the marriage could be less about love and more about money. For example, maybe the woman was only marrying the man because he was very rich and she wanted his economic benefits, but later decided she couldn't be with somebody she didn't love. So, extremely expensive rings could be the indication of a superficial marriage with the man "buying" the woman's love.
That's interesting. I feel like if a golddigger is any good at what she does, though, her fiance would be buying her rings that cost much more than $4000.
DeleteI agree with you that couples who pay less than $1000 for a ring are more practical (because rings have very low resale value) and invest more money in a house. They live in the house all the time, and can have joint custody of the house, so that can cement their marriage.
Kevin Fan
Perhaps another reason that the moderately priced rings lead to longer lasting marriages is attributed to the sentimental value linked to the ring itself. A more expensive ring will began to appear as a monetary value and will contain most of its value in its price. However, a ring between $500-$1000 will contain more sentimental value to both partners involved.
DeleteAndrew Cheng
Nicola Konigkramer
DeleteI agree with the first comment, in response to your question about correlation. The values in the marriage are clearly swayed toward money or resources rather than love or commitment. On the other hand, a more expensive ring or purchase could represent a larger commitment to an individual.
The biggest takeaway from this article post is not the actual ny daily news article, but the research that led to the article's claims. Firstly, this article has no link directly to the original research findings. Rather the nydailynews website leads the reader a huffington post article and only from there can one access Dr. Francis' findings. Dr. Francis' paper uses a number of popular news sources rather than scholarly journals and his paper is not published in any sort of peer reviewed source/journal. As such, it is difficult to analyze his findings in a factual setting as there is no surety to the ethicality and legitimacy of his claims.
ReplyDeleteI agree, if a real statistician analyzed this data I would expect a lot of holes. I thought this article was kind of a "floozy" to begin with because predicting marriage success by ring size is ridiculous and irrelevant. Only very shallow people would base their happiness on ring size and those people really shouldn't be getting married in the first place. Completely agree with you.
DeleteThis article was definitely interesting and seems sound at first glance. However, there is a high possibility that the researchers manipulated correlation to become causation. These variables could have been correlated in some manner, however to actually imply causation, they would have had to test this out experimentally which would have been impossible to manipulate. Furthermore, even the relationship of these variables seem spurious at best. The researchers could have also failed to account for the external factors/variables that could have affected the overall findings in their research.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to think about the amount of money spent on a wedding/ring in comparison to the length of the marriage lasting. I do not think these factors decide if there will be a divorce within a marriage or not, however based upon certain monetary value there can be insight to the relationship. Spending an over the top amount of money on a ring and ceremony can be an indicator of superficiality and therefore lead to a divorce if the couple are not completely invested in each other. Spending too little money also showed an increase in divorce rate, which can be due to a lack of investment in the other person as well. Overall however, it may just be a correlation trend with no causation being the actual reason for the divorce.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting study considering the odd correlation between rings and divorce rates. I feel like there's one variable missing from this study that links the price of engagement rings with divorce rates because the to variable are so different from each other. Also, I find it ironic that men who can afford to buy more expensive rings have shorter marriages because their economic status should ensure marital happiness with their wives. Nevertheless, I feel like the hypothesis needs to be more clarified.
ReplyDeleteI like how you talked about the correlation, rather than saying the ring price caused the short marriage. Correlation does not equal causation, so there may very well be a third variable that affects both of the phenomena.
DeleteKevin Fan
This entire article is very dubious and I feel that it is just something that would come up during conversation as gossip masquerading as a scientific article. As you said, the two things being studied here, rings and divorce rates, are very different and an in depth study would have to be performed. The article wasn’t clear as to how they decided whether a marriage was successful or likely to end in divorce. They also didn’t come up with a solid conclusion. They said that “marriage duration is [EITHER] not associated or inversely associated with spending on the engagement ring and wedding ceremony”. As far as having a substantial amount of money and being divorced goes, I think that it is the product of superficiality. Wives may expect that lavish gifts and treats will increase as their marriage extends, but what they fail to understand is that the luxuries peak at the wedding. From there on, its not so much about what you have. It’s about how much you’re willing to give. So when it comes to time face reality, if the couple isn’t interested in each other enough to stay together, they will file for a divorce.
DeleteI've never thought about marriage and divorce in this context before. I can understand the ideology behind an expensive engagement ring and divorce rates. Specifically, in my family expensive engagement rings are frowned upon, because it is wiser to invest in a house. I can see that thy article may be hinting at a problem with marriages today, which is prioritizing. Financial burdens are leading causes of divorce. It can also touch how some women may emphasize a certain ring size minimum they want, which can be an indicator in their investment in the marriage. Showing a greater interest in materialistic objects can become problematic when things get financially tough in a marriage.
ReplyDeleteI.M.
I think the article is interesting because not only does it say that overly expensive rings lead to higher divorce rates, but also overly inexpensive rings have the same effect. This leads me to believe these people have unrealistic views of the union they are about to enter in to. For the overly extravagant buyers, it makes me think that they have a romanticized view of marriage and about the token of a ring and are not ready for the hard work and tough parts of marriage. On the other hand, buying a really inexpensive ring makes me think the person is not taking the union seriously or maybe it is not very important to them. Both have unrealistic views and it makes sense that they could ultimately lead to weak unions and divorce.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting how the correlation between the cost of engagement rings can lead to divorce. I disagree about how men who spend $2,000 to $4,000 on engagement rings and women spending $20,000 or more on their wedding are likely to get a divorce because it doesn't happen to every couples. But I do agree that the engagement rings can be very expensive to pay for but men shouldn't try to buy a really expensive engagement ring or women spending a lot of money for their wedding because it will end up being a waste of money if their marriages are cut short. However, marriages can lead to financial problems and the cause of failed marriages.
ReplyDeleteAmeerat Olatunde
To me this is a tricky article to decipher. As we learned in class, a lot of factors go into whether a couple will stay married or not. It seems silly to try to predict the success of a marriage based on how much the man spends on the engagement ring or how much the wedding cost overall. There have to be more variables looked at such as cohabitation before marriage, children, careers, etc. Money cannot decide everything in a marriage.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes down to it, this article just doesn't have enough concrete data to be interpreted as legitimate. It offers various points of correlation between ring cost and the likelihood of divorce, but correlation does not prove causation. As much as i'd like to believe that couples who value love over wealth and material possessions are more likely to stay together, I don't think that this data regarding divorce and ring costs offers enough proof to support this claim. This is because there are numerous factors to take into consideration that could've affected the results of this study, and it is not a topic that can be truly "experimented" so to speak.
ReplyDeleteRyan Muscatella
ReplyDeleteEven though the two economist studied 3,000 couples in this study, by only judging them on the size of the ring does not tell the reader enough information on why people are actually getting divorced. Even though money acts as a great factor in a marriage, other sociological aspects, such as where people live, who they live with, and their occupation, all help form different types of people. Therefore, judging the divorce rate based on then size of a ring may be a fair judgement for some cases, however, not all cases are directly related to this statement. Sociologists state that all situations are unique and different and as a result people can not stereotype marriages based on the size of the ring.
This article was difficult for me to completely understand. A lot of factors go into deciding that you have found the right person to marry(i think thats true, considering I'm not married), i dont think a study based on the size and price of the ring can be a good indicator of marriage. i just think its a crazy coincidence based on the sample. if your marriage is based on money then chances are it won't work anyways
ReplyDeleteI think this article was very interesting, though I'm skeptical about how accurate it actually is. I think the price of a ring is correlated with how much one makes (salary). So maybe the article is saying that people with more of a middle class income are less likely to get divorced than a lower class or upper class family. I don't think that we can necessarily say this is true, but it is definitely interesting to think more about.
ReplyDeleteI think the article could be more specific about the sampling method used. These particular kinds of studies can be ambiguous because there is uncertainty in the other auxiliary assumptions related to the data. These assumptions may actually have an influence on the results of the study. Although it is an interesting idea to consider, I am not sure in the validity of the study.
ReplyDelete-12keys
While I think the article raises a valid point of interest, I think it needs to be researched more. The article stated it surveyed married people- so how did they figure the rate of divorce if only talking to currently married couples? They also say "We find that marriage duration is either not associated or inversely associated with spending on the engagement ring and wedding ceremony." but give no indication to how they found this. I do like the point it raises towards the end, how the trends of wedding planning have become more extravagant and pricey. It seems now a days that people are judged off how much they spend on a wedding or wedding ring, as if that shows how much you care. Just as we learned in class that marriage trends are changing, so too are wedding trends.
ReplyDeleteThis article is seriously lacking in accuracy and credibility. The article does not provide a citation for the research performed by the two professors, whose fields of study aren't very related to the premise of the topic. Additionally, the article ignores an important aspect of the case study performed by the researchers, the sampling method. Besides the validity of the research cited, there are many other reasons and conditions that contribute to whether a divorce occurs or not, such as age at marriage, the number of remarriages, and socioeconomic class of the bride and groom. It's very hard to believe that a simple item's value solely can influence whether a married couple divorce.
ReplyDeleteI think this article is interesting, considering what we've been talking about in class. The article says that the amount you spend on a ring, between $500 to $1000 dollars, the less likely you are to get divorced, and the more you spend on a ring, between $2000 to $4000 dollars, the more likely you are to get married. However, in class, we've been talking about age and marriage: saying that the younger a couple is, the more likely they are to get divorced. Nowadays, people are waiting until their later twenties to get married, resulting in less risk for divorce, as both have probably gained their education and have or are establishing income somewhere in their life. But those younger people getting married, who are apparently more likely to get divorced, are probably spending closer to around $500, or between $500 and $1000, which in the article were said to have longer lasting marriages. In class we said that the older people are to get married, the less likely they are to get a divorce. But at this time, they should have decent jobs and maybe are more likely to spend anywhere from $2000 to $4000 dollars, because they're able to afford a little nicer ring. However, in the article it says that people who spend anywhere between this range have higher divorce rates. So I thought it was interesting how our class discussion and this article are inversely related.
ReplyDeleteMy first thought when it comes to expensive rings is: older men are able to afford more expensive rings. In class, we talked about how the older you are when you get married, the more stable the marriage is. That could explain why the cheap rings are correlated with high divorce rates: younger men buy them.
ReplyDeleteIt's curious to see that after a certain point, spending more on a ring doesn't improve marriage length. Perhaps by that point the men are just compensating for something else.
Kevin Fan
A lot of times when people get married to someone rich, it's for the money and not for the emotional connection between the two of them. These people will likely marry for the money and then later on realize they don't love their spouse, or even go into the marriage knowing that they just want to divorce to try to get a lot of their spouse's money. The more money in a relationship, the less true love there actually is.
ReplyDeleteColleen Snitzer
I find this article to be quite interesting. I do not believe there is a real correlation between the price of a ring and the length of the marriage. For instance, a low-income male may not be able to afford a high-priced ring and would have to settle for a more reasonable priced ring. This does not mean his marriage will last longer than that of a rich man who is able to afford a high-priced ring. Other factors contribute to marriage lengths rather the price of a ring. However, I can see other classmates' points of views about age relating to what the man can buy, but other factors besides age can be relevant to what the man can buy as well.
ReplyDelete-Kiana Smith
I believe that a low income male or female may do a payment plan on a ring that cost a lot of money and eventually in the marriage, it may affect the husband and wife's finances. A lot of women, today, want rings that would cost more than their rent or mortgage. I feel like that's being too materialistic. It's okay to have a nice ring, but does a man really have to break their bank in order to actually get the ring the woman wants? I don't think so. It's okay if the man knows he can really afford it and won't have to suffer financially, later.
ReplyDelete-Ruby22
I agree with this. I think that going into debt or stretching your finances for something like a ring is not a smart thing to do. It is already creating problems in the relationship that do not have to be there. Why create problems and extra stress when you don't have to and can have total control over the situation.
Delete-Moose
Even though this article has an eye catching title there is no actual proof that high ring/wedding costs case higher divorce rates. The article does not even provide any evidence for the correlation besides a simple survey conducted by the researcher. I would never take this article seriously until I do my own research.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the previous comments. There must be multiple variables that are not being fully disclosed in the article. It sounds much more sensational if the price of the ring is charged with the length of a marriage. Obvious variables (age, demographic, education, number of marriages) must be discussed in the population before such a blanket statement is made.
ReplyDeleteI find this an interesting article about the relationship with the amount a ring costs and the time a married couple stay together. I believe that the amount one spends on a ring should not affect a marriage if a couple really do love each other. I believe that people are paying more attention to things such as a price on a ring or wedding, rather then their actual marriage itself.
ReplyDeleteThis article deals with the correlation between marriage and divorce. Many couple that spend more money on a ring, may be getting married for superficial reasons. An engagement shouldn't be about the ring size or the diamond but about the person you will be spending your life with. If the ring size is a large factor in the engagement then that may show that the couple probably won't work out because they aren't solely about getting married for love but for money or fashionable things.
ReplyDeleteThat is the same exact thing I thought when I read the article. I feel like that plays a big part in getting marry. Some people maybe just be getting married for the expensive ring and it effects them in the long run but then again how accurate is the information in the article. I do think the article is only showing a snippet of the problem and thats not good because then people automatically assume every person who has an expensive ring will later get an divorce.
DeleteSimilar to the discussions we had in class regarding the correlation between marriage and divorce, this article introduces a new variable that we normally would not associate between marriage and divorce, engagement ring costs. This does overlap some bit with wealth. I agree with some comments above that those couples who spend larger than normal amounts of money on an engagement ring could very well be getting married for all the wrong reasons. And while this should not be the case, I think it is become increasingly more problematic today. I think that in instances like this, there is more likely cause for eventual issues over things like money and love, which could very likely lead to divorce. However, I do not think that everyone who spends more money on an engagement ring will end up in this predicament, I just think that it is definitely something that is more prevalent today. On a separate note, I agree with a few other classmates, that we could question the accuracy of this article and how this was determined, but I do definitely see it as a possibility.
ReplyDelete- Cierra Horsting
Ring size doesn't automatically determine whether or not the couple will get a divorce. Some people don't care about ring size because they aren't materialistic or even care that much about the objects within the relationship rather than the actual emotions behind it. But some people are materialistic and want something big and nice to show off to people. Regardless, a big or small ring doesn't determine divorce because lots of factors go into play when it comes to divorce, like age at marriage, cohabitation, and more.
ReplyDelete- Sarah Sakhi
Ring size does not directly affect the divorce rate. It may be that a majority of people engaged spend more on wedding rings now and the people who are getting divorced are apart of that majority.
ReplyDelete-Christina Asare
This is another instance where correlation does not mean causation. The amount spent on a ring is most likely related to the income of the man at the time rather than the divorce rate. Although, if this could be proven somehow, it could be because if less than $500 is spent on the ring then the couple might not be economically stable enough to be married and if over $2000 is spent then the couple may be more concerned with material things and status rather then their love.
ReplyDeleteThis article was interesting. My first thought was divorce rates and ring size correlate because ring size and income correlate. People with higher incomes can afford to get divorced. They have enough money to live comfortable without a second income to help them. Couples that purchase smaller rings probably rely on each other more, and try harder to stay together. Richer individuals don't need another person the way someone with less money does.
ReplyDeleteCelia Reilly
This article relates to our discussion on the duration of marraige in the US and the divorce rates as well. I find this article very interesting because it examines the amount of money, either to much or too little, on an engagement ring can affect whether or not it results in divorce. Society has turned marriage into such an important event that it takes away from the actual reasons behind someone gets married. It makes sense that if you spend to much or too little the rates of divorce are higher. A more expensive ring is usually bought by someone with more money who can afford divorce or requires more payments which can lead to financial issues. If someone spends too little on an engagement ring, it may cause the spouse to think that their person didn't care enough or is not as financially stable, which can also lead towards financial problems. One of the major reasons couple fight or get divorced surrounds the aspect of money.
ReplyDelete-Foofie
I think this relates to our discussion in class, where we talked about how marriage is a symbol of status. It also reflects how people go into marriages with different expectations.
ReplyDeleteLarge, elaborate rings and weddings tend to cost astronomical amounts of money, and tend to be more of a show of wealth, rather than a show of love for the other person. Those ceremonies also tend to happen with marriages where the priority is appearing rich, or of a special social status.
Conversely, simpler rings tend to happen in relationships where the important thing is the feelings and the formalization of the relationship, where the priority is the couple's emotions rather than their social status, since if the marriage is based of love and contentment, a 10 carat diamond starts to look like just a big waste of money.
-CouchPotato
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is not surprising that there is a correlation with ring size and the divorce rate. However, the research conducted and represented through this source does not seem credible so the following interpretations may be calculated through this unreliability. On television, and particularly in reality shows, elaborate weddings and rings are popularized. This is not limited to reality shows but celebrities as well. Oftentimes, on television viewers see relationships/marriages develop and devour faster than their engagement period. Also, it seems that those who are very wealthy are able to divorce or separate from their spouse faster and easier than those who are not. This could explain why celebrities and reality stars are oftentimes married several times. Additionally, the more money an individual has the more likely they are able to support themselves if divorced or separated from their partner. These are some spurious relationships. In the Emory University’s researchers conclusion of their research, they have said, ”The wedding industry has consistently sought to link wedding spending with long-lasting marriages. We find that marriage duration is either not associated or inversely associated with spending on the engagement ring and wedding ceremony.” (Emory University, 2014) Essentially, they have concluded that the relationship between the engagement ring and marriage may or may not be associated with each other and if they are it would be inversely. In the main article by Daily News, the writer makes it seem that there is a profound and certain conclusion made about the relationship but as revealed by the researchers they are not certain but believe there may be an inverse relationship between marriages and engagement ring cost. Furthermore, the wedding industry much like majority of other industries attempts to plant the idea that there is a linkage between a long-lasting marriage and the cost of a ring. This attempt is tantamount to how cigarette companies use models in their commercials/ads to make viewers believe that it makes them “happy,” and “beautiful.” This all comes back to ethics. The researchers purpose or reasoning as to why they should conduct this research was to determine whether or not it is true that the wedding industry’s claims exist. Ultimately, the researchers were unable to completely find out if marriage duration is either associated with directly or not with the cost of an engagement ring but they found that there may be an inverse association or no association at all. The writer of this article fails to portray the researcher’s full conclusion that they are not certain about the existence of an inverse or non-existing association.
ReplyDeleteI thought this article was very interesting and agree with many of the comments above. I think that the reason that a correlation was found between marriage and ring size is because the people who have very expensive rings may be getting married to the person for their wealth instead of for the right reasons. Although it is important to acknowledge that just because someone buys an expensive ring, does not mean that there going to get divorced.
ReplyDeleteI think that the correlation between price of engagement ring and divorce rates is logical. As the price of the ring goes up, the couple is more well off, more focused on materialistic things, and therefore more likely to divorce due. However, the converse is true as well, the lower the price of the ring, the higher the divorce rate because it could be an elopement or vegas wedding, or just significant of a poor couple which means they will have economic strains and therefore a harder marriage.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteso, the ring size may not have to do with how long your marriage last but maybe it has to do with people fiances. Maybe a married couple with a lot of money are to busy with working they don't spend enough quality time together and the poor people who have to work hard for just a little bit of money barley spend time together with there significant other. But getting a average ring cost may mean you are middle class and you have a balance amount of money and time spend to work on your marriage.
ReplyDeleteI stumbled upon this article one day and found it incredibly fascinating. So many people rush into marriages to seek some sort of financial security and the fact that the marriages in which the ring was larger ended up being much shorter than marriages with smaller rings. I think this illustrates the fact that many times, marriages are superficial and a large ring has teh power to make things seem like they are falling into place whereas in relatity, there may be many issues beneath the surface.
ReplyDeletei found this article interesting regarding money spent on weddings and rings being correlated with length of marriage. people throw around their money in place of affection and this is probably one of the leading reasons why marriages don't last. they don't truly love each other, they simply use there money to buy the other ones love and in time the marriage is seen for what it really is, a fake.
ReplyDelete-Bryce Young
Ring size obviously does not single handedly determine the success of a marriage. I do however believe that the correlation makes lots of sense. On one extreme, people that spend a ridiculous amount on an engagement ring may be financially well off, sure. But it could also be a superficial way to make a relationship seem and feel better than what it actually is. On the opposite extreme, people that spend less than $500 on an engagement ring can either not be as secure about their relationship as they should be or simply aren't as financially well off as they should be. Still, just because a couple spends $500-$1000 on an engagement ring, it does not mean that they won't get divorced.
ReplyDelete-Tita
Obviously, it is not about the actual price of the ring that causes higher or lower divorce rates. It is about why couples get married; the motives behind the marriages.
ReplyDeleteFor example, young couples that get married around their 20s will get rings cheaper than $500 and will be more likely to divorce. Not because of the ring, but because their age.
Same thing with over expensive rings; people might get married not because of love, but for the money of their ‘significant other’.
- Jeroen Meefout
I find this article particularly interesting because my sister did just get engaged previously this year over the summer. My sister and her boyfriend decided to not invest too much in a ring with the hope that one day they could renew their vows and spend more money on a nicer ring if that's what seems right down the road. I feel as if this is a very healthy incentive for couples today to see marriage as something more than just a materialistic gratification but as something that is life long.
ReplyDeleteThe article definitely shows a correlation between the ring cost and the length of the marriage. According to the article, the expensive wedding rings don't lead to longer marriages. But thus irony can be easily falsified by stating the fact that this article has no credible sources of information. Also, as we have learnt in the class that people in their mid twenties tend to get married than they tend do so in other age groups. As a result, it may happen that due to the financial status of the bride and groom, they decide upon buying a cheaper wedding ring as people in thier twenties are relatively less financially stable as people in their thirties or higher. People who buy expensive wedding rings and get divorce early actually never understand each other. They might not love each other that much and might have just got married to show thier extravagant nature to the society.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows that there is some sort of relationship between price of engagements rings and likelihood of divorce in some marriages. It can make sense in some circumstances, as some people get married for financial reasons before love. In these cases, the engagement ring would probably be very expensive. I believe that, for the most part, marriages only last if they are based on love. So, it makes sense that there would be a correlation between price of engagement rings and likelihood of divorce. Also, when an engagement ring costs less than 500 dollars, there is a greater likelihood of divorce. This makes sense as well because, when two people get engaged but are not financially ready, they could get married prematurely. This can lead to conflicts and issues in relationships, leading to divorces.
ReplyDelete-Simon Chang
There is more to marriage than a ring. Though a ring is representational of devotion and commitment to a relationship, ultimately, it is not the relationship itself. What this study perhaps shows is that a ring can sometimes distract couples from the essence of their communion. Though luxury goods are enjoyable, in the long run, money cannot buy happiness. On the contrary, the finding that an inexpensive ring also leads to high divorce rates posits that lack of money can bring about unhappiness. A middle ground of understanding must be reached. In class we discussed how marriage carries symbolic significance as a marker of prestige. This is further supported by the reality of the expensive rings being handed out these days. The ring is an obvious mark of prestige, but it is not and cannot be the only driving force in a marriage. Important to note, however, that there is most definitely something else at play in cases of divorce aside from the cost of the ring. Correlation, as it has been drilled into our heads, is not causation. While the ring might play some role in marriage, it is only one part of a much broader entity.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is correlation between the price of the ring and divorce rates. If the bridegroom can afford a ring that costs thousands of dollars, most likely he is rich. It is known that there is sort of women who get married because of their husband's bank account. In these cases, the marriages are most likely not to last for a long time, because there is no honest intimacy, understanding ,real care of each other (and not the care of his money) and love.
ReplyDeleteBefore even finishing this article I had a thought. Someone who feels the need to buy the most expensive ring possible (especially if its way out of their price range) has some major trust issues already. Obviously you want to get your wife the best ring possible, but if you are with a girl that will be pissed if the ring isn't big enough, you're with the wrong girl. I wonder if there is a correlation between percentage of income and price of ring and what that says about different demographics of relationships.
ReplyDeleteAccording to this article, the size/ worth of the ring and wedding ceremony is indicative of the length of the marriage. While the article makes no attempt to explain this, a possible answer is that a couple that uses more expansive things such as this is that if a couple feel the need to express their love through physical objects have a less stable relationship, but convince themselves otherwise and go forward with the marriage. This less than perfect matrimony will then lead to divorce.
ReplyDelete-Matthew Glazer (11/27/14)
I think it is very interesting to read this article and learn that either there is no correlation between wedding spending and wedding length, or the two are inversely related. I definitely would have thought the opposite of this. I think after reading this I realized that the less you spend on the ring, as long as it's over $500, the more couples value each other over physical objects. It's possible that when there is too much spending that couples are not focusing on each other and their lives together, but instead focusing on the social aspects of getting engaged and married, and how other will view their lifestyles and what they own/can afford to spend.
ReplyDeleteI found this article extremely interesting. The author claims that the more the wedding and the engagement ring cost, the shorter the marriage will be. On the other end, the less the wedding and the engagement ring cost, the shorter the marriage will be (higher divorce rate). So, no one should be spending too much or too little on weddings and engagement rings because the chances are that the relationship will end up in divorce. Again, each couple and relationship is different. This article is just saying in general it will lead to ending the marriage earlier. But to be honest, if you truly love someone and spend a lot on the wedding and engagement ring, you will not end up getting a divorce. There are a lot of factors that lead to divorce.
ReplyDeleteThis article makes a correlation between the amount of money spent on an engagement ring and the length of the marriage. I believe the length of the marriage is influenced by the relationship of the couple, not the price of the ring. I can think of a few reasons why the correlation brought up by the author exists. If the relationship exists because of expensive gifts, and not true love, then the marriage is bound to end at some point. I can also imagine someone going into their second marriage, planning on "outdoing" their first by making the entire event (proposal and marriage) as extravagant as possible. This would lead into misguided motives for the marriage.
ReplyDelete-Brandon Chambers
This articles summarizes a study done thats brings a new perspective on the length of a marriage. According to the professors, the more expensive an engagement ring and wedding is, the shorter it will more likely be. This is interesting because most people would think the opposite because of the investment into the marriage. However, it seems if the marriage begins off too materialistic then perhaps it will stay that way. A reason the study might prove to be true is if the marriage is only happening because of the economic backgrounds between the parties involved, then there is less assurance that the relationship will last. However, if the wedding ring is not irrefusable and the decision is solely based on the parties' values instead of economic background. The marriage then might be able to last longer. Additionally, if the party purchasing the engagement ring is spending an outrageous amount of money, then he might already doubtful from the beginning. Lastly, if the parties are spending a lot on the wedding, the purpose of the wedding might be to impress others instead of it being a statement of their love. All of these reasons could lead a marriage to failure and prove serve to prove the professors right.
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be oddly amusing to me. The article describes the correlation of a spending more on a larger wedding ring to the increasing divorce rates. I do think each individual situation is different, and it is possible to have a marriage last despite this generalization. However that being said, I do think the type of people who care about the size of the ring also reflects their personality and the things they find important in a relationship. If someone cares about having a huge wedding ring, it shows that the material items are important in their overall relationship, which I think can shorten the overall longevity for most couples.
ReplyDelete-Lakshmi Subramanian
The underlying message of this article is something that we can all apply to many decisions we make in our everyday life and also with major long-tern decisions. The message is that we should do things in moderation. Beth Stebner talks about how people who spent an outrageous amount on engagement rings have a higher divorce rate. Likewise, those who spent under five hundred dollars also have higher divorce rates. The people with the lowest divorce rates are those who found the "happy medium" price of engagement rings. This is obviously not the only factor influencing divorce, but it is an interesting one to observe.
ReplyDeleteI found this article funny. I feel like our society is obsessed with material items, but clearly through this study, these items to do not necessarily equal happiness. Finding the balance between too much and too little is an important concept to apply to life in general, and this study is a perfect example of it. Too much or too little spent on an engagement ring correlated to higher divorce rates. But the happy medium had much lower rates. Its an interesting factor in divorce i never thought about before.
ReplyDeleteEven though I think that weddings are a fun way to celebrate and can be meaningful to families, I believe that an actual wedding ceremony is not necessary at all to have a successful marriage. There are so many couples that forego a wedding and still have lasting marriages. But the reason they did not have a wedding is also important (if for practical reasons, I am inclined to think the marriage will last longer). I am skeptical that there can be any correlation between engagement ring size and the duration of a marriage just because people have so many unique circumstances and motivations when buying rings that I think the data cannot even be compared to each other. In the end, I think that societal forces that we discussed in class regarding the occurrence of divorce is what has the biggest impact on the length of marriages- apart from the couple’s actual feelings for each other, of course!
ReplyDelete0601
Although the title of this article is not necessarily false, it is misleading and designed to grab the attention of readers. What we see here is the presence of a spurious relationship. Perhaps when a couple spends more on an engagement ring and wedding, they are getting married for financial reasons rather than because they are actually in love or compatible. This leads to a higher divorce rate among couples who spend more. The price of a ring does not impact a marriage.
ReplyDelete- Drew Brees
I find this article an interesting read. To simply summarize, there is an "inverse relationship" between the size of wedding rings and the marriage duration. There are many factors as to why couples split with expensive rings. Some of these factors may be how to couple may find wealth as there source of happiness much less than actual love. Another reason why may be that the quality and cost of the ring may woe and persuade women to accept the marriage. So it makes sense that marriages tend to be shorter as the ring size grows larger
ReplyDeleteThe article paints a picture of a Gaussian curve where ring price corresponds to length of marriage. However, it seemed very unnecessary and stupid in my opinion. The fact that our society has placed such an incredible amount of significance to a piece of jewelry is confusing. I've argued with this topic with my friends and family for a while now. Ring price should have no correlation to marriage duration if the individuals are fully committed to each other and love each other unconditionally. The only reason why a relationship is seen is because of various confounding variables.
ReplyDeleteSong Yun
This article definitely got my attention because it taught me a few things about wedding ring spending. According to the data these researchers found, if one spends under $500 on a wedding ring, they are more likely to have a shorter marriage and higher divorce rate. I'm assuming this could be because there isn't much money among the partners and with low income comes a lot of money related problems. The data also shows that those who spent thousands of dollars on a ring also experienced similar problems. Clearly, if these individuals can afford to spend that much on a ring, then they are not that strapped for cash. However, one can assume that because they spent an outrageous amount on a ring, they bought it impulsively and thought that that simple gesture in itself could ensure a long lasting marriage. The researches included that the best way to go is to meet in the middle because couples that spent only a few thousand or less had the longest lasting marriages.
ReplyDelete- Louis Pardo
I was quite interested in this article, and a little surprised, as I would have expected that those who spent more on a wedding band would have happier marriages if only for the fact that they probably have more disposable income than the average person and I subscribe to the notion that money CAN buy happiness. According to the article however, I am a bit wrong. I also found this article to be interesting because of the fact that I never thought to draw any connections between ring spending and success of the marriage, although I also believe that it's important to be cautious when reading these sort of studies, because of the fact that correlation does not equal causation. Just because there is a correlation between ring size and divorce rates, doesn't necessarily mean that either one of them causes the other.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with what the article talks about, there is no relation between the cost of the ring and the length of marriage.Also I think there is a reason why the result of the study is the more expensive the ring is the shorter the marriage sustain: maybe they did research on a certain type of people. I think a boy will be willing to spend a lot of money on a ring if he loves the girl or in some cases the boy spends a lot of money on other things and has not enough money for an expensive ring.
ReplyDelete-Qiao Mi
I don't necessarily disagree with the research but I feel that sometimes it isn't always even legitimate to say the ring has anything to do with the marriage. I understand that you can build better confidence intervals the higher your sample size is, but many couples I know that have yet to divorce even once were poor. They were couples who made their proposals with $5 plastic rings because not everyone at the time these people got married could afford more expensive rings. But on the other hand, I also know many other couples too who have yet to get a divorce and have expensive rings and other jewelry. The same way that Martin Luther King felt to judge a man you should know the content of his character and not the color of his skin, I feel a marriage and whether or not it will end should be determined by the quality of the bond it was founded on and not the money spent on it.
ReplyDeleteKenny P
It is surprising how more expensive rings lead to less happy marriage. My interpretation of the data is: people that buy expensive rings are people with certain lifestyle (pop stars, business people etc.), and those are the people with a lifestyle that may lead to a higher divorce rate. The study also pointed out that couples with a very cheap wedding ring have a big chance of divorce, probably because they will have some financial problems. So as I see from the result, normal middle class couples have a more stable relationship because the lifestyle they have is healthier for marriage.
ReplyDeleteLi
The correlation between the price of rings and the longevity of marriages is surprising. It's interesting that many people want nicer, more expensive rings with larger diamonds to symbolize the extent of their love, yet, those with costly taste are the people who experience higher rates of divorce among couples. I find it ridiculous to spend that much money on something like an engagement ring. I think the same of couples who spend extensive amounts on the wedding ceremony. In my opinion, weddings and rings are luxuries for the benefit of other people. Engagement rings tell people of your status of being in a committed relationship, they do nothing for the person wearing them who already know how their relationship is doing. Buying expensive rings is like trying to put a price on a relationship or trying to show the other partner how much they are worth to the other.
ReplyDelete-Paige Willingham
Well, I believe it depends on the relationship and how the couple implicitly or explicitly expresses their love. Personally' I'm nowhere near marriage and inevitably never researched the price of most wedding rings. It's nice to know there are studies that support me not having to incur further debt in order to purchase a wedding ring. Apparently, some people believe the more costly the memory, the more of an impression the memory leaves in ones in mind. There is way to much debt floating around, i try my best not to catch it. That will be a lot harder to explain to my mysterious future wife to be. Everything has a price. Yes, everything has a price, evidently even love. Will that price be monetary? I believe it will be more indirectly than anything.
ReplyDelete--Bl@k Thought
I think that it is not purely the amount of money one spends on a ring, but why they are spending that amount that would cause the shorter marriage. For example, if the buyer is spending less than 500 dollars on a ring, then maybe they are very young, have financial problems, and/or do not think marriage is particularly important. All of these factors I can see leading to a shorter marriage.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this notion that the reasons behind their spending choices are what may be an indicator of higher or lower divorce rates. You touched on the reasons behind couples spending little money on a ring, but did not talk about the reasons behind spending an outrageous amount. I think some of these reasons could potentially include that the couple is financially very well off and often times extremely wealthy people have really high divorce rates. They also could be trying to prove their love to their partner and if a big ring is how you show love then that is not the healthiest relationship.
DeleteOyin Adedipe, 0601
ReplyDeleteThe article states that “spending between $2,000 and $4,000 on an engagement ring was associated with a higher divorce rate.” The way this research finding is presented is very much flawed and shows illogical reasoning. I do not believe that the cost of the engagement ring directly causes higher rates of divorce. This logic seems very outlandish. Other factors linked to the purchase of a cheaper engagement ring may be at blame for the higher rates of divorce. Such factors may include age at which people get married and poverty. For example, a young man let’s say age 18, who decides to get married, may not be well established in his profession and thus may only be able to afford a cheaper engagement ring for his wife. His marriage is more likely to end in divorce because studies have shown that the higher the lower the age of marriage, the higher the probability of disruption. Therefore, it may appear that purchasing cheaper wedding rings is causing a higher rate of divorce, which is not the case.
studies have shown that the lower the age of marriage, the higher the probability of disruption.***
DeleteOyin Adedipe
These finding by Emory University are surprising to me because I would probably have never thought of this, but they are not shocking. If you think about it in (with my cynical outlook) then it makes sense. I think a relationship based on spending is not ideal. Lots of people are superficial and dumb. Not to be sexist but more often then not, a woman will mistake a man spending lots of money on her as a sign of love, but it isn't. At the same time, some men are convinced that the only way to show a woman love, is to spend a lot of money on her. So in superficial relationships like these, one where the man will buy a ridiculously expensive ring, of course there will be a larger rate of divorce. What did shock me was that when less than $500 was spent on a ring, there was higher divorce rates as well. As we've studied in class, financial issues are the number one reason why people get divorced, and spending less than $500 on a wedding ring may indicate financial issues, which is why there is a high divorce rate.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very interesting article. It demonstrates how marriage in the U.S. has become a prestigious act. It feeds into the stereotype that some women marry for money, because that is almost what it seems like. The costlier the engagement and wedding, the more likely it might be that the woman is marrying for money rather than love. However, I also think it's funny that men who "don't spend enough" on a ring also create a higher risk of divorce. Is it because he doesn't care enough about her, or does she care about the money, too? It's hard to know. Regardless, this confirms my belief that people are beginning to take weddings more seriously than the actual marriages.
ReplyDeleteThe article presents an interesting story on how the expenses spent on wedding relate to divorce rate. However, I’m a little skeptical about the information. First of all, the article does not cite properly, or provide a direct link to the actual study. Second, high divorce rate in families that spend thousands on wedding or wedding rings does not mean these two aspect have a connection. There are multiple reasons for a couple to divorce, not to mention researchers must take into account their backgrounds; and maybe coincidentally a high percentage falls into the ones who lavish. Couples who spend less can divorce too!
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point, the article didn't provide enough investigations, and therefore, it's not credible enough. The connections between ring size and divorce rate is a illogical reasoning that does not consider the other factors which might lead to high divorce rate for richer couples.
Delete- Jialun Lin
The article is amusing to me because of it's use of illogical reasonings. It suggested that buying expensive rings are associated with higher rate of divorce. The size and price of wedding rings did suggested the income level of the couple, which implies that richer people are more likely to get divorce. However, this is not always true, because it does not mean that middle-class people don't afford a more expensive ring. The article brings up a interesting idea, but it lacks credibility since it is not looking at all the perspectives that leads to divorce.
ReplyDeleteAlthough an interesting article to read, I found the claim that the more costly the ring, the less likely that marriage would last was an example of illogical reasoning. Perhaps providing the reader with more statistics about the study they conducted could have made the claim more credible, however, that is not the case. Illogical reasoning, the idea in which the cause and effect do not make sense and are not associated, is somehow supposed to make men think they should not spend too much or too little, but the right amount of money on a ring in order to have a long marriage. Rings are only symbols; marriage deals with trust, honesty, love, etc…not the cost of a ring.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation of this article as illogical reasoning. I do not think that the cost of a ring would severely impact the longevity of a marriage. I believe that there must be some intervening variables in this study.
DeleteThis article relates to some of the topics discussed in class regarding marriages and the increase of divorce within the US society. America’s wealth has grown considerably since the more traditional periods of marriage where matrimony was viewed more sacred then trendy as it is today. The increasing US economy has led people to consume more and live materialistically. Marriage has become a tool more so for status and financial stability compared to earlier generations that was secured by stronger values of love, honesty, and commitment. People in society today care more about the presentation of being married more than they do actually being together for the long term.
ReplyDelete-Cameron J. Goins/ 12/10/14
Just like any competitive business industry, the wedding industry associates expensive weddings and rings to longer lasting marriages in order to promote growth and spending. The industry is looking to gain as much revenue as possible on events that typically happen once in a persons lifetime. This article raises an important question though: does spending extravagant amounts of money on a wedding lead to a superficial and materialistic marriage? The article claims that those who spent over $2,000, and conversely under $500, had shorter lived marriages on average.
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how the size of a ring and how much it costs can really damage a marriage. The whole idea sounds silly because there is no good reasoning towards it. However, it does relate to factors of failed marriages that we have discussed in class how money is important in a marriage. This also relates to gender because some women feel that they need expensive things to be able to show off to their friends. Who would want to tell their friends that their fiancee spent $100 on a ring he bought from a back of a truck rather than a +$1,000 ring at Tiffany's. Since our economy has grown over the past few decades, people are willing to spend more especially on expensive goods. When it comes to engagement rings, they are making the point that men shouldn't spend too little on a ring or too much.
ReplyDeleteCorrelation does not imply causation. Maybe it is not the amount of money someone spends on a ring that decides how long their marriage will last, but instead the modern day culture that is putting emphasis on materialism which then leads to increased divorce rates and more money spent on rings.
ReplyDelete-Glen Coco
As interesting as the first few sentences sounded none of their findings seemed to be based in any reliable sources. And let's be honest a ring is forever. Take some pride in what you buy. It's not the size of the ring that matters it's the pride you put in it.
ReplyDeleteI think it is important to note where the writer is coming from in this piece. the New York Post is quite often considered a "rag", with journalistic integrity left up to the readers themselves. Being a New Yorker myself, we often take articles from the Post at face value. Thus, I feel that they are attempting to imply causation from a simple correlation in the amount that someone spends on the ring. To many people, the amount that is spent is not significant; a ring is simply our society's way of signifying marriage. This article does not look at the underlying causes for the ring purchase, and attempts to further the overall materialistic consumer culture of America. I do not think that this article is a good gauge on the causation it is attempting to imply regarding divorce rates and marriage duration.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that's important to note with this article is the fallacy of causation that can occur from results such as this. When you take into account that couples with less money perhaps have less material things and thus spend more time with each other. Or perhaps expensive rings and weddings can lead to early debt that can place strain on a marriage. That said this was one of my favorite articles.
ReplyDelete- Malcolm Lawanson
Personally I view a ring as the sign of marriage and not what marriage is all about. I would spend money for a nice ring but nothing crazy expensive
ReplyDeletePersonally I view a ring as the sign of marriage and not what marriage is all about. I would spend money for a nice ring but nothing crazy expensive
ReplyDelete