Marriage After Retirement: Intimacy, Identity, Routine, and Time Together
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 17, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Marriage after retirement changes because retirement changes the architecture of daily life. Work no longer separates the day into predictable blocks, professional roles may lose some of their former weight, household routines become more visible, and spouses may suddenly have far more access to each other’s time. For some couples, that creates relief, companionship, and new possibilities. For others, it exposes mismatched expectations about closeness, autonomy, chores, leisure, social life, or what retirement was supposed to feel like.
Research does not support a simple story in which retirement either improves or damages marriage. A 2022 meta-analysis of retirement-adjustment predictors found that social participation, physical health, marital relationship quality, finances, and retirement exit conditions were all meaningfully associated with adjustment, with substantial variation across people and studies. La Rue, Haslam, and Steffens (2022) In a large dyadic study of 2,117 couples, life satisfaction increased on average around retirement for both retirees and partners, yet the amount of change varied widely and was strongly correlated within couples. Weber and Hülür (2021) Retirement is therefore best understood as a couple transition occurring inside two individual lives, not as a uniform marital event.
This article focuses specifically on the psychological transition inside an existing marriage or long-term partnership. It does not cover pension law, survivor benefits, or the separate search intent of getting married after retirement. It also does not treat ordinary adjustment difficulties as disorders. The central question is how retirement can reshape emotional intimacy, identity, routine, autonomy, shared time, and the everyday coordination of two people who may have spent decades building a life around work.
What Changes in a Marriage After Retirement?
The biggest change is not simply that spouses have more time. It is that time loses an external organizer. Before retirement, jobs often determine when people wake up, leave home, eat, socialize, rest, and reunite. Even couples with flexible schedules usually have some recurring separation built into the week. Retirement can remove that scaffolding almost overnight.
That redistribution of time changes the relationship system. A person who used to decompress alone during a commute may now enter the kitchen while a spouse is following a long-established morning routine. A partner who imagined retirement as shared travel may discover that the other imagined woodworking, volunteering, grandchildren, or three quiet mornings a week alone. Neither expectation is inherently wrong. The friction comes from treating one private picture of retirement as if it had already been jointly agreed.
Longitudinal evidence supports the idea that expectations matter. In a 10-year Dutch panel study of 724 partners of older workers who retired, only a minority reported serious adjustment problems, but pre-retirement expectations predicted later difficulties in relationship, finances, and shared leisure. Damman, Segel-Karpas, and Henkens (2019) The implication is practical: retirement is easier to coordinate when couples make their assumptions visible before those assumptions become daily grievances.
Does Retirement Make Marriage Better or Worse?
On average, retirement can coincide with improved well-being, but averages conceal very different trajectories. In the Finnish Retirement and Aging Study, 3,543 public-sector employees showed improved life satisfaction across the retirement transition, with the largest gain in the ‘easiness’ domain; the pattern varied by gender, health, and spousal status. This is evidence about life satisfaction rather than marital intimacy, so it should not be converted into a claim that retirement automatically improves relationships. Prakash et al. (2022)
At the relationship level, recent evidence also emphasizes heterogeneity and interdependence. A 2025 dyadic study of 108 retired Arab couples in Israel found that relational uncertainty, perceived partner interference, and partner facilitation were associated with both marital satisfaction and intimacy. Because the study was cross-sectional and culturally specific, it cannot establish a universal causal pattern. It does show something important: in retirement, one spouse’s sense of disruption or support is linked to the other spouse’s relational world. Nashef-Hamuda et al. (2025)
The most useful conclusion is therefore not ‘retirement is good for marriage’ or ‘retirement is dangerous for marriage.’ Retirement increases the amount of relational reorganization that may be required. Whether that reorganization feels expansive or constricting depends on resources, health, prior relationship quality, timing, social networks, expectations, and the couple’s ability to negotiate a new daily structure.
Why More Time Together Can Feel Surprisingly Difficult
Closeness and constant availability are not the same thing. Emotional intimacy depends partly on responsive attention, disclosure, care, and a sense that one can remain a distinct person inside the relationship. When retirement removes routine separation, a couple can gain opportunity for connection while losing some of the automatic boundaries that previously protected concentration, privacy, friendship, hobbies, and decompression.
Consider a small scene. One partner retires on Friday. On Monday morning, the other is at the table reading the news and planning the day exactly as they have for years. The newly retired spouse enters every ten minutes: ‘What are we doing today?’ ‘Should we go out?’ ‘Do you need anything?’ ‘Who should we call?’ The questions may be affectionate. They can still feel intrusive if the other person experiences the morning as personal territory rather than couple time.
Research on retired couples has used terms such as interference and facilitation to describe this difference. A partner can become an obstacle to established routines, or can make life easier by supporting goals and helping the other person function. The issue is not how many hours spouses spend together. It is whether shared time is coordinated in a way that leaves both people with enough autonomy and enough connection.
Identity After Work: Who Am I, and Who Are We?
Retirement can change identity because work often supplies more than income. It may provide status, competence, rhythm, social membership, responsibility, recognition, and an answer to the ordinary question, ‘What do you do?’ When that role changes, a spouse may encounter a person who has more free time but less certainty about where value, purpose, or belonging now come from.
A 2023 longitudinal study of Australians who had retired within the previous year found that maintaining some pre-retirement group memberships and gaining new ones helped explain better post-retirement health and well-being. Haslam et al. (2023) A systematic review of interventions aimed at meaningful social roles also found some evidence that socially engaging roles can support life satisfaction, social support, activity, and aspects of health, although the intervention literature was limited and heterogeneous. Heaven et al. (2013)
Inside marriage, identity change matters because the relationship must adapt to it. A spouse who previously organized family life around a demanding profession may want to become more involved at home. Another may feel displaced by that involvement. Someone who drew confidence from expertise at work may become unusually sensitive to being corrected in ordinary domestic tasks. A person who expected retirement to feel like freedom may feel ashamed that it instead feels disorienting. These are identity and role transitions, not proof that love disappeared.
A healthy post-retirement identity usually has more than one pillar. The marriage can be important without becoming the only source of meaning. Friendships, groups, hobbies, volunteering, learning, physical activity, family roles, creative projects, and part-time work can all widen the self beyond the spouse. That broader identity base can also protect intimacy by allowing partners to return to each other with experiences to share rather than expecting the relationship to generate all stimulation, purpose, and social contact.
Routine, Space, and the New Geography of Home
Retirement turns the home into a more intensely shared environment. That can be pleasant and still require explicit negotiation. Couples often need to decide questions that work once decided for them: Who gets uninterrupted morning time? Which room is for quiet? When are errands done? How often are meals shared? Is every outing a joint outing? Is a closed door a rejection or simply concentration?
Routines matter because repeated small interactions become the emotional climate of a marriage. A couple does not need a rigid schedule. It often helps, however, to create predictable categories of time: some shared, some individual, some social, and some intentionally unplanned. The goal is to reduce unnecessary ambiguity. When each person knows that Tuesday morning is separate time and Friday afternoon is usually together, requests for space are less likely to be interpreted as relational withdrawal.
This is also where ordinary irritation can be misread. Increased exposure makes habits more visible: television volume, kitchen timing, phone use, mess, interruptions, pacing, naps, commentary, and small preferences that were previously diluted by work hours. Friction over these details does not automatically indicate deep incompatibility. It often indicates that a couple is learning how to co-occupy more time and space.
Household Roles and Fairness After Retirement
Retirement can unsettle long-standing domestic arrangements because the logic behind them changes. If one spouse handled most household tasks while the other worked longer hours, what happens when the work hours disappear? If both partners retire, do they renegotiate from scratch or fall back into the old division?
A panel study using 29 waves of the German Socio-Economic Panel followed 3,288 dual-earner couples. When one spouse retired first, that spouse generally did more housework while the still-working partner did less. After both spouses had retired, however, couples tended to move back toward their pre-retirement division of household labor. Leopold and Skopek (2018) That finding is useful because it shows that having more available time does not automatically erase established gendered or relational patterns.
The psychological issue is usually not a mathematical 50/50 split. It is perceived fairness, recognition, and agreement. A partner may willingly cook more because they enjoy it but resent being treated as if the labor happens by magic. Another may take over errands but feel criticized for doing them differently. Retirement can improve domestic partnership when couples discuss tasks as a new system rather than quietly assuming that old roles will either continue unchanged or disappear on their own.
Shared Time: Quality Matters More Than Quantity
Retirement creates a large increase in potential couple time, but not all shared time is equally connecting. Sitting in the same room while separately scrolling can be pleasant companionship, neutral coexistence, or a source of disconnection depending on what each person expects. A weekly walk may create more felt closeness than twenty hours of passive co-presence.
Research on shared leisure across couples suggests that the value of joint activity depends on context and resources rather than following a simple ‘more is better’ rule. A longitudinal dyadic study of 1,382 newly married U.S. couples found that shared leisure interacted with financial distress and income in complex ways, illustrating that shared activity is not uniformly protective across circumstances. That sample was not retirement-age, so it should be used as general relationship evidence rather than direct retirement evidence. Totenhagen et al. (2024)
For retirement specifically, the partner-adjustment study by Damman and colleagues found that about one in ten partners reported at least some difficulty with shared leisure, and pre-retirement expectations predicted later experiences. The useful target is therefore not maximum togetherness. It is mutually satisfying togetherness: activities that both people genuinely value, alongside enough independent life that shared time remains chosen rather than obligatory.
This distinction also helps explain why retirement can sometimes resemble a roommate marriage. A couple may be together almost continuously while emotional, recreational, or affectionate connection becomes thin. Physical proximity cannot substitute for responsiveness.
Emotional Intimacy After Retirement
Retirement can create more opportunities for intimate conversation because spouses have fewer scheduling barriers. It can also increase the amount of emotional processing that enters the marriage. A person who is grieving a role, angry about an involuntary retirement, worried about health, or uncertain about purpose may turn repeatedly toward the spouse as the nearest witness to that transition.
In a 14-day dyadic diary study of 45 couples in which one partner found recent retirement challenging, daily rumination was associated with poorer perceived disclosure quality: conversations were experienced as more repetitive, negative, difficult to follow, or less open and authentic. Retirement-related disclosure also showed partner effects, meaning one person’s adjustment process could spill into the other partner’s emotional experience. Horn, Holzgang, and Rosenberger (2021)
This does not mean partners should stop talking about retirement. It means disclosure works best when the relationship is not asked to function as an endless processing chamber. A spouse can listen, validate, ask questions, and still have limits. The retiree can also use writing, friendships, groups, activity, or professional support to distribute emotional regulation across more than one channel.
The broader relationship-science concept that helps here is perceived partner responsiveness: the experience of being understood, valued, and cared for. A contemporary review describes responsiveness as a central process across romantic interactions, while the classic interpersonal process model of intimacy links disclosure and perceived responsiveness to felt intimacy. Arican-Dinc and Gable (2023); Laurenceau, Barrett, and Pietromonaco (1998). Retirement may change the topics and frequency of conversation, but the psychological mechanism of intimacy remains recognizable: people tend to feel closer when what they reveal is met with attention and care rather than dismissal, automatic fixing, or indifference.
For a broader explanation of emotional closeness itself, see Emotional Intimacy in Marriage. If retirement has exposed an existing period of disconnection, the more relevant next step may be How to Reconnect With Your Spouse and Rebuild Emotional Intimacy.
When One Spouse Retires Before the Other
Asynchronous retirement creates a special coordination problem because the partners suddenly have different relationships to time. One person may experience freedom while the other still has deadlines, commuting, fatigue, or work stress. The retiree may want daytime companionship; the employed spouse may want the home to continue functioning as it did before. Both can feel that the other is failing to understand an obvious reality.
The housework evidence shows that the first retiree often takes on more domestic labor during this stage, but those changes may not persist after both partners retire. The Dutch partner study also shows that the non-retiring spouse has their own adjustment process and expectations. That is why ‘my retirement’ can be a misleading phrase inside a couple. The employment status changes for one person, but the schedule, household, availability, social rhythm, and expectations change for two.
Couples often do better when they name the asymmetry directly. The retired partner has more discretionary time but is still entitled to autonomy and purpose. The working partner has less discretionary time but is not automatically entitled to outsource every domestic task. A negotiated arrangement is psychologically stronger than an invisible one.
Social Life Outside the Marriage Still Matters
One of the clearest mistakes in retirement is expecting the spouse to replace the social world that work used to provide. Colleagues, customers, students, patients, teams, professional communities, lunch companions, and casual acquaintances can disappear or sharply decrease. The resulting social vacuum may be interpreted as ‘I need more from my marriage’ when part of the unmet need is actually broader belonging.
The 2022 meta-analysis of 125 reports and 78,632 participants found social participation to have the strongest positive association with retirement adjustment among the five major predictor categories examined. La Rue et al. (2022) The 2023 longitudinal identity study similarly suggests that preserving and gaining group memberships can support post-retirement well-being. Haslam et al. (2023)
For marriage, this means independence and intimacy can reinforce each other. Separate friendships and activities can reduce pressure on the spouse to be the only source of novelty, validation, entertainment, and purpose. Couples can also build shared social worlds together: neighbors, clubs, volunteering, faith communities, classes, walking groups, travel communities, or regular gatherings. The key is that retirement should widen life where possible, rather than shrinking both partners into the same room.
Health, Energy, and Caregiving Can Redefine Retirement
Retirement often overlaps with changes in health, energy, mobility, sleep, caregiving, or family responsibility. These factors can be more consequential for the relationship than retirement status itself. A 2025 overview of 15 systematic reviews on retirement and health concluded that outcomes vary substantially by socioeconomic status, job characteristics, lifestyle, and other contextual factors, with important methodological limitations across the literature. Vigezzi et al. (2025)
A couple may have planned a retirement of travel and discover that one partner becomes a caregiver. Another couple may have expected more intimacy but faces pain, fatigue, treatment schedules, or anxiety. These shifts should not be reduced to a failure of motivation. Health changes the feasible range of activities and can alter roles, dependency, autonomy, affection, and emotional availability.
At the same time, ageist assumptions are unhelpful. Later-life couples remain capable of emotional growth, affection, conflict, novelty, sexuality, learning, and relational change. Retirement is a social transition, not a psychological expiration date.
What Retirement Problems Can Look Like in Real Life
One couple argues every morning about errands. Under the argument is a disagreement about time: one spouse experiences the whole day as jointly available; the other experiences several hours as personal time.
Another couple rarely fights. They manage appointments, meals, grandchildren, prescriptions, and household maintenance efficiently. Yet one partner feels lonely because every conversation has become logistical. That experience belongs closer to loneliness in marriage than to a simple shortage of time together.
A third couple spends almost every hour together and slowly becomes bored. They conclude that something is wrong with the marriage, when part of the problem may be reduced novelty and too little independent experience entering the relationship. Relationship boredom is a studied experience rather than a diagnosis; the English Hub covers it separately in Boredom in Marriage.
A fourth couple discovers that retirement is emotionally better than expected. One partner cooks lunch, the other walks with friends, they meet again in the afternoon, and they now have enough energy to talk without rushing. Their marriage did not become stronger because they were together every minute. It became easier to access because stress and time scarcity changed.
What Helps Couples Adjust to Retirement Together?
The strongest practical principles follow directly from the evidence on expectations, social participation, identity, household roles, disclosure, and couple interdependence.
Make the invisible retirement plan visible
Ask each other what an ordinary week is supposed to look like, not just what the dream vacation looks like. Discuss mornings, meals, chores, grandchildren, friends, hobbies, travel, money boundaries, exercise, quiet, sleep, caregiving, and how much spontaneous togetherness each person actually wants. Expectations that remain private can later masquerade as moral judgments: ‘You never want to do anything’ or ‘You never leave me alone.’
Protect both autonomy and connection
Retirement gives couples a chance to choose more of their time. Use that flexibility to create both shared and separate life. Needing individual space does not automatically mean emotional distance. Wanting shared rituals does not automatically mean dependence. A workable marriage allows both needs to be negotiated without turning either into an accusation.
Renegotiate chores explicitly
Do not assume that free time will redistribute labor fairly on its own. Talk about which tasks changed, which tasks are invisible, who dislikes what, what standards actually matter, and whether the arrangement still feels reasonable. Appreciation often matters as much as arithmetic.
Build social identity beyond the couple
Preserve old groups when they remain meaningful and create new ones when work-based belonging falls away. A spouse is a central relationship, but making one person the entire social environment is a heavy demand for both partners.
Keep some shared experiences intentional
Choose forms of time together that produce attention, enjoyment, novelty, affection, or meaning. The activity can be small: coffee outside, a walk, a film, a class, cooking, gardening, a museum, a game, or a recurring visit. The psychological value lies less in grandeur than in mutual engagement.
Talk about the transition without making every conversation about the transition
Retirement deserves emotional processing, especially when it was involuntary or identity-disrupting. It also helps to notice when the same worries are cycling without movement. Couple conversation works better when both partners can remain open and responsive rather than exhausted by repetition.
A small 2026 feasibility study of a couple-based retirement education program involving 27 couples found increases in retirement self-efficacy and dyadic coping, though relationship satisfaction did not increase from its already high baseline and the design was not a definitive efficacy trial. Halford and Ho (2026) The study is useful as preliminary evidence that retirement preparation can be designed for couples rather than only individuals.
Intimacy in Culture: 45 Years
Andrew Haigh’s film 45 Years is not a retirement study and should not be read as one. Its value here is psychological illustration. The film places a long marriage in later life under sudden pressure from the return of an unresolved story from the past. Daily routines continue, preparations continue, and yet the meaning of the shared history shifts.
What makes the film relevant to retirement is not a claim that retired couples secretly contain such crises. It is the way later life can reduce external noise and make identity, memory, and the meaning of the partnership newly visible. A long marriage is partly a shared archive. Retirement can create more time to inhabit that archive, sometimes warmly and sometimes uneasily. Fiction compresses this process into drama; real couples more often encounter it through smaller questions about who they have been, who they are becoming, and what still belongs to ‘us.’
Marriage in the Artificial Era
Retirement is now occurring in the Artificial Era, when companionship, advice, planning, memory support, and conversation can be partly mediated by AI. For older adults, this is already more than a theoretical possibility. A 2026 qualitative study of later-life adults who regularly used AI chatbots found that participants described them as companions, teachers, consultants, assistants, and sources of entertainment. The study did not focus on married retirees, so it cannot tell us whether chatbot use improves or harms retirement marriages. Wu et al. (2026)
At the couple level, a 2026 systematic review of 21 studies described generative AI as a potential ‘third voice’ in human relationships: adults use it for advice, emotional support, and communication mediation. Users often rate AI responses as empathic and helpful, but objective evaluations show reliability problems, inconsistency, and risks involving sycophancy, overreliance, authenticity, privacy, and safety. Evidence for relational benefit remains preliminary. Levkovich and Alon (2026)
For retired couples, the psychologically important question is not whether AI use is inherently good or bad. It is where AI enters the relational ecology. An AI assistant might help organize travel, explain a medical form, generate activity ideas, or help a person formulate what they want to say before a difficult conversation. It can also become a private audience for frustrations, fears, or emotional disclosures that once went primarily to a spouse.
That possibility makes boundaries worth discussing explicitly. Does either partner paste private couple conversations into AI systems? Is AI advice being treated as a prompt for reflection or as an authority that settles who is right? Is chatbot companionship adding to a broad social world or replacing difficult human contact? These questions belong to Marriage in the Artificial Era and to the evidence-focused page on AI Relationship Advice.
Technology can also consume the time retirement makes available. Partner phubbing and technoference research links device interruption with poorer relationship outcomes in many samples, although much of that literature is observational. Couples who want more connection after retirement may gain as much from protecting some screen-free moments as from adding more hours of nominal togetherness. See Phubbing and Technoference in Relationships.
When Professional Support Can Help
Retirement adjustment does not require therapy simply because a couple is irritable, uncertain, or reorganizing routines. Professional support becomes more relevant when distress is persistent, communication repeatedly collapses, one or both partners feel chronically lonely or trapped, retirement has intensified unresolved resentment, caregiving strain is overwhelming the relationship, or the transition is accompanied by significant anxiety, depression, grief, substance problems, or other mental-health concerns.
Couple-based support can also be useful before a crisis. A clinician can help spouses make expectations explicit, negotiate autonomy and shared time, revise domestic roles, and identify interaction patterns that are difficult to see from inside the marriage. When conflict has damaged closeness, the cluster’s article on Relationship Repair After Conflict addresses the repair process more directly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can retirement ruin a marriage?
Retirement does not determine marital outcome. It changes time, roles, identity, routine, and social context, which can expose both strengths and vulnerabilities. Large studies show substantial variation in adjustment, and dyadic research shows that partners’ experiences are interdependent. Persistent relationship problems deserve attention, but retirement itself is not a verdict on the marriage.
Is it normal to want more alone time after retirement?
Yes. Increased proximity can make the need for solitude more visible. Alone time can support concentration, rest, hobbies, friendships, and a sense of autonomy. The important question is whether the amount and meaning of separate time are understood by both partners rather than interpreted automatically as rejection.
How much time should retired couples spend together?
There is no evidence-based universal number of hours. Couples differ in temperament, health, housing, social networks, interests, and desired closeness. A better target is a mix of mutually satisfying shared time and enough independent activity that neither partner feels chronically crowded or abandoned.
Why do couples fight more after retirement?
Some couples do not fight more. When conflict does increase, common contributors include unspoken expectations, constant proximity, changed household roles, loss of work identity, reduced social contact, financial stress, health changes, and the need to renegotiate daily routines. These factors can co-occur, so one recurring argument may represent several underlying transitions.
What if one spouse loves retirement and the other hates it?
That mismatch is common enough to take seriously. Retirement is experienced individually even when it is managed as a couple transition. The partner who feels relieved and energized does not need to minimize the other’s loss of structure or identity, and the struggling partner does not need to define the other’s enjoyment as indifference. Different reactions can coexist while the couple builds routines that respect both.
How long does adjustment to retirement take?
Research does not support one fixed timeline. Adjustment varies by health, voluntariness of retirement, finances, social participation, identity, relationship quality, and life events. Some people feel better quickly; others take longer to build satisfying routines and roles. The useful marker is not whether a couple has reached an arbitrary deadline, but whether life is becoming more workable, meaningful, and connected over time.
Related Articles
References
Arican-Dinc, B., & Gable, S. L. (2023). Responsiveness in romantic partners’ interactions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 53, 101652. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37515977/
Damman, M., Segel-Karpas, D., & Henkens, K. (2019). Partners’ adjustment to older workers’ retirement: Testing the role of preretirement expectations in a 10-year panel study. Aging & Mental Health, 23(11), 1555–1561. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2018.1501661
Halford, W. K., & Ho, A. (2026). Helping couples plan for retirement: A feasibility test of Couple CARE in Retirement. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.70134
Haslam, C., Lam, B. C. P., Ghafoori, E., Steffens, N. K., Haslam, S. A., Bentley, S. V., Cruwys, T., & La Rue, C. J. (2023). A longitudinal examination of the role of social identity in supporting health and well-being in retirement. Psychology and Aging, 38(7), 615–626. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000757
Heaven, B., Brown, L. J. E., White, M., Errington, L., Mathers, J. C., & Moffatt, S. (2013). Supporting well-being in retirement through meaningful social roles: Systematic review of intervention studies. Milbank Quarterly, 91(2), 222–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/milq.12013
Horn, A. B., Holzgang, S. A., & Rosenberger, V. (2021). Adjustment of couples to the transition to retirement: The interplay of intra- and interpersonal emotion regulation in daily life. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 654255. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.654255
La Rue, C. J., Haslam, C., & Steffens, N. K. (2022). A meta-analysis of retirement adjustment predictors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 136, 103723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103723
Laurenceau, J.-P., Barrett, L. F., & Pietromonaco, P. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1238–1251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238
Leopold, T., & Skopek, J. (2018). Retirement and changes in housework: A panel study of dual earner couples. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 73(4), 733–743. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw121
Levkovich, I., & Alon, L. (2026). Generative AI as a third voice in human couple relationships: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 23, 101255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2026.101255
Nashef-Hamuda, R., Estlein, R., Palgi, Y., & Segel-Karpas, D. (2025). Relational turbulence among retired couples in Arab society: An APIM analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 87(5), 2097–2109. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.13118
Prakash, K. C., Virtanen, M., Törmälehto, S., Myllyntausta, S., Pentti, J., Vahtera, J., & Stenholm, S. (2022). Changes in life satisfaction during the transition to retirement: Findings from the FIREA cohort study. European Journal of Ageing, 19(4), 1587–1599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-022-00745-8
Totenhagen, C. J., Wilmarth, M. J., Madsen, R. M., & Marks, L. D. (2024). Do couples who play together stay together? A longitudinal dyadic examination of shared leisure, financial distress, and relationship outcomes. Family Process, 63(1), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12869
Vigezzi, G. P., Barbati, C., Maggioni, E., Stenholm, S., Odone, A., & Italian Working Group on Retirement and Health. (2025). Impact of retirement transition on health, well-being and health behaviours: Critical insights from an overview of reviews. Social Science & Medicine, 375, 118049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118049
Weber, E., & Hülür, G. (2021). Co-development of couples’ life satisfaction in transition to retirement: A longitudinal dyadic perspective. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(8), 1542–1554. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa067
Wu, Y., Jiao, F., Wang, H., & Zhang, Q. (2026). The role of the AI chatbot for digital companionship among older adults: A qualitative study. The Gerontologist, 66(9), gnag155. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnag155