Partner choice, relationship satisfaction, and oral contraception: the congruency hypothesis

S. Craig Roberts, Anthony C. Little, Robert P. Burriss, Kelly D. Cobey, Kateřina Klapilová, Jan Havlíček, Benedict C. Jones, Lisa DeBruine, Marion Petrie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

32 Citations (SciVal)


Hormonal fluctuation across the menstrual cycle explains temporal variation in women's judgment of the attractiveness of members of the opposite sex. Use of hormonal contraceptives could therefore influence both initial partner choice and, if contraceptive use subsequently changes, intrapair dynamics. Associations between hormonal contraceptive use and relationship satisfaction may thus be best understood by considering whether current use is congruent with use when relationships formed, rather than by considering current use alone. In the study reported here, we tested this congruency hypothesis in a survey of 365 couples. Controlling for potential confounds (including relationship duration, age, parenthood, and income), we found that congruency in current and previous hormonal contraceptive use, but not current use alone, predicted women's sexual satisfaction with their partners. Congruency was not associated with women's nonsexual satisfaction or with the satisfaction of their male partners. Our results provide empirical support for the congruency hypothesis and suggest that women's sexual satisfaction is influenced by changes in partner preference associated with change in hormonal contraceptive use.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1497-1503
Number of pages7
JournalPsychological Science
Issue number7
Early online date12 May 2014
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2014


  • hormonal contraception
  • major histocompatibility complex
  • masculinity
  • mate choice
  • menstrual cycle
  • MHC
  • romantic relationships
  • sexual desire


Dive into the research topics of 'Partner choice, relationship satisfaction, and oral contraception: the congruency hypothesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this