【題組】19. The more a relationship moves through a series of formal and informal escalators, the less likely it is toterminate short of marriage (Adams 1979, pp. 260-267).
 Adams (1979) also provides some warnings about these propositions. First, some factors (such as partner'sgood looks) have greater salience for men than for women, while some (such as partner's empathic capacity)have greater salience for women than for men. Second, some factors such as parental interference may havedifferent outcomes in the long run compared to the short run. Third, the timing of courtship may bringdifferent considerations into play, e.g., courtship in later life such as following divorce or widowhood, orwhen children from previous marriages must be considered (see Bulcroft and O'Connor 1986). Finally,social class factors may affect the predictive value of the propositions. There is also a difference betweentraditional (male-dominated) and egalitarian relationships-the former more often found in the workingclass and among certain ethnic groups, the latter more likely to characterize the middle class. Thus, the kindof marriage one anticipates (traditional/egalitarian) may influence the mate-selection process.Further, as courtship has moved away from the fixed-stage sequence of development, it may be viewed bestfrom a circular-causal perspective (Stephen 1985) in which progress is strongly influenced bycommunication within the couple, leading to increased or decreased movement toward marriage.The timing of marriage may be influenced by such factors as meaningful employment opportunities forwomen (which may diminish their motivation to marry), the increasing acceptability of nonmaritalcohabitation and adult singlehood (see Stein 1981), and the effects of nonmarital pregnancy or of variousintolerable conditions (such as violence) in the family of origin. Currently, a number of scholars arestudying each of these topics. They affect not only the timing of marriage but also how we define courtship.Regarding premarital factors that contribute to later marital adjustment, no scholar has presented evidence torefute Kirkpatrick's ([1955] 1963) conclusions: The happiness of parents' marriage； adequate length ofcourtship； adequate sex information in childhood； a happy childhood including a harmonious relationshipwith parents； approval of the courtship relationship by significant others； good premarital adjustment of thecouple and strong motivation to marry； homogamy along age, racial-ethnic, and religious lines； and, laterage at marriage. Murstein (1980) reviewed mate-selection scholarship from the 1970s and predicted that researchers wouldfocus less on the "old standby'' variables such as race, class, and religion and more on the dynamic aspectsof courtship. He was correct. Some of the major themes that have interested scholars in recent years areidentified below. Studies of cohabitation included early efforts to identify its several types (both structural and motivational).Later studies focused on the effects of cohabitation on subsequent marital happiness, satisfaction, andstability. The general finding across such research is that living with someone prior to marriage has little orno positive effect. Instead, most studies show negative effects in terms of happiness, satisfaction, andstability. This research has been carried out in the United States, Canada, and other countries, and althoughthe rates vary, they are quite uniform in showing that there is a greater tendency to divorce among those whohave lived with someone (i.e., the future spouse or any other partner) prior to marriage than among thosewho did not previously cohabit. Most scholars point out that either or both of two factors are probably atwork here； first, the less-than-full acceptance of cohabitation as a lifestyle (implying less or no socialsupport for those who cohabit), and second, the kind of persons who choose a "deviant" lifestyle--personswho are risk-takers, and who are less commitment-oriented. (However, see Popenoe 1987 for a differentview of cohabitation in a setting where it is more normative.)
 Question
Based on Laner's discussions, please evaluate the trend of homogamy in contemporary Taiwan'ssociety. Then, identify factors associated with family formation in the future.