ArticleScientific reports2025
Mechanisms creating homogamy in depressiveness in couples: A longitudinal study from Czechia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Moving beyond attraction, compassion, and competence: evidence for compatibility as a distinct component of mate preferences.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Couples often resemble each other in characteristics like depression, but the reasons for this homogamy (i.e., similarity) remain unclear. We investigated two potential mechanisms: preference for a self-similar partner and convergence (i.e., increasing similarity) over time. In a nationally representative sample of 2,793 Czech individuals who we surveyed three times in one year, we examined self-reports of participants', their ideal partners', and their actual partners' "pessimism and depressiveness". Participants preferred partners less depressive than themselves, yet their actual partners were more depressive than desired. Those who ended their relationships showed a greater ideal-versus-actual partner discrepancy than those who stayed together. In stable relationships, individuals adjusted their ideal preferences to align more closely with their actual partners over time. We identified four relationship classes with latent class growth modeling based on self and partner evaluations: both non-depressive, both depressive, self depressive and partner non-depressive, and self non-depressive and partner depressive. Romantic relationships were most stable when both partners were non-depressive and most likely to dissolve when both were depressive. While we failed to detect convergence overall, we found it within heterogamous (i.e., dissimilar) classes. Overall, our findings suggest that homogamy and heterogamy in depressiveness are complexly associated with relationship maintenance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.