the psychological consequences of cohabitation among students of ...

Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
ISSN 1943-2429
© 2013 Ozean Publication
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF COHABITATION AMONG
STUDENTS OF TAI SOLARIN UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION, IJAGUN, OGUN
STATE, NIGERIA
BELLO, M. O. &OGUNSANWO, B. A.
Tai Solarin University of Education,
College of Science & Information Technology,
Department of Human Kinetics and Health Education, Ogun State, Nigeria
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: This study focused on the psychological consequences of cohabitation among students of Tai Solarin
University of Education, Ijagun, Ijebu-Ode, Ogun State, Nigeria. The descriptive survey research design was
used for the study. A sample of seventy-five (75) respondents was randomly selected from each of the four (4)
colleges in the university thereby having a total sample of three hundred respondents (300). Frequency counts
and percentages as well as inferential statistics of Chi-square were used to analyze the obtained data. The
criterion for accepting or rejecting the three (3) hypotheses of the study was set at 0.05 level of significance.
The findings revealed that all the hypotheses were rejected, meaning that depression, hatred for the opposite sex
and lack of concentration were significant psychological consequences of cohabitation among the students.
Based on these findings, recommendations were made on how to reduce, if not eradicate, cohabitation among
students in tertiary institutions, among others, in Nigeria.
Keywords: Psychological Consequences, Cohabitation, students of tertiary institution.
____________________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
Nigerian government‟s policy on students‟ hostel accommodation which is encouraging private hostel
developers may have its good side, but f5rom observation, the inability of the tertiary institutions in expanding
and building new hostels had forced several students to look outside the campus for accommodation. This had
led to the emergence of an unacceptable trend in most of our tertiary institutions in which male and female
students cohabit in the same room. Some call it campus marriage but it could rather be called “cohabitation”
among students, since it is an indecent act perpetuated off campus (Abubakar, 2008). Cohabitation is when
people live together in an emotional and/or physically intimate relationship. The term is most frequently applied
to couples who are not married (West Encyclopedia of American , Law, 2009) while Abubakar, (2008) defines
cohabitation as simply the act of a man and woman living together and having a sexual relationship without
being married.Popenoe and Whitehead (2002) asserted that what makes cohabitation so significant is not only its
prevalence but also its widespread and popular acceptance. They went further to say that in recent students‟
65

Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
representational survey, nearly 66% of high school senior boys and 61% of the girls indicated that they agreed or
mostly agreed with the statement claiming that it is usually a good idea for a couple to live together before
getting married in order to find out whether they can really get along. Nearly three quarters of the students
slightly more girls than boys stated that “a man and woman who lived together without being married are either
experimenting with a worth while alternative lifestyle or “doing their own thing and not affecting anyone else”.
Meanwhile statistics has shown that this cohabitation phenomenon among students has a far reaching effect on
their later lives. However, the effects are both positive and negative but more on the negative side. Although
most theories of marital choice predict that cohabitation would increase stability of later marriages for those
couples who do marry, evidence to date suggests the contrary. Couples that cohabit prior to marriage seem to
end their marriages at significantly higher rates than couples who never lived together before wedding Bennet,
Blanc & Bloom, 1998; DeMaris& Rio, (1992). According to Haruna (2008), there was a study on couples living
together in one of the campuses in the Federal Polytechnic, Bida, which revealed several heartbreaks one after
the other. It is very shocking that casual sex and cohabitation are now becoming one of the favourable subjects
of the Nigerian youths as you hear jokes about it from our campus boys and girls. Even secondary school
students practice the act as they see it glorified in movies and televisions. They have become convinced that
cohabitation and sex are the means to improve their love towards each other. On the other hand, young people
who abstain from sex are seen as weird and branded by their peers as religious fanatics.
Statement of the Problem
The majority of young Nigerian men and women today want to marry and have children. Therefore, many of
them see cohabitation as a way of life and to test their compatibility and probably the chances of long-lasting
marriage. The reason being that after living together for several years and having „cordial relationship‟ a person
will eventually have a marriageable mate. Traditionally, cohabitation among university students or nonuniversity
youths is forbidden in most Nigerian cultures. It is seen as an act that must not be conducted or
practiced either secretly or openly. Despite this condemnation, some youths still practice it with impurity. It has
become a problematic issue that it threatens to destroy the marital institution or life which is now almost
becoming beyond control. A lot of marriages collapse/brake up few years after wedding which depicts students‟
perception of cohabitation as a cont5ract that can terminate any time. It is presumed that campus cohabitation
does not last and where it doe4s, it breads various problems in later marital life. Therefore, this study was
embarked upon to investigate the psychological consequences of cohabitation among students of Tai Solarin
University of Education, Ijagun, Ijebu-Ode, Ogun State, Nigeria.
Hypotheses
The following hypotheses which guided the study were tested at 0.05 level of significance.
Ho 1 - Hatred for opposite sex will not significantly be a consequence of cohabitation among students
of tertiary educational institutions.
Ho 2 - Depression will not significantly be a consequence of cohabitation among students of tertiary
educational institutions.
Ho 3 - Lack of concentration leading to poor academic performance will not significantly be a
consequence of cohabitation among students of tertiary educational institutions.
METHODOLOGY
The design of the study was the descriptive survey research. The utilization of the design was hinged on the fact
that it is suitable for gathering data from a relatively large number of cases at a particular time. The population
of the study comprised all the male and female students of Tai Solarin University of Education, Ijagun, Ijebu-
Ode, Ogun State, Nigeria. The sample was made up of a total of three hundred (300) students selected through
stratified random sampling technique. It involved selection of seventy five (75) students from each of the four
(4) colleges in the university. The research instrument was the researcher designed Likert type questionnaire
66

Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
with four points rating scale of strongly agreed, agreed, disagreed and strongly disagreed. The instrument was
validated by three experts and found suitable for the collection of data for the study. A test-retest method was
used to test the reliability of the instrument and Pearson Moment Correlation Co-efficient was used to determine
its reliability of 0.78. the questionnaire forms were self administered in the various colleges of the university.
The analyses of the data utilized descriptive statistics of frequency counts and percentages as well as the Chisquare
inferential statistics set at 0.05 level of significance.
RESULTS
The results are presented in tables 1 – 3 in line with the hypotheses tested.
Hypothesis 1 – Hatred for opposite sex will not significantly be a consequence of cohabitation among students
of tertiary educational institutions.
Table 1:Chi-square analysis on Hatred for opposite sex
Response Frequency % df Calculated value Table value Decision
Positive
Responses
Negative
Responses
X 2
210 70
90 30
TOTAL 300 100.0
= 169.6; df = 3; P

Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
176.6 with df = 3 at P

Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
tertiary institution is to acquire knowledge turn around to combine “married life with academic life” usually face
serious or great consequence of less level of concentration in school. This invariably affects their academic
performances adversely.
CONCLUSION
In view of the findings of this study, the following conclusions were drawn:
1. Hatred for the opposite sex would significantly be a consequence of cohabitation based on often
disappointed relationships.
2. Depression would significantly be a consequence of cohabitation following strained relationship.
3. Poor academic performance would be a consequence of cohabitation whenever disappointed partner
looses concentration.
RECOMMENDATION
The findings and conclusions of this study has prompted the following recommendations:
1. Government at all levels should work in collaboration with the private hostel developers in expanding
and building new hostels that have forced several students to look outward for accommodation. With
students staying in the university hostels, they will concentrate more on their academic activities than
combining married life with academic life when they cohabit with their loved ones.
2. Tertiary institutions‟ management should work in partnership with non-governmental organizations
(NGO‟s) to educate their students on sex and family life issues. This could be done in the form of
counseling the students on the consequences of cohabitation viz-a-viz their level of concentration in
school which goes a long way to adversely affect their academic performances.
3. Tertiary institutions, particularly Tai Solarin University of Education, Ijagun, Ijebu-Ode, Ogun State,
should provide a plat-form on which parents of their students will be advised on the need for them to
always find time to visit their wards/children on regular basis. This will enable parents to have the
opportunity to assess their social life on campus.
4. Lastly, universities should strengthen their counseling unit to be saddled with the responsibility of
counseling students that are at risk or in need of help.
69

Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 6(2), 2013
REFERENCES
Abubakar, T.T. (2008). Cohabitation – A Deadly Trend in Tertiary Instititions. Retrieved February 25 th , 2009
from http//allafuca.com/stories/ 20080906049.htm1
Bennet, N.H., Blanc, A. & Bloom, D.E. (1998). Commitment and the modern union: Assessing the link
between premarital stability. American sociological Review, 58.357-372.
Brown, S.L., Bulanda, J.R. & Lee, G.R. (2005). The significance of non marital cohabitation: Marital status
and health benefits among middle – ages and older adults. Journal of Gerontology Series B:
Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 60: S21 – S29.
Lee, D. (2007). The Psychological Benefits of Marriage.Retrieved Jan. 11, 2010 from www.maxim.org.nz.
DeMaris, A. & Rio, K.V. (1992). Premarital cohabitation and subsequent marital stability in the United States:
A reassessment. Journal of Marriage and the family. 54: 178-190.
Ferguson, D.M., Horwood, L.J. &Lnyskey, M.T. (1997).Childhood sexual abuse, adolescent sexual behaviours
and sexual victimization.Child Abuse and Neglect. 21(8): 789-803.
Haruna, A. (2008). Campus gist: Evils of campus marriage. Gateway Nivvor, March 16-22.
McDowell, J. & Day, D. (1987). Why wait. San Bernadino, C. A.: Here‟s Life Publishers.
Popenoe, D. & Whitehead, B.D. (2002). Should we live together What young adults needs to know about
cohabitation before marriage. Retrieved February 25, 2009 from marriage@rci.rutugers.edu.
West Encyclopedia of American Law (2009).Meaning of Cohabitation.Retrieved May 24, 2009 from
http:www.answers.com/topic/cohabitation.
70