The cohabitation is an emerging form of the family of the world in which commitment is also a challenging concept. In terms of method and theory, this research employs a qualitative approach and the grounded theory. The research findings presented and discussed in this paper is based on interviewing with a sample of 18 cohabitating individuals in Isfahan City. The results of this study have indicated that not only commitment is not simply a concept with stable and absolute meaning, but also it varies significantly by such determinants as time passage, the place and conditions which understood within the moral virtues’ framework and moral levels. Furthermore, the commitment typology in cohabitation contains a spectrum ranging from the conventional ethics to post-conventional ethics. Finally, the research results presented and discussed in this paper support the bottom-line conclusion that the term and concept of commitment in the cohabitation has widespread, multi-faceted, relative and unstable meaning, leading to the fact that no general rules can apply to this emerging form of the family so-called cohabitation in the contemporary societies.
Akbarzadeh, F., & Hashemianfar, S. (2020). From Conventional Ethics to Post-Conventional Ethics: Typology of Commitment Experience in Cohabitation. Sociology of Social Institutions, 6(14), 177-206. doi: 10.22080/ssi.2019.16173.1584
MLA
Fatemeh Akbarzadeh; Seyedali Hashemianfar. "From Conventional Ethics to Post-Conventional Ethics: Typology of Commitment Experience in Cohabitation". Sociology of Social Institutions, 6, 14, 2020, 177-206. doi: 10.22080/ssi.2019.16173.1584
HARVARD
Akbarzadeh, F., Hashemianfar, S. (2020). 'From Conventional Ethics to Post-Conventional Ethics: Typology of Commitment Experience in Cohabitation', Sociology of Social Institutions, 6(14), pp. 177-206. doi: 10.22080/ssi.2019.16173.1584
VANCOUVER
Akbarzadeh, F., Hashemianfar, S. From Conventional Ethics to Post-Conventional Ethics: Typology of Commitment Experience in Cohabitation. Sociology of Social Institutions, 2020; 6(14): 177-206. doi: 10.22080/ssi.2019.16173.1584