Say what? Yet to be or already retired?

I read the following over and over. What are they trying to say? I can’t be sure, but I think it means when planning for and once retired, both partners should be equally involved and participate in all relevant decisions.

Cognitive interdependence is a good thing – it appears.

This research examined the influence of cognitive interdependence—a mental state reflecting a collective representation of the self-in-relationship—on the anticipation for and experiences with the transition into retirement. Among soon-to-be retirees (Study 1), greater cognitive interdependence was associated with seeing partners as more instrumental to one’s goals both pre- and post-retirement, anticipating greater goal alignment post-retirement, and having directly involved partners in retirement planning to a greater extent than those relatively lower in cognitive interdependence. Among recent retirees (Study 2), retrospective cognitive interdependence was associated with post-retirement goal alignment and goal instrumentality, and the extent to which they believed they had directly involved their partners in retirement planning.

However, it was post-retirement goal alignment that was associated with greater ease of retirement and subjective well-being. Finally, soon-to-be retirees relatively high in cognitive interdependence responded to concerns about their retirement (i.e., goal discordance and high retirement ambivalence) by wanting to involve their partners in their retirement plans to a greater extent (Study 3). These studies highlight the importance of romantic partners across the lifespan, and how partners might influence retirement planning, the transition to retirement, and well-being among recent retirees.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8716039/

3 comments

  1. But I haven’t read many articles here or elsewhere discussing the importance of husband and wife agreeing/understanding, and sharing responsibility for financial decisions, retirement or otherwise.
    The wife and I both have pensions which were reduced actuarially so that they will both continue unchanged on the death of the other. That seemed like a no-brainer to us. As I recall, in California at least, we were required by law to agree. I could not unilaterally choose a higher pension and leave her poor after my death. Nor could she do that to me.*
    For investments, I have most of my IRA and other investments in index funds. She lost a bit in 2008-9 and wants nothing to do with the market. Has cash and CDs. As it happens, we each have roughly equal funds; separate banks, joint accounts.

    *I don’t know what happens if we couldn’t agree on the annuity. Could it go to court?

    Like

    1. A spouse agreeing to a single life annuity pension must be in writing under federal law. As for other articles, I and others have written about that subject and it’s importance on HumbleDollar.com

      Like

Leave a reply to rdquinn Cancel reply