What longitudinal studies compare polyamorous, swinging, and monogamous couples on divorce and satisfaction over 10+ years?

1. What the published reviews say: a field still asking for time

A recent scoping review of polyamory and consensual non‑monogamy (CNM) catalogs dozens of studies but explicitly notes that only a small minority used longitudinal data and that most comparisons are cross‑sectional, with many studies grouping different CNM types together rather than comparing polyamory, swinging, and open relationships separately ^[1]. The review extracted study designs, whether longitudinal data were used, and concluded that longitudinal analyses are scarce, which limits claims about long‑term outcomes like divorce or decade‑scale satisfaction trajectories ^[1].

2. What primary empirical papers do — and don’t — provide

Core empirical sources cited throughout the CNM literature are large national or convenience samples that measure prevalence, attitudes, and cross‑sectional satisfaction differences; for example, national or convenience surveys have documented that a nontrivial share of adults have participated in CNM and that satisfaction may be conceptualized differently in CNM subtypes, but these studies do not follow the same couples for 10+ years to measure divorce incidence or longitudinal satisfaction change ^{[2] [6]}. Papers explicitly referenced in multiple reviews (e.g., Balzarini et al., Conley and colleagues) analyze relationship quality across partner types or compare CNM subgroups but are not presented as decade‑long longitudinal comparisons of divorce outcomes ^{[4] [5]}.

3. Where the often‑quoted “divorce rate” claims come from — and their limits

Popular articles and advocacy pieces frequently assert that swingers or polyamorists have lower or higher divorce rates than monogamous couples, sometimes citing older or nonrepresentative studies or extrapolating from marital research that links jealousy with divorce; these media claims often lack direct, longitudinal evidence comparing CNM subtypes to monogamy over 10+ years and sometimes conflate different concepts (infidelity vs consensual non‑monogamy) or rely on convenience samples ^{[7] [8] [4]}. The academic literature warns against inferring long‑term stability from snapshots: satisfaction and commitment vary by how people define satisfaction, their demographic profiles, and whether behavior aligns with values — factors often uncontrolled in media summaries ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Competing interpretations and agendas in the debate

Scholarship and public commentary diverge: some researchers emphasize the need for nuanced, methodologically rigorous longitudinal work and note demographic differences between CNM and monogamous samples that complicate comparisons ^{[1] [3]}, while opinion outlets and advocacy pieces sometimes advance normative claims about marriage stability or social harms that exceed what the empirical record supports ^[9]. Hidden agendas include moral or political commitments to defending monogamy or normalizing CNM; these can shape which studies are highlighted and how cross‑sectional findings are extrapolated to claims about divorce across decades ^{[9] [7]}.

5. Bottom line and what credible longitudinal work would require

Based on the sources examined, there is no robust, peer‑reviewed longitudinal study of 10+ years that directly compares divorce rates and satisfaction trajectories among polyamorous, swinging, and monogamous couples; the field needs prospective cohort studies that sample representative couples, disaggregate CNM subtypes, control for demographic covariates, and track legal separation/divorce and standardized satisfaction measures over a decade or more to answer the question definitively ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Until such data exist, claims about long‑term comparative divorce or satisfaction should be treated as unresolved or provisional rather than established fact ^{[1] [2]}.