Â鶹ÒùÔº

Love is in the air, and wedding season is upon us.

Like many elder millennials, I grew up watching sitcoms in the 1980s and '90s. Whenever those series needed a ratings boost, they would feature a wedding. Those special episodes taught me that weddings usually involve young lovebirds: think Elvin and Sondra from "The Cosby Show," Cory and Topanga from "Boy Meets World," or David and Darlene from "Roseanne."

But those were different times. People are getting married later in life than they used to: In the United States, has grown to 28 for women and 30 for men.

This trend means that many Americans now enter marriage after being self-reliant for several years, including managing their own money. Will they be eager to change that once they get married? Don't count on it. A 2017 suggests that millennial married couples are around 15 percentage points more likely than their predecessors to keep their finances separate.

This is not necessarily a good development. As a behavioral scientist , I find that joint accounts .

There are some risks, however. Joint accounts create transparency, and intuitively, transparency feels like a good thing in relationships. But I argue that some privacy is important even for highly committed couples—.

The newlywed game

Behavioral scientists , , and I recently conducted . Each of the pairs had entirely separate accounts, but they were undecided about how they wanted to manage their money moving forward.

We randomly assigned each of the 230 couples to one of three groups. One group kept their money in separate accounts; one merged their cash into a joint account and stopped using separate accounts; and one managed their money however they liked.

We followed couples for two years, periodically asking them to complete surveys assessing their relationship dynamics and satisfaction. Our relationship quality measure included items such as "I cannot imagine another person making me as happy as my partner does" and "Within the last three months, I shouted or yelled at my partner."

Among the couples who could do whatever they wanted, most kept things separate. They and the couples assigned to keep separate accounts experienced a steady decline in relationship quality over time.

This is a fairly typical pattern. For instance, in , and colleagues found that "marital happiness either declines continuously or flattens after a long period of decline."

Declines during the first two years of marriage are particularly important. Social scientist and colleagues call those first two years ." They find that relationship dynamics that develop during that crucial period can foreshadow relationship quality for many years to come.

Couples in our study who were prompted to take the plunge into a joint account, however, maintained their initial level of relationship satisfaction over the course of the two-year experiment.

Tit-for-tat

Our survey results suggest that, by turning "my money" and "your money" into "our money," a joint account can help to reduce scorekeeping within a relationship. For example, we found that couples with joint accounts were more likely to agree with statements such as "When one person does something for the other, the other should not owe the giver anything."

Relationships usually don't start with a scorekeeping orientation. In the 1980s and '90s, psychologist and colleagues conducted experiments where partners had the option of keeping track of each other's contributions to a shared task. that intimate relationships often begin with a "communal" orientation, where partners help one another without keeping careful track of who's doing what.

Eventually, however, they take on more of an "exchange" orientation—where inputs are tracked and timely reciprocity is expected. Couples that manage to stave off a tit-for-tat mindset .

Too much of a good thing?

The data from our experiment with young couples clearly suggests that using only a joint account is better than using only separate accounts. However, I argue in my new book, "," that just a joint account is probably not optimal.

When partners use only a joint account, they get an up-close-and-personal view of how the other person is spending money. This kind of transparency is as a good thing.

Some commentators argue that a healthy marriage should have no secrets whatsoever. For example, Willard Harley, Jr., a clinical psychologist who primarily writes for Christian audiences, argues that you should "reveal to your spouse : your thoughts, feelings, habits, likes, dislikes, personal history, daily activities, and plans for the future."

In addition, if your goal is to minimize optional spending, that the transparency that comes with a joint account can be helpful. We spend less when someone is looking over our shoulder.

Still, there are reasons to believe that .

Many people have become convinced that if they could just stop buying lattes and avocado toast, they could invest that money and become rich. Unfortunately, the underlying math is highly dubious, as journalist Helaine Olen points out in ." Still, many people view small indulgences as their primary obstacle to wealth. Complete transparency around these financially inconsequential "treats" .

Also, spouses may have different passions that their partner does not fully understand. Expenses that seem perfectly reasonable to another hobbyist may seem outrageous —another source of .

'Translucent,' not transparent

I propose that many couples may benefit from a combination of joint and separate accounts.

A joint account is essential for ensuring that both partners have immediate and equal access to "our money." Ideally, all income would be direct-deposited into the joint account, which would help to blur the gap between partners' earnings. Conspicuous income differences .

Separate accounts attached to the joint account can allow some privacy for individual purchases and help partners maintain a sense of autonomy and individuality. Each person gets to spend some of "our money" without their partner looking over their shoulder. Spouses would have a high-level understanding of how much their partner is spending per week or per month, but avoid the occasionally irritating details.

This kind of partial financial transparency—"—could help couples strike the right balance between financial and psychological well-being.

Of course, this approach requires a lot of trust. If the relationship is already on thin ice, complete financial transparency may be necessary. However, if the relationship is generally in the "good, but could be even better" category, I would argue that financial translucency is worth considering.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .