Editing Polyamory (section)

===Difficulties===
Morin (1999) and Fleckenstein (2014) noted that certain conditions are favorable to good experiences with polyamory but that these differ from the general population.<ref name="Shernoff">{{cite journal | last=Shernoff | first=M | title=Negotiated nonmonogamy and male couples. | journal=Family Process | volume=45 | issue=4 | year=2006 | issn=0014-7370 | pmid=17220111 | pages=407–18 | url=http://www.familyprocess.org/Data/featured_articles/65_shernoff.pdf | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130429022859/http://www.familyprocess.org/Data/featured_articles/65_shernoff.pdf |archive-date=2013-04-29| doi=10.1111/j.1545-5300.2006.00179.x }}</ref><ref name="Fleckenstein Cox pp. 94–116">{{cite journal | last1=Fleckenstein | first1=James R. | last2=Cox | first2=Derrell W. | s2cid=144311126 | title=The association of an open relationship orientation with health and happiness in a sample of older US adults | journal=Sexual and Relationship Therapy | volume=30 | issue=1 | date=November 18, 2014 | issn=1468-1994 | doi=10.1080/14681994.2014.976997 | pages=94–116 | quote=Regression analyses suggest that the factors which predict better health and happiness differ between the general population and those who participate in consensually non-exclusive sexual relationships}}</ref> Heavy public promotion of polyamory can have the unintended effect of attracting people to it for whom it is not well-suited. Unequal power dynamics, such as financial dependence, can also inappropriately influence a person to agree to a polyamorous relationship against their true desires. Even in more equal power-dynamic relationships, the reluctant partner may feel coerced into a proposed non-monogamous arrangement due to the implication that if they refuse, the proposer will pursue other partners anyway, will break off the relationship, or that the one refusing will be accused of intolerance and not being open-minded.<ref name="Sizemore">{{cite journal | last1=Sizemore | first1=Kayla M. | last2=Olmstead | first2=Spencer B. | s2cid=4030065 | title=Willingness of Emerging Adults to Engage in Consensual Non-Monogamy: A Mixed-Methods Analysis | journal=Archives of Sexual Behavior | volume=47 | issue=5 | date=October 6, 2017 | issn=0004-0002 | doi=10.1007/s10508-017-1075-5 | pmid=28986760 | pages=1423–1438 | quote= The final reason given by those in the 'Willing' group was that their engagement in CNM would be a sacrifice for their partner or for their relationship. This group of participants indicated that despite their own lack of desire to engage in CNM, they would be willing to try CNM for their partner or their relationship.}}</ref>

Polyamorous relationships present practical pitfalls. One common complaint from participants is time management, as more partners mean one must divide one's time and attention between them, leaving less for each.<ref name="Masters">{{cite book | last=Masters | first=Robert | title=Transformation through intimacy: the journey toward awakened monogamy | publisher=North Atlantic Books | location=Berkeley, Calif | year=2011 | isbn=978-1-58394-388-5 | oclc=793850748 | pages=23–25}}</ref> Related is that the complexity of the arrangement can lead to so much effort being spent on the relationship that personal, individual needs can be overlooked.<ref name="Brunning 2016">{{cite journal | last=Brunning | first=Luke | title=The Distinctiveness of Polyamory | journal=Journal of Applied Philosophy | volume=35 | issue=3 | year=2018 | issn=0264-3758 | doi=10.1111/japp.12240 | pages=15–16 | s2cid=147982689 | url=https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:355c60d9-818c-454c-8ed2-7320ccf540f9 | access-date=August 18, 2020 | archive-date=October 25, 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201025054226/https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:355c60d9-818c-454c-8ed2-7320ccf540f9 | url-status=live }}</ref> The strong emphasis on communication can unintentionally marginalize partners who are less articulate.<ref name="Brunning 2016"/> Finally, negotiating the sometimes complex rules and boundaries of these relationships can be emotionally taxing, as can reconciling situations where one partner goes outside those boundaries.<ref name="Brunning 2016"/><ref name="Masters"/>

The scientific studies of psychological well-being and relationship satisfaction for participants in polyamory have been limited due to mostly being a "hidden population." While some results could be interpreted as positive, these findings often suffer from bias and methodological issues.<ref name="Rubel Bogaert">{{cite journal | last1=Rubel | first1=Alicia N. | last2=Bogaert | first2=Anthony F. | s2cid=36510972 | title=Consensual Nonmonogamy: Psychological Well-Being and Relationship Quality Correlates | journal=The Journal of Sex Research | volume=52 | issue=9 | date=September 4, 2014 | issn=0022-4499 | doi=10.1080/00224499.2014.942722 | pmid=25189189 | pages=961–982}}</ref> A significant number of studies rely on [[Sample size determination|small samples]], often recruited from referrals, [[snowball sampling|snowball-sampling]], and websites devoted to polyamory.<ref name="Rubel Bogaert"/> Individuals recruited in this manner tend to be relatively homogeneous regarding values, beliefs, and demographics, which limits the generalizability of the findings. These samples also tend to be [[Self-selection bias|self-selecting]] toward individuals with positive experiences. In contrast, those who found polyamory to be distressing or hurtful might be more reluctant to participate in the research.<ref name="Rubel Bogaert"/> Most of the studies rely entirely on [[self-report study|self-report measures]]. Generally, self-reports of the degree of well-being and relationship satisfaction over time are flawed and are often based on belief rather than actual experience.<ref name="Rubel Bogaert"/> Self-report measures are also at risk of [[self-enhancement]] bias, as subjects may feel pressure to give positive responses about their well-being and relationship satisfaction in the face of [[stereotype threat]].<ref name="Rubel Bogaert"/>