同居关系接受度均值的置信区间为0.688 ~ 0.912，置信值为95%。这意味着，如果重复采样，95%的情况下，上述问题的平均值将在0.688到0.912之间。对于婚前同居关系是否更稳定的回答均值为0.56。95%的置信区间是0。4和0。72。婚前同居关系中离婚概率均值的置信区间为-0.496 – -0.104。同样，承诺水平均值的置信区间为0.411和0.749。因此，从上面的讨论可以明显看出，样本的平均想法是，他们接受同居关系作为他们在自己生活中可能考虑的一种生活方式。这种影响在不同性别中都很显著。两组性别的均值在统计上是不平等的，这意味着两组性别对同居关系的适应有不同的认知。由于男性的平均水平高于女性，男性比女性更愿意接受同居关系。
The confidence interval for the mean of acceptance of live-in relationships lies in the range of 0.688 to 0.912, the confidence being 95%. This means that if a repeated sampling is done, 95% of the times, the mean for the aforesaid question will lie between 0.688 and 0.912. The mean of the response for whether or not a marriage preceded by live-in relationships are more stable, is 0.56. The confidence interval for this mean at 95% is 0.4 and 0.72. The confidence interval for the mean of probability of divorce in a marriage preceded by live-in relationships is between -0.496 and -0.104. Likewise, the confidence interval for mean of level of commitment is 0.411 and 0.749. Thus, from the above discussion it is apparent that the average thinking of the sample is that they accept live-in relationship as a possible mode of lifestyle they might consider in their own life. The effect is significant across the gender. The means of the two groups of gender are statistically unequal which implies that the two genders have different perception about adapting live-in relationships. Since the mean for men is higher than that for women, men are more willing to accept live-in relationship as compared to women.
However, the means across sexual orientation are statistically equal which means both the orientations considered are equally likely to accept live-in relationships. The sample thinks that live in relationships preceding marriages tend to reduce the chances of divorce, increase the level of commitment and bring stability in the marriage.However, this survey has several limitations. The sample size is very small which implies that there might be a sampling bias. The sample might not be a representative of the population due to which the above results might not hold true for the whole of India. Even though the sample is tried to keep random, the randomness might be low in it due to which sampling bias occurs. A better way to conduct this survey would be to include more people who have been in live-in relationships. Also, an equality in stratification is required which means within each strata, the incidence of classifying characteristics should be comparably close to each other, if not equal.