Suchergebnisse

This article advances the argument that engaging in broadly applied premarital education efforts can reduce marital distress and divorce. Because of the complexity of design issues and difficulties inherent in outcome studies, researchers will reasonably continue to debate the effectiveness of premarital education regimens. Furthermore, there is a great deal more to be discovered that will guide prevention efforts in ways that will improve the effectiveness of those efforts in the future. Using a combination of rational argument and empirical findings, 4 key benefits of premarital education are discussed: (a) it can slow couples down to foster deliberation, (b) it sends a message that marriage matters, (c) it can help couples learn of options if they need help later, and (d) there is evidence that providing some couples with some types of premarital training, for example, the Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP), can lower their risks for subsequent marital distress or termination.

Introduction --pt. I.Understanding the risks on the road to lasting love --Five keys for a great relationship : PREP in a nutshell --Destructive patterns : signs of danger ahead --Changing roles, changing rules : men and women in conflict --pt. II.Teaming up to handle conflict --When what you heard isn't what I said : understanding filters in communication --Talking safely without fighting : the speaker-listener technique --Controlling the home fires : handling issues and events well --New perspectives on problems and problem solving --Keeping conflict under control : ground rules for a great relationship --pt. III.Enjoying each other --Safe harbor : preserving and protecting friendship --Being there : supporting one another in life --Playing together : how to succeed in fun without really trying --Sense and sensuality : enhancing and protecting your sex life --Sacred places : core beliefs and spiritual intimacy --pt. IV.Staying the course --Why you can't always get what you want : unraveling the mysteries of expectations --Forgiveness : restoring hope --Sticking, stuck, or stopped : on the path to commitment --Moving forward.

This longitudinal study followed 120 cohabiting, opposite-sex couples over 8 months to test hypotheses derived from commitment theory about how two types of commitment (dedication and constraint) operate during cohabitation. In nearly half the couples, there were large differences between partners in terms of dedication. These differences were associated with lower relationship adjustment, even controlling for overall level of dedication. Furthermore, among couples who believed in the institution of marriage, cohabiting women were, on average, more dedicated than their partners. Additionally, there was evidence that constraints (e.g., signing a lease, having a joint bank account) make it less likely that couples think they will break up, regardless of relationship dedication. This finding was strongest for women and for those with higher income levels.

In this theoretical article, we review central concepts in the psychological literature on relationship commitment to provide a foundation to discuss two themes related to long‐term romantic relationships and marriages. First, we describe and discuss the role that commitment plays in stabilizing romantic attachment. Second, we use empirical research on cohabitation to highlight how what are now common trajectories of couple development can undermine the formation of commitment. The first topic underscores an increasingly important role for commitment in an age of companionate marriage. The second topic draws attention to dynamics that can affect the strength of romantic commitments, especially in marriage.

This study uses a new measure to examine how different types of reasons for cohabitation are associated with individual well-being and relationship quality in a sample of 120 cohabiting heterosexual couples ( N = 240). Spending more time together and convenience are the most strongly endorsed reasons. The degree to which individuals report cohabiting to test their relationships is associated with more negative couple communication and more physical aggression as well as lower relationship adjustment, confidence, and dedication. Testing the relationship is also associated with higher levels of attachment insecurity and more symptoms of depression and anxiety. Men are more likely than women to endorse testing their relationships and less likely to endorse convenience as a reason for cohabiting.

Abstract: Premarital cohabitation has consistently been found to be associated with increased risk for divorce and marital distress in the United States. Two explanations for this "cohabitation effect" are discussed: selection and experience. We present an empirically based view of how the experience of cohabitation may increase risk for relationship distress or divorce for some people beyond what is accounted for by selection. Specifically, using a commitment framework, we suggest that some couples who otherwise would not have married end up married because of the inertia of cohabitation. We discuss practice implications for relationship transitions that are characterized more by sliding than deciding, especially where a transition such as cohabitation increases inertia to remain in a relationship regardless of quality or fit.

Explanations for the risks associated with premarital and nonmarital cohabitation (e.g., higher rates of breakup and divorce, lower relationship satisfaction, and greater risk for violent interaction) have focused on levels of conventionality, including attitudes about commitment to the institution of marriage. However, relatively little attention has been paid to the role of interpersonal, not institutional, commitment. In a national random sample (United States), premarital and nonmarital cohabitation were associated with lower levels of interpersonal commitment to partners, suggesting links to further understanding of risk in these relationships. Premarital cohabitation was particularly associated with less committed and less religious males. Prior findings associating cohabitation with lower levels of happiness and religiosity, and higher levels of negative interaction (for men) were replicated.

A major revision of the classic divorce prevention book, with up-to-date research and inclusive content Fighting for Your Marriage is based on the widely acclaimed PREP approach (Prevention and Relationship Education Program). Research has found that couples who use these strategies can handle conflict more constructively, protect their happiness, and reduce the odds of breaking up. Based on more than 40 years of evidence, this book shows couples how to talk more and fight less, protect their friendship, and keep the fun alive. You'll learn what it takes to have a more intimate, sensual relationship and how to clarify and act on priorities. The 4th Edition has been substantially updated with advice for couples from a wide range of backgrounds and types who are interested in lasting love. The authors have included a wealth of techniques and down-to-earth guidance for all couples who seek to promote greater connection and pleasure in their long-term relationships. After reading the 4th edition, you will be able to: Apply up-to-date, research-backed strategies, using the renowned PREP approach to deepen your relationshipsRekindle your marriage and bridge the emotional distance that has grown between you and your spouseRepair your or your partner's lack of desire for sensual and sexual connectionsGet research-based advice for enhancing and strengthening relationships for people who are interested in lasting love For decades, this book has helped couples in serious relationships, newly married couples, and long-term married couples. It is also a valuable resource for couples and family therapists, college professors, clergy, and other professionals working with diverse individuals and couples who want to have happy, healthy relationships

Although there are studies on voting similarity in mate selection, very little research has examined party identification and relationship quality. We assessed associations between reports of personal and partner voting behavior (Democrat, Republican, or Independent) and both relationship adjustment and commitment to one's partner. We used a national (U.S.) sample of individuals (N = 510) in their 20s and 30s who were mostly in different-sex, serious relationships (Mdn duration = 5.25 years; 50% married). Controlling for age, college graduation, income, religiosity, minority status, and duration of relationship, voting Republican was associated with higher levels of commitment compared to voting Democrat. Similarly, being partnered with someone voting Republican was associated with higher relationship adjustment and commitment compared to being partnered with someone voting Democrat. Notably, differences in commitment were found only among those who were not already married or engaged. Findings were largely consistent with numerous online reports of survey data that have shown modestly greater relationship quality among those who report being politically conservative. While research has shown that people are less attracted to those who vote differently and that voting differently can be associated with lower relationship quality, we did not generally find perceived voting similarity to be associated with relationship adjustment or commitment. There was one exception: In exploratory analyses, Republicans paired with Democrats tended to report substantially lower relationship adjustment than if paired with Republicans. Implications for political differences among intimate partners and clinical work around these themes are discussed.

A random multistate sample of married individuals (N = 1,931) was used to explore whether more positive attitudes toward divorce and weaker commitment to marriage may contribute to the greater instability of remarriages than first marriages. Remarried adults, whether or not they brought children from a previous union into the remarriage, reported marital quality (happiness and conflict) equal to those in first marriages. They also reported more positive attitudes toward divorce, which were associated with higher divorce proneness (i.e., thinking about and taking actions toward divorce). Marriage type interacted with marital quality to predict divorce proneness, such that the association between low marital quality and divorce proneness was stronger for remarried individuals than for those in first marriages. This suggests that remarried adults may be more likely than adults in first marriages to take steps toward divorce when experiencing marital distress, possibly reflecting a weaker commitment to marriage.

The Commitment Inventory measures interpersonal commitment (dedication) and constraint commitment. Since it was first published, substantial revisions have been made, but there are no published data on the psychometric properties of the new version. Furthermore, little information is available on measuring commitment for unmarried couples. This study examined the psychometric properties of the Commitment Inventory in 320 premarital or cohabiting couples ( N = 640). Dyadic confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the hypothesized factor structure of six constraint subscales and one dedication subscale fit the data well for both men and women. Internal consistency coefficients were within acceptable range for most subscales. Within-couple correlations as well as correlations between subscales and with relationship quality, negative communication, and religiosity are presented. Implications for future research are discussed.

Military couples who have experienced deployment and reintegration in current U.S. military operations frequently experience stress regarding the dangers and effects of such experiences. The current study evaluated a sample of 300 couples with an active duty Army husband and civilian spouse who experienced a deployment within the year prior to the survey (conducted in 2007). Wives generally reported greater levels of emotional stress compared to husbands. Overall, higher levels of stress were found for couples who reported lower income and greater economic strain, perceive the need for more support and are unsure about how to get support, have more marital conflict, and are generally less satisfied with the Army and the current mission. Husband combat exposure was also associated with more stress for husbands and wives. Additionally, for wives, stress was related to greater child behavior problems and a sense of less Army concern for families. The results suggest areas of intervention with military couples to help them cope with the challenges of military life and deployment.

Using a sample of 434 couples consisting of active duty Army husbands married to civilian wives, relationships between recent deployment, current PTSD symptoms, and a range of marital outcomes were investigated. Self-reports from both husbands and wives regarding relationship functioning did not differ between couples who were and were not separated due to deployment in the prior year. However, deployment in the past year was related to higher levels of current PTSD symptoms for husbands, and husbands' current PTSD symptoms were associated with lower marital satisfaction, confidence in the relationship, positive bonding between the spouses, parenting alliance, and dedication to the relationship for both husbands and wives. In addition, husbands' current PTSD symptoms were associated with higher levels of negative communication for both husbands and wives, and lower satisfaction with sacrifice for the relationship for husbands. Once positive bonding, negative communication, and parenting alliance were controlled, husband PTSD symptoms no longer significantly predicted marital satisfaction for wives. Husband PTSD symptoms continued to exert a significant, but reduced, unique effect on husband marital satisfaction once these variables were accounted for. The results provide greater understanding of the relationship of deployment/PTSD symptoms and marital functioning and suggest areas for intervention with military couples.

AbstractIn an exploration of the links between relationship quality and depression, the extent to which women's weekly reports of depressive symptoms vary as a function of same‐week relationship functioning was tested. A sample of 161 married or cohabiting U.S. women completed measures of relationship functioning, mood, and depressive symptoms weekly for 12 weeks. In a series of hierarchical linear models, results of within‐subject analyses indicated that depressive symptoms were negatively associated with same‐week relationship functioning. Weekly fluctuations in mood did not account for these associations. Results of between‐subjects analyses suggested that women low in stereotypical masculinity and in relationships of shorter duration are particularly likely to show increased depressive symptoms during weeks when they experience poorer relationship functioning than usual.