Relationship enhancement with premarital couples: An assessment of effects on relationship quality

Ridley, Carl A.; Jorgensen, Stephen R.; Morgan, Anita G.; Avery, Arthur W.

doi:10.1080/01926188208250087

Cited by 48 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current findings replicate and extend earlier studies showing that couples improve their communication with skills-based relationship education (e.g., Hahlweg et al, 1998;Ridley et al, 1982;Stanley et al, 1995). Also, our findings replicate previous research indicating that skill-based relationship education is associated with reductions in communication negativity.…”

Section: Effects Of Self-prep On Relationship Communication Satisfacsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…These changes in communication are maintained for months or even years after completion of the education program (Hahlweg et al, 1998;Ridley et al, 1982;Stanley, Markman, St. Peters, & Leber, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Relationship education programs that have been evaluated empirically involve a substantial focus on training couple communication skills (Halford, 1999). For example, the Minnesota Couples Communication Project (Miller, Nunnally & Wackman, 1975;Wampler & Sprenkle, 1980) Leslie, & Milholland, 1980;Ridley, Jorgensen, Morgan, & Avery, 1982), and the Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP;Markman, Stanley, & Blumberg, 1994) all emphasize training couples in communication skills. This focus seems appropriate given that deficits in communication and conflict management prospectively predict relationship distress in newly married couples (Noller & Feeney, 1994;Karney & Bradbury, 1995;Markman, 1981;Markman & Hahlweg, 1993;Pasch & Bradbury, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program.

Halford¹,

Sanders²,

Behrens³

2001

Journal of Family Psychology

195

219

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eighty-three couples were stratified into groups at high and low risk for relationship distress and randomized to either the Self-Regulatory Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (Self-PREP) or a control condition. As predicted, there were differential effects of Self-PREP on high-risk and low-risk couples. Because of low statistical power, results must be interpreted cautiously, but at 1-year follow-up high-risk couples in Self-PREP showed trends toward better communication than control couples. However, there was no difference in the communication of Self-PREP and control low-risk couples. High-risk couples receiving Self-PREP exhibited higher relationship satisfaction at 4 years than control couples, but in low-risk couples relationship satisfaction was higher in the control condition. High-risk couples seemed to benefit from skills-based relationship education, but low-risk couples did not.Couples who sustain mutually satisfying relationships experience many benefits. Relative to other people, those in satisfying marriages have lower rates of psychological distress, higher rated life happiness, and greater resistance to the detrimental effects of negative life events (Bradbury, 1998;Gore, 1978;Gove, Hughes, & Style, 1983;Halford, 2001;Halford, Kelly, & Markman, 1997). In contrast, being in a distressed marriage is a generic risk factor for poorer mental and physical health for the couple and their offspring (Coie et al., 1993;Halford, 1999) and is strongly associated with risk for relationship aggression (Arias, Samios, & O'Leary, 1987;O'Leary et al., 1989).Almost all couples report high relationship satisfaction at the time of marriage, but for many couples satisfaction erodes in the first few years of marriage (Hill & Peplau, 1998;Huston & Vangelisti, 1991;Kurdeck, 1998;Markman, 1981;Noller & Feeney, 1994;Veroff, Douvan, Orbuch, & Acitelli, 1998). Decreased satisfaction is associated with a high risk of separation (Gottman, 1993), particularly if there is physical aggression between the partners (Rogge & Bradbury, 1999). About 42% of Australian marriages end in divorce (McDonald, 1995), and about half of these divorces occur in the first 7 years of marriage (McDonald, 1995).Across the United States, Western Europe, and Australia, relationship education programs are widely available to marrying couples (Halford, 1999;Simons, Harris, & Willis, 1994;van Widenfelt, Markman, Guerney, Behrens, & Hosman, 1997). These programs are intended to assist couples in sustaining satisfying marriages and to reduce divorce rates (van Widenfelt et al., 1997). Most relationship education programs are offered by religious and community groups, the content of these programs is often not documented, and the effects of most of the programs have not been evaluated (Halford, 1999;van Widenfelt et al., 1997). Relationship education programs that have been evaluated empirically involve a substantial focus on training couple communication skills (Halford, 1999). For example, the Minnesota Couples Communication Projec...

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Self-prep On Relationship Communication Satisfacsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program.

Halford¹,

Sanders²,

Behrens³

2001

Journal of Family Psychology

195

219

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, studies of PREP generally comprise up‐to‐date, empirically informed efforts to reduce the chances of marital distress and dissolution. There also are outcome studies of other well‐conceived programs for couples (e.g., Relationship Enhancement, Guerney, 1977; Couples Communication, Miller, Wackman, & Nunnally, 1983) that demonstrate consistently positive effects, at least over shorter term follow‐ups such as 6–12 months (e.g., Ridley, Jorgensen, Morgan, & Avery, 1982; see Giblin, Sprenkle, & Sheehan, 1985, for a meta‐analysis and review).…”

Section: Primary Effects Of Premarital Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making A Case for Premarital Education^*

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…The scale has been widely used to study the effectiveness of relationship enhancement programs for premarital or marital couples (Gordon & Waldo, 1984;Guerney, 1977;Heitland, 1986;Jessee & Guerney, 1981;Milholland & Avery, 1982;Rappaport, 1976;Ridley, Jorgensen, Morgan, & Avery, 1982;Ross, Baker, & Guerney, 1985;Schlein, 1971). A modification of the scale was used to investigate roommate relations between college students (Waldo, 1984) and the original scale was used to establish concurrent validity for other scales (Miller & Lefcourt, 1982Stevens & L'Abate, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Modified Interpersonal Relationship Scale: Reliability and Validity

Garthoeffner¹,

Henry²,

Robinson³

1993

Psychological Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to evaluate a modification of the Interpersonal Relationship Scale and to establish subscales representing dimensions of intimacy (N = 356). The initial self-report scale was tested for internal consistency reliability.Next, subscales were identified using principal components factoring with varimax rotation. Internal consistency reliability and concurrent validity of the modified over-all scale and subscales were examined. The modified scale and subscales provided reliable and valid measures of the quality of interpersonal relationships in young adults.Using both family and individual theories, scholars have identified the ability to develop and maintain intimate relations as a primary developmental task for young adults. From a f a d y systems perspective, Carter and McGoldrick (1988) observed that a primary task for young adults is to separate from the family of origin, develop a sense of self, and join with a spouse to form a new family subsystem. From an individual perspective, Erikson (1968) used a psychodynamic approach to illustrate that establishing a sense of identity during adolescence serves as the foundation for developing intimate relationships in young adulthood. These conceptualizations include the proposal that the process of defining a sense of oneself apart from the family of origin and forming intimate relations is central to the development of young adults.Although the ability of individuals to engage in intimate relations is identified as an important part of adulthood, the components of quality relationships are difficult to measure. Although originally designed to assess over-all quality in relations with one other person, the Interpersonal Relationship Scale (Guerney, 1977) has the potential to identify components of interpersonal relationship quality. This scale was developed to measure the quality of relationship and to evaluate the effects of a program, the Programs for Relationship Improvement by Maximizing Empathy and Self-disclosure (Guerney, 1977;Schlein, 1971). For the purposes of the initial scale development, interpersonal relationship quality was conceptualized as encompassing elements such as "acceptance, respect and admiration, understanding, friendship and companionship, ease in communication, sharing, caring and concern, wanting

show abstract

Relationship enhancement with premarital couples: An assessment of effects on relationship quality

Cited by 48 publications

References 9 publications

Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program.

Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program.

Making A Case for Premarital Education^*

The Modified Interpersonal Relationship Scale: Reliability and Validity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Relationship enhancement with premarital couples: An assessment of effects on relationship quality

Cited by 48 publications

References 9 publications

Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program.

Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program.

Making A Case for Premarital Education*

The Modified Interpersonal Relationship Scale: Reliability and Validity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Making A Case for Premarital Education^*