Working Hard or Hardly Working? Comparing Relationship Self-Regulation Levels of Cohabiting, Married, and Remarried Individuals

Abstract

The concept of relationship self-regulation (RSR) has been shown to be related to relationship satisfaction, yet the differences in RSR ability based on couple type have yet to be examined. This study compared first married, remarried, and cohabiting individuals on their self-reported ability to implement RSR in their relationship, along with their report of satisfaction, positive communication, and negative communication in their relationships. Data was derived from 6,591 participants who were part of the RELATionship Evaluation (RELATE) questionnaire data set. Multiple Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) statistics were used, and results showed that while mean differences in RSR were small across couple types, remarrieds reported significantly lower RSR levels than any other group, while first marrieds reported significantly higher RSR levels than any other group. Implications for relationship education programs and couple therapy are discussed with particular emphasis placed on ensuring that RSR related programs are being delivered to remarried individuals and couples.

Relationship Effort, Satisfaction, and Stability: Differences Across Union Type

“…() and Wilson et al. () on relationship effort and has been utilized in prior research (Meyer et al., ). This variable is a four‐item scale, using the following questions: “If things go wrong in the relationship I tend to feel powerless”, “I tend to fall back on what is comfortable for me in relationships, rather than trying new ways of relating”, “Even when I know what I could do differently to improve things in the relationship, I cannot seem to change my behavior”, and “If my partner doesn't appreciate the change efforts I am making, I tend to give up.” We reverse coded the variables from 1 to 5 so that higher values indicated more effort.…”

“…Relationship effort measured how willing and able individuals put forth effort into their relationships. The scale comes from a modified version of questions used by Halford et al (1994) and Wilson et al (2005) on relationship effort and has been utilized in prior research (Meyer et al, 2012). This variable is a four-item scale, using the following questions: "If things go wrong in the relationship I tend to feel powerless", "I tend to fall back on what is comfortable for me in relationships, rather than trying new ways of relating", "Even when I know what I could do differently to improve things in the relationship, I cannot seem to change my behavior", and "If my partner doesn't appreciate the change efforts I am making, I tend to give up."…”

“…Other remarital characteristics, such as heterogeneous partnerships (Shafer, 2012), mean partners may have difficulty working together to build positive relationships. Unclear behavioral norms in remarriage (Sweeney, 2010) may lead to misdirected and unhelpful efforts which fail to improve satisfaction or stability (Meyer et al, 2012). The selective attributes of divorc es, such as their inclination toward divorce and high gender/partner distrust due to first marriage experiences, may also undermine the work each partner puts in (Amato & Booth, 1991).…”

“…These procedures prevent us from claiming that our results are generalizable in any way. However, data are large, diverse, includes batteries of questions not found in other data sources and are commonly used (e.g., Busby, Holman & Niehuis, 2009;Busby, Holman & Walker, 2008;Busby et al, 2001;Meyer et al, 2012). In fact, the sample we use is large and includes cohabiters, although prior studies had only previously focused only on married couples (Halford et al, 2007(Halford et al, , 2010Wilson et al, 2005).…”

Differences in Relationship Quality Measurement and Covariate Influence Between Individuals in First and Second Marriages: A Propensity Score Analysis

“…To effectively assess the measurement model for relationship satisfaction and stability between individuals in first and second marriages, we incorporated a number of exogenous covariates into our analytical model that could potentially influence these constructs (Amato et al, 2007;Meyer, Larson, Busby, & Harper, 2012). Specifically, we included a dummy variable for female gender, with a value of 1 indicating female and 0 indicating male.…”