The existing research on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) indicated that there were problems with some of the subscales and individual items. This study was designed to improve the instrument by following the standards of construct hierarchy. Through previous research and the analyses in this study, the subscales were found to contain some items that were homogeneous and others that were more heterogeneous. This problem was corrected by selecting out items that were homogeneous; 7 first‐order scales were created which were combined to creat the 3 second‐order concepts of consensus, satisfaction, and cohesion. With a sample of distressed and nondistressed couples, a series of confirmatory factor analyses was conducted. The factor analyses provided evidence for the construct validity of the new structure of the Revised DAS (RDAS) with the distressed, nondistressed, and total samples of this study, as well as with the sample from Spanier and Thompson's (1982) study. Additional analyses correlating the RDAS with another popular marital instrument provided more evidence for the construct validity of the RDAS. Criterion validity was demonstrated by discriminant analyses results. Both internal consistency and split‐half reliability estimates demonstrated that the RDAS was reliable. The result also supported dividing the RDAS into two alternative forms for use in pre‐ and posttest studies. Summary statistics for the RDAS are presented as are implications for the field of marriage and family therapy.

The purpose of this article is to present the conceptual model underlying RELATE, a relationship evaluation instrument, and to describe how this instrument can be used by instructors, clinicians, and therapists. The RELATE model contains measures of the 4 primary contexts of a couple's experience: the individual, the family, the culture, and the couple. The model includes some of the primary variables in Gottman's marital cascade and has been evaluated for reliability and validity. Examples of how to use the instrument and model are illustrated for couples, educators, and clinicians. I t is challenging to capture the dynamics of couple relationships. Scholars have used interviews, observations, surveys, tasks, and even physiological measures to attempt to understand the quality of relationships. One group of scholars, the RELATE Institute (RI, previously the Marriage Study Consortium), was formed in 1979 by a diverse group of researchers, clinicians, and educators, dedicated to the dual goals of strengthening and understanding premarital and marital relationships.Over the last 20 years, members of the RI have grappled with trying to measure the complexities of adult romantic relationships from a variety of different angles. In addition, the RI has searched for ways to present data in a manner that is useful to couples and the family professionals who work with them. Through this endeavor, three versions of a comprehensive instrument and accompanying feedback tool have been published. The most recent version of the instrument is the RELATionship Evaluation Questionnaire (RELATE; Holman, Busby, Doxey, Klein, & Loyer-Carlson, 1997). This article describes the development of the conceptual model from which RELATE was derived and discusses how the model and instrument can be used by educators, clinicians, and researchers. The Development of the RELATE ModelThe RELATE model was developed by reviewing over 50 years of research that delineated the important premarital predictors of later marital quality and stability. The comprehensive

In this study, we address the communication technologies individuals within romantic relationships are using to communicate with one another, the frequency of use, and the association between the use of these technologies and couple's positive and negative communication. Participants consisted of individuals involved in a serious, committed, heterosexual relationship. The Relationship Evaluation Questionnaire instrument was used to assess a variety of relationship variables. The majority of individuals within the study frequently used cell phones and text messaging to communicate with their partner, with ''expressing affection'' being the most common reason for contact. Younger individuals reported using all forms of media (except for e-mail) more frequently than older participants. Relationship satisfaction did not predict specific use of media but predicted several reasons for media use. Additional analyses revealed that text messaging had the strongest association with individuals' positive and negative communication within their relationships. Specifically, text messaging to express affection, broach potentially confrontational subjects, and to hurt partners were associated with individuals' view of positive and negative communication within their relationship. Implications of the results are discussed.School of Family Life, Brigham Young University, JFSB 2087, Provo, UT 84602 (smcoyne@byu.edu).

Very little is known about how pornography use is related to the quality of committed relationships. This study examined associations among pornography use, the meaning people attach to its use, sexual quality, and relationship satisfaction. It also looked at factors that discriminate between those who use pornography and those who do not. Participants were couples (N = 617 couples) who were either married or cohabiting at the time the data were gathered. Overall results from this study indicated substantial gender differences in terms of use profiles, as well as pornography's association with relationship factors. Specifically, male pornography use was negatively associated with both male and female sexual quality, whereas female pornography use was positively associated with female sexual quality. The study also found that meaning explained a relatively small part of the relationship between pornography use and sexual quality.

This article describes the purpose, reliability, validity, and potential clinical applications of the brief accessibility, responsiveness, and engagement (BARE) scale. In addition to focusing on the central attachment behaviors of accessibility and responsiveness, this instrument highlights the key role of engagement in couple bonding. The BARE is a short, systemic, self-report measure of attachment behaviors in couple relationships. Both classical testing theory and item response theory were used to test the psychometric properties of the instrument. The BARE demonstrated appropriate reliability and validity while maintaining its brevity and potential usefulness for clinicians and researchers. The BARE also accurately predicted the key relationship outcomes of stability and satisfaction. The data for this study were collected from the RELATE assessment (see www.relate-institute.org).

No abstract

The present study utilized a sample of 1755 adult couples in heterosexual romantic relationships to examine how different patterns of pornography use between romantic partners may be associated with relationship outcomes. While pornography use has been generally associated with some negative and some positive couple outcomes, no study has yet explored how differences between partners may uniquely be associated with relationship well-being. Results suggested that greater discrepancies between partners in pornography use were related to less relationship satisfaction, less stability, less positive communication, and more relational aggression. Mediation analyses suggested that greater pornography use discrepancies were primarily associated with elevated levels of male relational aggression, lower female sexual desire, and less positive communication for both partners which then predicted lower relational satisfaction and stability for both partners. Results generally suggest that discrepancies in pornography use at the couple level are related to negative couple outcomes. Specifically, pornography differences may alter specific couple interaction processes which, in turn, may influence relationship satisfaction and stability. Implications for scholars and clinicians interested in how pornography use is associated with couple process are discussed.

The purpose of this research was to understand in greater detail, using 2 samples (Study 1 N = 4,881 heterosexual couples; Study 2 N = 335 heterosexual couples who completed the Relationship Evaluation Questionnaire), how partner or self-enhancement patterns differentially influence relationship outcomes. A multivariate analysis of covariance was conducted comparing 4 outcome measures for different couple types in which individuals rated the partner higher, the same, or lower than they rated themselves on affability. Couples in which both individuals perceived themselves as more affable than the partner experienced poorer results on the relationship outcome measures, whereas couples in which both individuals perceived the partner's personality as more affable than their own experienced more positive relationship outcomes. Additional analyses with structural equation models demonstrated the consistent influence of enhancement measures on relationship outcomes for cross-sectional and longitudinal samples.Scholars have been studying the influence of different patterns in self-and partner ratings on relationship outcomes for a few decades