Empirical studies of the relation between husband-wife power interactions and marital satisfaction are critically examined. Both self-report and observational measures of marital power interactions have tended, in general, to suffer from similar difficulties, including overly simplistic conceptualizations of power processes and limitations in the measurement of marital power and marital satisfaction. Despite these weaknesses, this group of studies has been fairly consistent in indicating that marriages in which the wife appears to be dominant are the most likely to be unhappy, whereas highest levels of satisfaction are more often found among egalitarian couples. Another group of studies focusing on the bases of marital power suggests that coercive control techniques may be related to marital dissatisfaction. This review also includes a discussion of the kind of expanded framework that future studies will need in order to make additional theoretical and substantive contributions to the understanding of power and satisfaction in marriage.This review critically examines research on the association between marital power and marital satisfaction. The literature on marriage and the family reflects a major concern with marital power; however, theoretical as well as methodological problems have hampered study in this area, as exemplified by the weakness both of conceptual and of operational definitions of marital power (Beck-

Research on the relationship between life stress and illness has focused largely on stress caused by change. The present study examines a relatively neglected source of stress: everyday problems, defined as ongoing, often chronic situations, which are stressful for a substantial period of time. An inventory of everyday problems was developed, designed to minimize as much as possible potential confounds present in earlier work. It was administered to 281 undergraduate women along with a life events inventory, the Hopkins Symptom Checklist, and a social support scale, which measured family and nonfamily sources of support. Stepwise regression analyses indicated that everyday problems were more effective than life events in predicting psychological symptoms. Everyday problems were significant predictors of symptoms even after statistically controlling for life events, whereas life events had no predictive ability beyond that attributed to everyday problems. In addition, a significant interaction between everyday problems and life events was found. Multiple regression analyses also showed an interaction between everyday problems and nonfamily social support, as predicted by the buffering hypothesis. Within the methodological limitations of this study, these findings are interpreted as supporting the importance of everyday problems as a significant source of stress.

Two samples of college women (N= 273 and N= 99) were administered a stress inventory, a social support scale, and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist. Separate measures of family and nonfamily social support were obtained as well as separate measures of types of social support: social availability, tangible support, information/guidance, and emotional support. With the total symptom score used as the dependent variable, nonfamily social support showed a clear buffering effect on life stress in both samples, whereas family social support showed significant buffering only in Sample 2. Multiple regression analyses indicated that nonfamily emotional support was more effective as a buffer than family social support in both samples. There were no clear differences among the types of social support in their buffering effectiveness All four symptom subscales showed buffering trends, but depression was the only subscale that was significantly buffered in both samples by nonfamily social support. The greater effectiveness of nonfamily social support as a buffer of stress is discussed in terms of the possible greater availablity, both physically and psychologically, of nonfamily friends for late adolescent and young adult women.

No abstract