2009
DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00612.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Association Between Partner Enhancement and Self‐Enhancement and Relationship Quality Outcomes

Abstract: 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 affa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
61
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(64 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
2
61
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Couples generally reported high satisfaction levels (M = 3.99, SD = 0.71). The RELATE satisfaction measures employed in this study have shown high test-retest reliability (between 0.76 and 0.78) and validity data have consistently shown that this scale is highly correlated with an existing relationship satisfaction and quality scale (Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale) in both cross-sectional and longitudinal research (Busby et al, 2001(Busby et al, , 2009.…”
Section: Couple Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Couples generally reported high satisfaction levels (M = 3.99, SD = 0.71). The RELATE satisfaction measures employed in this study have shown high test-retest reliability (between 0.76 and 0.78) and validity data have consistently shown that this scale is highly correlated with an existing relationship satisfaction and quality scale (Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale) in both cross-sectional and longitudinal research (Busby et al, 2001(Busby et al, , 2009.…”
Section: Couple Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…These items were adapted from earlier work by Booth, Johnson, and Edwards (1983). Cronbach's alpha was in the acceptable range (male: a = 0.79; female: a = 0.80).Previous studies have shownthis scale tohave test-retest reliability values between 0.78 and 0.86, to be appropriately correlated with other relationship quality measures, andtobevalidfor use incross-sectionalandlongitudinalresearch (Busby et al, 2001(Busby et al, , 2009Busby, Ivey, Harris, & Ates, 2007).…”
Section: Couple Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preliminary analyses showed strong internal consistency, with reliability coefficients (Cronbach's α) for male and female satisfaction at .84. The RELATE satisfaction measures employed in this study have shown high test-retest reliability (between .76 and .78), and validity data have consistently shown that this scale is highly correlated with an existing relationship satisfaction and quality scale (Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale) in both cross-sectional and longitudinal research (Busby et al, 2001;Busby, Holman, & Niehuis, 2009). …”
Section: Relationship Satisfactionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Cronbach's alpha with this sample for females was .72, and for males was .78. Likewise this scale has been used and tested extensively in previous work and had test-rest reliability values between .80 and .87, has been correlated with other relationship quality measures, and has been used in both cross-sectional and longitudinal research measuring change (Busby et al 2001(Busby et al , 2007(Busby et al , 2009.…”
Section: Relationship Problemsmentioning
confidence: 98%