... until careers do us part: Vocational and marital satisfaction in the dual-career commuter marriage

Abstract

The first purpose of this study was to identify significant differences between the dual-career couple whose work requires a geographic separation and the dual-career couple whose work allows them to maintain one residence. Specific comparisons included general marital satisfaction, use of parallel communication, attributional patterns, and general vocational satisfaction. The second purpose of this study was to identify variables that predict vocational and marital satisfaction for the commuting and non-commuting couples. The sample consisted of 55 commuters and 55 non-commuters. Instruments utilized were the Marital Satisfaction Inventory, Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, Relationship Style Inventory, and two instruments designed for the study. There were no differences between commuters and non-commuters or between men and women on a global measure of marital satisfaction. Commuters were more dissatisfied with time spent together and with affectional communication. Commuters were more non-traditional in their perceptions of marital and parental roles. Non-commuters had a higher proportion of parallel communications. There were no differences on attribution measures or on global vocational satisfaction. Marital satisfaction was best predicted by parallel communication for both groups; however, there was a much stronger relationship for commuters. Vocational satisfaction for both groups was predicted by satisfaction with job security. Counseling strategies for use with problems faced by commuters are discussed.The family has changed from the traditional nuclear family with the husband as wage earner and wife as homemaker. Dual workers are an increasingly more common family form. As the number of women in the work force has increased, greater numbers have selected careers that require extensive preparation and considerable commitment for career development.In the late 1960s, the British researchers Robert and Rhona Rapoport initiated study of the dual-career couple. The Rapoports (1976) identified a number of dilemmas that were stressful for the dual career family. These sources of dissatisfaction included: (a) domestic overload -with the wife

Long‐Distance Romantic Couples: An Attachment Theoretical Perspective

“…The salience of LDR proximity maintenance is apparent in research. Married participants noted losing (a) everyday talk and sharing (Gerstel & Gross, 1984;Govaerts & Dixon, 1988), (b) the partner's presence (Gerstel & Gross, 1982), (c) daily companionship (Magnuson & Norem, 1999), and (d) ''the small connecting links of daily life'' (Johnson, 1987, p. 6). Without referring to attachment, Gerstel and Gross (1984) interpreted the lost routine behavior as the physical proximity that contributes to the partners' ability to provide emotional support to each other, as is consistent with proximity maintenance keeping the partner accessible for caregiving functions.…”

Going the Distance: Individualism and Interdependence in the Commuter Marriage

“…Literature that has focused on dual‐earning professionals who lived apart was based almost exclusively on research from the 1970s and 1980s (Anderson & Spruill, ; Bunker, Zubek, Vanderslice, & Rice, ; Gerstel, , ; Gerstel & Gross, , ; Gross, , ; Rindfuss & Stephen, ; Winfield, ). Much of this older research, in addition to the minimal recent work exploring this topic, focused on the psychological consequences of these relationships for the individuals involved (Bunker et al, ; Govaerts & Dixon, ; Magnuson & Norem, ).…”

Measuring Long-Distance Romantic Relationships: A Validity Study

“…the work week, with other criteria (e.g., partners have separate residences and pursue a career) sometimes specified (Bunker, Zubek, Vanderslice, & Rice, 1992;Gerstel & Gross, 1982;Govaerts & Dixon, 1988;Jackson, Brown, & Patterson-Stewart, 2000;Johnson, 1987;Magnuson & Norem, 1999). LDR status is also determined by participant responses to a forced-choice LDR/GCR item: (a) "My partner lives far enough away from me that it would be very difficult or impossible for me to see him or her every day" (Guldner & Swensen, 1995, p. 316; see also Guldner, 1996;Stafford & Merolla, 2007;Stafford, Merolla, & Castle, 2006) or (b) "Do you consider this a long-distance relationship?"…”