Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231026047
CITATIONS READS
5 2,937
1 author:
Nadia Ayub
Institute of Business Management
21 PUBLICATIONS 63 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Nadia Ayub on 24 August 2017.
Nadia Ayub*
* Department of Social Sciences, College of Business Management, Institute of
Business Management, Karachi, Pakistan
ABSTRACT
19
20 Ayub
INTRODUCTION
1
Locke, H.J. (1968). Predicting Adjustment in Marriage: A Comparison of Divorced and
Happily Married Groups. New York: Greenwood.
Development of Marital satisfaction Scale 21
2
Wolfram, S. (1987). In-Laws and Out-Laws: Kinship and Marriage in England.
London: Croom Helm.
3
Sher, T. G., & Baucom, G. H. (1993) Marital communication: Differences among
martially distressed, depressed, and non-distressed couples. Journal of Family
Psychology, 7, 148-153.
4
Gokmen, A. (2001). Evli elerin birbirlerine ynelik kontrolclk ve bamllk
alglarnn evlilik doyumu zerindeki etkisi. Unpublished masters thesis,
Hacettepe University, Ankara. In B. Cogla (2004). An exploration of marital
satisfaction, locus of control, and self-esteem as predictors of sexual satisfaction,
Doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University.
5
Weishaus, S., & Field, D. (1988). A half century of marriage: Continuity or change?
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 763-774.
22 Ayub
6
Kluwer, E. S., Heesink, J. A. M., & Van de Vliert, E. (1996). Marital conflict about the
division of household labor and paid work. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
58, 958-969.
7
Dokmen, Z.Y. & Tokgoz, O. (2002). Cinsiyet, eitim, cinsiyet rol ile evlilik doyumu,
ele alglanan benzerlik arasndaki ilikiler. XII. Ulusal Psikoloji Kongresi.
Ankara: Trk Psikologlar Dernei Yaynlar. In B. Cogla,(2004). An exploration
of marital satisfaction, locus of control, and self-esteem as predictors of sexual
satisfaction, Doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University,
8
Robert, B.& Wolfe,D.M. (1960). Husband and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living
New York: Free Press.
9
Chilman, Catherine S. (1980). Parent Satisfaction, Concerns, and Goals for their
Children. Family Relations 29 (July), 339-345.
Development of Marital satisfaction Scale 23
have a positive effect on marriage, couples with children had significantly less
verbal communication and that their interaction rates were lower and involved
talking more about their children and less about themselves and their
relationship. They felt less close to each other than childless couples, who were
more responsive to conflict, and experienced lower marital satisfaction10.
10
Harold,F. (1971). The effects of Children on the Family. Pp. 107-125 in Family Issues
of Employed Women in Europe and America edited by A. Michel Leiden: E.G.
Brill.
11
Coyne, J. C., & Anderson, K. K. (1999). Marital status, marital satisfaction, and
support processes among women at high risk for breast cancer. Journal of
Family Psychology, 13, 629-641.
12
Donnelly, D.A. (1993). Sexually inactive marriages. The Journal of Sex Research, 30
(2),171-179.
24 Ayub
The aim of the study is to explore the variables, which affects, the
psychological health status of couples in context of Pakistani culture. This issue
is addresses because of its psychological consequences such as depression, self-
esteem, and self-perception as they are more severe and rigorous as compared to
the physical effects. Researches that have been carried out in West, have proved
that the experience of marital dissatisfaction erodes couples self- esteem and put
them at a greater risk in an innumerable kind of mental disorders like depression.
Although, different scales have been developed to measure marital satisfaction
13
Tharp, G.P. (1963) Psychological patterning in marriage. Psychological Bulletin, 60,
97-117.RP, G.P. (1963) Psychological patterning in marriage. Psychological
Bulletin, 60, 97-117.
14
Hill, M. S. (1988). Marital stability and spouses shared leisure time: A
multidisciplinary Hypothesis. Journal of Family Issues. (9), 427-451.
15
Gottman, J. M. (1979). Marital interaction: Experimental investigations. San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
16
De La Ronde, C., & Swann, W. B. (1998). Partner verification: Restoring shattered
images of our intimates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 374
382.
17
Klein, S. B., Loftus, J., & Burton, H. A. (1989). Two self-reference effects: The
importance of distinguishing between self-descriptiveness judgments and
autobiographical retrieval in self-referent encoding. Journal of Personality &
Social Psychology, 56(6), 853-865.
18
Cobb, R. J., Davila, J., & Bradbury, T. N. (2001). Attachment security and marital
satisfaction: 138. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20(1) 115-138.
Development of Marital satisfaction Scale 25
METHOD
The purpose of this phase was to create a pool of items relating to marital
satisfaction. A pool of 58-items was generated based on pilot study, theoretically
driven logic, and past literature. In addition, available scales including- Spouse
Rating Scale22 and Quality Marriage Index23 were examined. This extensive
process resulted in a measure consisting of 58-items that describe variables of
marital satisfaction. Based on above criteria, items were generated to measure the
following variables: In- laws relationship, Communication, Husband financial
status, Compromise, Spouse Support, Self-Perception, Dual Earning, Mutual
Understanding, Presence of Children, Understanding, Education of Partner,
19
Meens, L. D. (1986). Concurrent and discriminant validity of the Kansas Marital
Satisfaction Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 381-387.
20
Mehrabian, A. (2005). Manual for the Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale
(CMSS). Monterey, CA: Author.
21
Fowers, B.J. & Olson, D.H. (1993) ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale. Journal of
Family Psychology 7, (2) 176-185
22
Sacco, W.P., Dumont, C.P., & Dow, M.G. (1993) Attribution, perceptual, and affective
responses to depresses and non-depressed marital partners. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 1076 1082.
23
Norton, R. (1983) Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 141-151.
26 Ayub
Sample
The subject were 600 (300 men, mean age = 37.0 years; 300 women,
mean age = 32.0 years) from different areas of the Karachi city. The average
length of marriage was 11.58 years. The education levels ranged from
Matriculation/O levels (20%), Intermediate/ A levels (40.2%), Bachelors (17.3%)
up to Masters (20.5%). The average number of children was 03. All participants
resided in Pakistan and volunteered to take part in this study. Couples had been
married from one to thirty years, marriage and the average length of their
marriage was 9.78 years. All of the respondents belong to different socio-
economic background.
Procedure
Data Analysis
0.05 alpha levels. For Item total correlation of 58-items Pearson Product-Moment
Coefficient of Correlations was calculated on SPSS.
Sample
Procedure
Sample
Measure
To help test the validity of the Marital Satisfaction Scale, two additional
instruments are contained in the study.
Procedure
24
Messer, B., & Harter, S. (1986). Manual for the Adult Self Perception Profile. Denver,
CO: University of Denver.
25
Sacco, W.P., Dumont, C.P., & Dow, M.G. (1993) Attribution, perceptual, and affective
responses to depresses and non-depressed marital partners. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 1076 1082.
Development of Marital satisfaction Scale 29
RESULTS
Table 1
Descriptive statistics of Sub-Scales of Marital Satisfaction Scale
Table 2
Reliability Analyses- Scale (Alpha) for Marital Satisfaction Scale
600 40 .696
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics and Item total Correlations of 40 items on Marital
Satisfaction Scale
Table 4
Test-retest reliability of Marital Satisfaction Scale
Table 5
Convergent validity of Marital Satisfaction Scale
P< .05
Table 5 Shows convergent validity of Marital Satisfaction Scale with Adult Self-
Perception Profile, and Spouses Rating Scale
32 Ayub
Table 6
Item Sub-Scale Correlation of Marital Satisfaction Scale
DISCUSSION
This study sets out to develop an internally consistent, reliable and valid
indigenous measure of marital satisfaction. MSS developed, has been comprises
of 40-items, 4-point questionnaire, containing likerttype response format, self-
report measure for the married couples. It consisted of twelve subscalesin-laws
relationship, communication, understanding, compromise, education of spouse,
financial status of husband, sexual satisfaction, mutual understanding, self-
perception, gender difference, dual earning, and spouse supportderived
through item total correlation.
Development of Marital satisfaction Scale 33
The high inter correlations demonstrate that the forty items are probably
related to the same construct, measuring marital satisfaction. There are
consistently positive correlations between almost all the Marital Satisfaction
Scale subscales and the total score reflecting positive relationship towards overall
scale. Moreover, the final score reflect its proficiency in Marital Satisfaction
Scale is significant. Finally, results depict that twelve subscales directly and
effectively contributes in marital satisfaction in a Pakistani society.
There are some limitations of the present study. First limitation of the
study is that items such as, item number 26 and 35 showed weak correlation with
the total scores, future research should modify these items and measured the
validity. Second, the sample was drawn from the couples who currently live in a
big city like Karachi, Pakistan; so the research is not appropriate to apply its
results to people who live rural areas. Finally, the study depended on self-
reported data. There is always a risk of being biased and selective recall when
using such data26. Expansion on the present study would allow greater knowledge
into the predictors of marital satisfaction of couples.
CONCLUSION
26
Smith, M.L. & Glass, G.V. (1987) Research and Evaluation in Education and the
Social Sciences Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.