Australian Couples in Millenium Three  

Across almost all countries and cultures almost all people are involved in marriage, or in cohabiting committed couple relationships, at some point in their life (Buss, 1995). In Australia, over 85% of the population marry by age fifty (McDonald, 1995). Of those people who choose not to marry, most are involved in committed couple relationships either as a prelude, or as an alternative, to marriage (McDonald, 1995). At the beginning of committed relationships almost all couples report high levels of relationship satisfaction (Bradbury, 1998; Markman, 1991; Markman & Hahlweg, 1993). However, the mean level of relationship satisfaction typically declines each year over at least the first ten years of the relationship, with a substantial proportion of couples reporting dramatic declines in satisfaction that are associated with contemplation or enactment of separation (Glenn, 1998). Deteriorating relationship satisfaction and separation are associated with a range of adverse outcomes for partners and any children of the relationship (Halford, Kelly & Markman, 1997).

In Chapter 1 of this report I describe what research has established about the consequences and causes of deterioration in relationship satisfaction and stability, and review the evidence on the effects of marriage and relationship education in promoting strong, satisfying couple relationships. The first section of this chapter is a brief description of the significance of marriage and couple relationships. I begin by briefly summarizing current trends in couple relationships, marriage, separations and divorce. Then the impact of strong couple relationships on adult partners and children is described. A research-based analysis of the characteristics of strong couple relationships is presented. A summary with conclusions is the final part of this chapter.

Changing patterns of couple relationships, marriage and divorce

Over the course of this century in Australia there have been major changes in patterns of couple relationships, marriage, and rates of relationship dissolution. Similar changes have occurred in the United States, and much of Western Europe (McDonald, 1995). Projection of these trends into the next millenium suggests that marriage and couple relationships will continue to change. It is beyond the scope of this report to review all the evidence, but I do want to summarize the key trends in marriage and relationships, as these trends provide the changing context within which marriage and relationship education is provided.

The House of Representative Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs prepared a report entitled "To have and to hold: Strategies for strengthening marriage and relationships" in 1998. In that report was a review of much of the evidence on trends in marriage and relationships in Australia. McDonald (1995) also has reviewed major trends. The key trends these two sources noted in marriage over the last 50 years that are of particular relevance for marriage and relationship education are as follows.

1. The vast majority of families in Australia are couple families (86%). Single parent families make up most of the rest of Australian families, and the proportion of all families that are single parent families is increasing (from 3% of all families in 1966 to 14% in 1996).
2. About half (48%) of married couples have dependant children, 11% have nondependant children, and 41% have no children at all. These figures represent a substantial decline in the proportion of couples with dependant children over time. This trend is attributable to increasing life expectancies, decreased average numbers of children per couple, and increased proportions of couples delaying or choosing not to have children.
3. There has been a decline in the rates of marriage over the last 50 years, particularly in the last 20 years, though the most recent statistics show that trend has slowed. Those people who marry do so at later ages on average than in the past. However, still 85% of Australians will marry before age 45.
4. Increasing proportions of couples choose to be married by civil celebrants, and decreasing proportions by religious celebrants. In 1998 a little over half of all marriages in Australia were performed by civil celebrants, compared with less than 2% in the early 1970s.
5. Rates of cohabitation by couples has increased, with over 65% of marrying couples having lived with a partner before marriage, and about 8% of couple families being cohabiting couples.
6. Rates of divorce have increased dramatically, with estimates that about 40 to 45% of Australian marriages will end in divorce. Increasing proportions of couples divorce in the early years of marriage, with more than 20% of couples divorcing within 10 years of marriage. Rates of relationship separation of cohabiting couples are hard to estimate, but are higher than for married couples.
7. The number of children involved in divorce has increased dramatically, and by age 18 about 18% of Australian children will experience their parents divorcing.
8. The overwhelming majority of people who separate from couple relationships become involved in subsequent couple relationships, either by marrying or cohabiting with a new partner. Rates of remarriage after divorce have decreased, particularly for women, and for people who are older when they divorce.
9. The majority of children who experience parental divorce live with their mothers (80%), and about half of these children will have a step-father living with them within 6 years of the divorce. Rates of break-up of stepfamilies are particularly high, and many children are exposed to two or more separations of their parents with partners.

The trends to lower rates of marriage and higher rates of divorce covary with a number of societal changes such as the increase in women working outside the home, increased acceptance of divorce, changes in divorce laws, the increased geographical mobility of couples, and reduced contact with extended family (Markman, Halford, & Lindahl, in press). This complex of changing factors makes it hard to determine which variables may be crucial in determining the changing patterns of couple relationships.

Associated with a range of complex social changes is a transformation in the nature of couple relationships. In the past, couple relationships had clear gender roles and definitions of power (the so-called "traditional marriage"), now there are more gender role flexible and egalitarian relationships (Notarius & Markman, 1993). Not surprisingly, these changes can generate conflict. For example, there may be differences over issues such as whose career is more important, who will be the predominant caregiver for the children, or whose opinion will prevail regarding family money matters. Partners who feel their relationship does not meet their expectations often feel severely dissatisfied (Baucom, Epstein, Rankin, & Burnett, 1996). Unfortunately there have been no concomitant changes in social institutions to provide couples with the skills to handle such inevitable conflicts. Research has shown that couples who are not able to handle conflicts and negotiate the transitions in a couple's life together are at increased risk for relationship distress and separation (Halford et al. 1997; Markman, Stanley, Blumberg, 1994).

The trends in delaying marriage, and high rates of divorce have led some commentators to speculate that marriage is an outdated social institution that may soon disappear (e.g. Demo, 1993). However, despite the high rates of relationship breakdown and divorce, most young unmarried Australian adults expect to marry at some point in their lives, and want their marriage to be life-long (Australian Institute of Family Studies, 1997; Millward, 1990). Whilst not universally endorsed, the majority of young adults have expectations of their spouses which include sexual monogamy, honesty, expressions of affection, emotional intimacy and support (Australian Institute of Family Studies, 1997). Even after marriage the vast majority of partners maintain extremely positive views of their spouse, and report great optimism about the future of their relationships (Fowers, Lyons, & Montel, 1996).

In summary, sharing a close couple relationship is highly valued by most Australian adults, they aspire to be in such a relationship, and the vast majority of people believe being in such a relationship is good for them. The pervasiveness of the valuing of couple relationships across cultures and recorded history is striking, and this suggests that in the foreseeable future such relationships will continue to be valued.

The form and expectations of couple relationships are undergoing substantial change. Increasing proportions of Australians couples cohabit without getting married. The choice to cohabit or marry is a function of many factors. For gay and lesbian couples cohabitation is their only choice as marriage currently is not available to them. For heterosexual couples cohabitation is a choice, and this choice is exercised for a diverse range of reasons. For many couples marriage has positive connotations of public commitment to a partner, and often marriage has important religious and spiritual dimensions. Some couples view cohabitation as a prelude to marriage. For example, cohabitation can be a chance for development of the relationship and to establish if a commitment to marriage is desired. Some couples dislike particular connotations they attribute to the institution of marriage (e.g., it is too conservative, too religious, too high a level of commitment). Couples also may have positive connotations they attribute to cohabitation (e.g., they feel they can define the nature of their relationship for themselves, rather than have it defined legally), and for this latter group of couples cohabitation may be seen as preferable to marriage as a means of being in a committed relationship.

The vast majority of research on committed couple relationships has been conducted on married couples (Halford & Markman, 1997), and the generalizability of this research to unmarried cohabiting couples is open to question. In this report I assume that much of the evidence on the nature of strong relationships, the influences on those relationships, and the impact of relationship education will be similar for cohabiting and married couples. This does not mean cohabitation is identical to marriage. Many cohabiting couples do not view their relationship as having the same characteristics as marriage, and cohabiting couples do have significantly higher relationship break-up rates than married couples (Hahlweg, Baucom, Bastine, & Markman, 1998). However, where comparisons have been made about the nature and determinants of relationship quality across cohabiting and married couples, similar patterns have been found (e.g. Hannah, Halford, & Dadds, 1999). In instances where the research seems relevant only to marriage, I use the term marriage to describe the phenomena being studied. In other instances I use the term couple relationship to include marriage and other committed couple relationships.

[ top ]

Benefits of strong couple relationships for partners

Mutually satisfying marriage is good for the physical health of adults (Burman & Margolin, 1992; Waite, 1997). Relative to never-married or divorced people, married people, and in particular people in a mutually satisfying marriage, live longer and have lower rates of many diseases and illnesses (Hu & Goldman, 1990; Burman & Margolin, 1992; House, Landis, & Umberson, 1988; Kitson & Morgan, 1990; Larson, Sawyers, & Larson, 1995). Moreover, married adults who do develop health problems tend to recover faster, and more effectively from many illness than other adults (Schmaling & Sher, in press).

There are a number of mechanisms by which being happily married may impact upon physical health. Couple relationships can have effects on health mediated through health related behaviors. For example, happily married partners tend to lead healthier lifestyles, (e.g., do not smoke tobacco, drink less alcohol, exercise more) than other adults (Burman & Margolin, 1992). Moreover, happily married partners make greater use of health promotion and early detection of disease services (Shmaling & Sher, in press), and take more active roles in management of their illnesses than other adults (Shmaling & Sher, in press). In addition, unhappy marriages may have direct deleterious physical effects that harm health. For example, relationship conflict is associated with suppression of the immune system (Kiecolt-Glaser, Fisher, Ogrocki, Stout, Speicher, & Glaser, 1987) which increases risk of major health problems.

A mutually satisfying long-term couple relationship is associated with greater resilience to the negative effects of life stresses (Coie et al. 1993; Halford et al. 1997), and reduced rates of psychological disorder (Halford, 1995). In contrast, relationship problems and separation are very stressful life events, often associated with substantial adjustment problems (Bloom, Asher & White, 1978). Marital distress is associated with higher rates of many forms of individual maladjustment, including substance abuse (Halford, Bouma, Kelly, & Young, (1999); Halford & Ogarsby, 1993; Jacob & Krahn, 1988), depression (Gotlib & Beach, 1995; Halford, 1995), bipolar disorder (Miklowitz, Goldstein, Neuchterlein, Snyder & Doane, 1988) and anxiety (Halford et al. (in press). Marital problems often precede the onset of individual problems like excessive drinking and depression (Maisto, O'Farrell, Connors, McKay, & Pelcovits, 1988; Paykel, Myers, Dienfelt, Klerman, Lindenthal, & Pepper, 1989). Moreover, marital problems predict much poorer prognosis for people receiving treatment for a range of psychological disorders (Halford, 1995; Halford et al. in press).

Marriage has a major impact on the financial well being of partners. On the one hand, being in a mutually satisfying marriage is associated with less time away from work and greater career achievement (Forthofer, Markman, Stanley, Cox, & Kessler, 1996). On the other hand, separation and divorce are associated with substantial financial losses for both partners (Behrens & Smythe, 1999).

[ top ]

Impact of strong couple relationships and marriage on children

Growing up in a home with two stable and happy parents is one of the strongest protective factors for children against a wide variety of mental, physical, educational, and peer-related problems (Coie et al. 1993; Emery, 1982; Sanders, Nicholsen & Floyd, 1997).

In contrast, parental conflict, distress and divorce are risk factors for a range of poor child outcomes including depression, withdrawal, conduct disorder, poor social competence, health problems, and academic under achievement (Amato, 1996; Cowan & Cowan, 1990; Cumming & Davies, 1994; Easterbrooks, 1987; Hetherington, 1988; Rutter, 1971). The negative effects of parental relationship problems and divorce impact upon offspring long term. Adult offspring of divorce have substantially higher rates of psychological disorder, and are much more likely themselves to divorce, than the rest of the population (Friedman, Tucker, Schwartz & Tomilson, 1995; Glenn & Kramer, 1985).

High levels of inter-parental conflict constitute a major risk factor for poor mental health both for the parents and for the children involved (Halford et. al., 1997). Parental conflict that is more overt, frequent and intense predicts externalizing as well as internalizing problems, including conduct-related problems, social incompetence, depression, health problems, and poor school performance (Fincham, 1998). Marital conflict also is associated with parents having more negative and less effective parenting strategies (Belsky, 1985; Emery, Fincham, & Cummings, 1992; Erel & Burman, 1995).

The nature of strong couple relationships

There is no absolute definition of strong or successful couple relationships; the standards by which people judge relationships vary by culture and individual (Jones & Chao, 1997). Whilst there is no absolute criterion, there are a number of indices of positive couple relationships that are likely to have broad consensual validity with the majority of couples.

Relationship satisfaction

Relationship satisfaction has been widely used as an index of relationship success (Halford, Kelly, & Markman, 1997). Relationship satisfaction can be defined as an individual partner's global sentiment about, or evaluation of, their relationship. An advantage of this construct is that it does not define an ideal relationship, but rather asks partners to rate the extent to which their relationship satisfies their individual expectations.

In research, relationship satisfaction usually is operationalized as the score on a standardized self-report measure. For example, the most widely used measures of relationship satisfaction are the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Test (MAT) (Locke & Wallace, 1959) and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) (Spanier, 1976). The Positive Feelings Questionnaire (O'Leary, 1977), the satisfaction sub-scale of the ENRICH measure (Olsen, Fournier, & Druckman, 1987), and the Positive and Negative Marital Qualities Scale (PANQMS) (Fincham & Linfield, 1997) are examples of other satisfaction scales. Each of these scales asks partners to rate the extent of their agreement with a variety of descriptors about their relationship. Derived scores reflect overall satisfaction with the relationship.

Almost all couples begin committed relationships reporting high relationship satisfaction (Markman & Hahlweg, 1993; Markman, 1991). However, the mean level of relationship satisfaction erodes over at least the first ten years of marriage, and many couples contemplate or enact separation (Glenn, 1998). A limitation of many of the measures of relationship satisfaction is that they originally were developed to assess relationship distress, and the content of some scales places heavy emphasis upon levels of conflict and unmet expectations (e.g. the DAS) (Fincham, Beach & Kemp-Finchem, 1997). As a consequence, the scales are useful when evaluating whether marriage and relationship education prevents the onset of relationship problems, but may be relatively insensitive to variations in degree of positivity of well functioning relationships.

[ top ]

Stability of relationships

As noted previously, most people entering committed relationships aspire for them to be life long, and stability of the relationship seems an important index of a strong and successful relationship (Halford et al. 1997). Hence, separation or divorce is the most obvious marker of lack of relationship stability. In addition, the Marital Status Inventory (MSI) is a 14-item self report measure of steps taken toward separation. In the MSI partners rate as true or false statements such as: "Thoughts of separation occur to me very frequently, as often as once a week or more", and "I have suggested to my partner that I wished to be separated, or rid of him or her". The Marital Status Inventory has been modified to a 12-item Relationship Status Inventory that assesses steps toward separation in unmarried couples, including couples in committed relationships who are planning to marry or cohabit, or who are cohabiting (e.g., Sanders, Halford, & Behrens, 1999).

Separation should not always be seen as a relationship failure. In some relationships separation may be the best alternative available to partners. For example, if a relationship involves abuse or either partner is very unhappy with crucial aspects of the relationship, then continuing the relationship may not be a good outcome for anyone. A strong relationship is one that is stable because the relationship is satisfying for both partners, and because it is a relationship both partners choose to continue.

Steps toward separation and divorce usually, though not always, follow periods of deteriorating relationship satisfaction (Gottman, 1993a). In that sense, a multistep process of steps toward separation and divorce can be seen from a period of eroding relationship satisfaction, through sustained relationship distress, increasingly active contemplation of separation, and separation itself.

In addition to satisfaction and stability, a number of other global relationship characteristics have been proposed as indices of relationship success. Suggestions have included the psychological well being of the partners and any offspring (Halford et al. 1997), and the extent to which the relationship buffers the partners against adverse effects of life stress (Burman & Margolin, 1992). Relationship satisfaction is strongly correlated with each of these other characteristics of relationship success (Halford et al. 1997). Thus, whilst these other indices may be valuable to assess in research on marriage and relationship education, routine evaluation focusing on relationship satisfaction may be of greater practical utility.

[ top ]

Couple interaction

Relationship success also has been defined in terms of specific characteristics of couple interaction within the relationship. For example, each of the following have been proposed as indices of relationship success: the presence of intimate and self-disclosing communication, effective conflict management, partner mutual support, positive day-to-day interactions, and shared positive activities (Weiss & Heyman, 1997). There is a strong association of each of these specific characteristics of couple interaction with global relationship satisfaction (Halford et al. 1997).

Good communication is strongly correlated with relationship satisfaction and stability, and problems in communication are the most frequently cited specific complaint by distressed couples (Bornstein & Bornstein, 1986). Both independent observers and spouses report positive communication is associated with relationship satisfaction (Weiss & Heyman, 1997). Satisfied couples with strong relationships discuss problem issues with low levels of hostility, or criticism (Christensen & Shenk, 1991; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989; Gottman, 1994; Halford, Hahlweg & Dunne, 1990; Heavey, Christensen, & Malmuth, 1995; Notarius & Markman, 1993). Satisfied couples actively listen to their partner when discussing problems (Halford, et al. 1990; Jacobson, McDonald, Follette, & Berley, 1985; Weiss & Heyman, 1990), or when trying to support each other (Pasch & Bradbury, 1998). Satisfied couples remain engaged in conversations with their spouse and do not withdraw or avoid discussions of problem issues (Christensen & Shenk, 1991; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989; Gottman, 1994; Heavey, Christensen, & Malmuth, 1995).

Satisfied couples often are calm in their emotional responses to their partners' negative behavior, whilst distressed couples are highly reactive at an emotional level to their partners' negative behavior, and show significantly higher rates of negative reciprocity during interaction than do satisfied couples (e.g., Gottman, Markman & Notarius, 1977; Schaap, 1984). In observational studies the conditional probabilities of distressed partners responding with intense negativity to their partner's negativity is much higher than the conditional probabilities for satisfied partners (e.g., Halford, et al. 1990). In addition to this negative reciprocity, relationship distress also is associated with high levels of psycho-physiological arousal during interaction (e.g., Gottman & Levenson, 1988). This arousal is assumed to be aversive, which may explain the higher rates of withdrawal during problem-focused discussions by distressed partners (Christensen & Shenk, 1991; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989). Both the extent of arousal, and the frequency of withdrawal, prospectively predicts deterioration in relationship satisfaction (Gottman, 1993b; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989; Heavey, Layne, & Christensen, 1993; Heavey, Christensen, & Malmuth, 1995).

Another common characteristic of satisfied couples is that they undertake a range of positive activities on a regular basis (Halford, in press). These positive activities need to be a balance of independent activities of the spouses, positive coupleonly activities, and activities of the couple shared with family or friends. The exact balance that is desirable for particular couples is a function of partner preferences. However, having very high levels of any of the independent, couple, or shared activities, to the exclusion of the other types of activities, often is associated with relationship distress.

Over time the shared interests and activities of the partners need to change for both psychological and pragmatic reasons. At the psychological level, sharing new activities sustains partner interest in the relationship (Hill, 1988; Reissman, Aron, & Bergman, 1993), and seems to enhance mutual intimacy and passion (Baumeister & Bratlavsky, 1999). At the practical level, circumstances often require couples to modify their activities. As examples, having young children restricts some activities (e.g. going out at night), and ill health or aging may restrict some activities (e.g. very vigorous sporting activities). Couples need to develop new shared activities to replace those activities that become difficult to sustain. Thus, maintaining a healthy long-term relationship requires couples to evolve their shared activities across changing circumstances to provide novelty and mutual fun.

In an attempt to assess the usual way partners behave toward each other, researchers have has couples keep specially designed diaries of their day to day behaviours. There is a well-replicated finding that positivity of daily behaviors correlate with relationship satisfaction (Birchler, Weiss, & Vincent, 1975; Halford & Sanders, 1988; Jacobson, Follette, & McDonald, 1982; Johnson & O'Leary, 1996). More specifically, relative to satisfied couples, distressed couples report higher rates of negative, displeasing behaviors by their spouse and fewer positive, pleasing behaviors (Birchler, et al. 1975; Halford & Sanders, 1988; Jacobson et al. 1982; Johnson & O'Leary, 1996). Furthermore, satisfied couples' behavior is not contingent on the preceding partners' behaviors; satisfied couples tend to be positive irrespective of their partners' prior actions (Birchler et al. 1975; Jacobson et al. 1982). In contrast, distressed couples tend to reciprocate on a "quid pro quo" basis the behaviors of their spouse. In other words, in a distressed relationship partners tend only to be positive if their partner recently has been positive, and if one partner behaves negatively the other often responds negatively immediately (Birchler et al. 1975; Jacobson et al. 1982).

Thus, positive communication, strong mutual support, and effective conflict management characterize strong couple relationships. In addition, strong relationships have partners trying new and interesting couple activities, and balancing those couple activities with positive independent activities and activities the couple share with other people. Positivity in day-to-day interaction and expressions of caring and affection also are important.

Couple communication can be assessed by direct observation, and this has been widely done in much research (see Weiss & Heyman, 1997 for a review). However, the conduct of such observational assessments requires sophisticated training of people in observational coding systems, and this is time consuming and expensive to administer. Such observational assessment is invaluable in basic research to understand the processes by which couples communicate, and manage conflict (Gottman, 1998). Observational assessment also can be invaluable in rigorous scientific evaluation of the effects of marriage and relationship education in research (see Halford & Behrens, 1996 or Dyer & Halford, 1998 for a review of this research). However observational research is not practical for routine evaluation of marriage and relationship education service delivery.

[ top ]

Thoughts and feelings

Satisfied couples have a number of characteristic cognitions about their relationships (Baucom, Epstein, Sayers, & Sher, 1989). Satisfied couples selectively attend to their partner's positive behavior (Eidelson & Epstein, 1982; Floyd & Markman, 1983; Jacobson & Moore, 1981), and selectively recall such positive behavior (Osgarby & Halford, 1999). Satisfied couples tend to have a very positive view of their partners and relationships (Flowers, Applegate, Olsen, & Pomerantz, 1994). In contrast, distressed partners tend to overlook positive behaviors by their spouses (Gottman et al. 1977; Notarius, Benson, Sloane, Vanzetti, & Horyak, 1989), and to selectively recall negative aspects of relationship interaction (Osgarby & Halford, 1999).

Another characteristic of satisfied couples is holding realistic beliefs about relationships and partners. More specifically, happy couples tend to see disagreements between partners as part of a healthy relationship, that relationships and partners change over time, and that flexible gender roles are adaptive (Eidelson & Epstein, 1982; Baucom & Epstein, 1990). In contrast, distressed couples are more likely to believe that any form of disagreement is destructive, that change by partners is not possible, and that rigid adherence to traditional gender roles is desirable (Eidelson & Epstein, 1982; Baucom & Epstein, 1990). Distressed couples also report that their relationships often violate standards about how they think their relationship should be (Baucom, Epstein, Daiuto, Carels, Rankin, & Burnett, 1996). For example, distressed women report that their partners do not share power within the relationship in the manner the women believe they should, and distressed men believe their partners should invest more time and energy in the relationship than they do (Baucom et al. 1996).

Satisfied couples attribute the causes of relationship problems to a complex range of dynamic factors such as the circumstances each partner is dealing with, patterns of interaction and individual partner characteristics. Distressed couples attribute relationship difficulties to stable, internal, negative and blame-worthy characteristics of their partners (Bradbury & Fincham, 1990; Fincham & Bradbury, 1992). For example, a partner arriving home late from work may be attributed by a satisfied partner as the spouse "struggling to keep up with a heavy load at work, and being subject to lots of pressure from the boss". The same behaviour may be attributed in a distressed relationship to the spouse being "a generally selfish person who doesn't care about the family". The process of attributing relationship concerns to a complex of dynamic factors is believed to lead satisfied partners to respond constructively to dissatisfaction in their relationship (Halford, Sanders, & Behrens, 1994). On the other hand, attributing relationship problems to static characteristics of the spouse leads most people with relationship distress feeling powerless to improve their relationship (Vanzetti, Notarius, & NeeSmith, 1992).

One additional cognitive characteristic of satisfied couples is that they expect positive outcomes from interaction with their partners. Satisfied couples report that prior to a discussion they expect to be able to resolve problem issues in their relationships, whilst distressed couples do not (Vanzetti et al. 1992). In anticipation of a problem solving discussion, distressed partners show high physiological arousal (Gottman, 1994), negative affect, and become primed to access negative evaluative judgements about their partner and the relationship (Fincham, Garnier, Gano-Phillips, & Osborne, 1995). It is believed that this arousal combined with negative expectations often leads distressed couples to avoid discussion of difficult issues, and these issues therefore do not get resolved (Halford, Gravestock, Lowe, & Scheldt, 1992).

The cognitive characteristics of distressed couples mediate their subsequent behavior toward their partners. For example, the occurrence of positive attributions is associated with subsequent positive behavior (Bradbury & Fincham, 1992). In unhappy couples negative thoughts about the partner predict future negative behaviors better than predictions from previous behavior (Halford & Sanders, 1990), suggesting these cognitions are more than just the consequences of negative behavior.

In summary, in strong relationships partners have realistic expectations about relationships. When there is conflict they see that as a normal part of a relationship, and actively seek to resolve problems. Satisfied partners avoid the trap of excessive blaming of their partner for difficulties in the relationship, and instead look to a complex of personal, environmental and interactional processes to understand where problems may arise.

Couple's thoughts and feelings have been extensively researched in the couples literature (Fincham & Beach, 1999). This research does provide invaluable insights into the basic processes that influence the development of satisfying couple relationships, but has not been used to evaluate the outcome of marriage and relationship education. Given the expense involved in these assessments, it seems unlikely that this will be used in routine service delivery, but greater attention to rigorous evaluation of changes in thoughts and feelings resulting from marriage and relationship education would be a useful basic research strategy to follow.

[ top ]

Sexuality

As might be expected, there is a strong relationship between relationship satisfaction, and sexual activity and satisfaction (Schenk, Pfrang, & Raushe, 1983; Spence, 1997). This strong association probably reflects that similar factors influence both sexual and general relationship functioning. For example, communication between the partners predicts both relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction (McCabe, 1994). Across at least the first 10 years of marriage expectations and satisfaction with sexuality is a strong predictor of relationship satisfaction and stability (Fowers & Olsen, 1986; Fowers & Olsen, 1989).

The frequency of sexual activity and satisfaction with sex tends to be highest in the earliest phases of a couple's relationship, and to decline over the first few years of marriage (Greenblatt, 1983). Many writers assume this is inevitable with a loss of novelty that is believed to induce high levels of sexual passion (Baumeister & Bratlavsky, 1999). The transition to parenthood is associated with a further significant decrease in sexual activity (Donnelly, 1993). Moreover, problems like anxiety, depression or fatigue can have a strong negative effect on sexual interest and enjoyment (Zimmer, 1987). For some couples adaptation to these changes is difficult, and conflict over sex is a common problem in couples with relationship distress (Zimmer, 1983).

There are gender differences in the desire for sex. On average women desire sex less often in committed relationships than men (Michael, Gagnon, Laumann, & Kotola, 1994; Oliver & Hyde, 1993). It is a source of considerable controversy whether these gender differences are the result of socialization or are inherent biological differences. Whatever the source of these differences, a challenge within relationships is to meet the expectations and desires of each partner, and to accommodate to different desires in the frequency and type of sexual activity. Couples who lack communication and conflict management skills find these negotiations difficult, and this can be a source of significant relationship strain.

There are a number of common sexual problems such as very low sexual desire, painful intercourse, and anorgasmia in women; and erectile problems and premature ejaculation in men (Spence, 1997). Couples who lack knowledge about sexuality are more likely to develop these problems, and less likely to seek assistance when such problems develop (Zilbergeld, 1995). Ongoing sexual problems can substantially increase the risk of relationship distress, and may contribute to relationship breakdown (Spence, 1997). Increasing sexual knowledge and enhancing couple communication about sexuality is a potentially important element of effective relationship education for couples.

[ top ]

Relationship aggression

Strong couple relationships do not include use of physical aggression or intimidation between partners. Unfortunately, aggression between partners in committed couple relationships occurs at high rates. Prevalence data on aggression in representative samples of Australian couples is lacking. In the United States up to a third of representative samples of young couples report engaging in less severe forms of physical aggression, such as throwing things, pushing, slapping or shoving one another (Pan, Neidig, & O'Leary, 1994; O'Leary, Malone, & Tyree, 1994). Even these less severe forms of aggression can lead to injury, and significant physical injury occurs in about 10% of couples (Straus & Gelles, 1986; Straus, Gelles & Steinmetz, 1980). More severe aggression involving choking, strangling, beating up or attacking with a weapon occurs in about 4% of couples (O'Leary et al. 1994). As might be expected, high rates of injury are associated with severe aggression (Cantos, Neidig, & O'Leary, 1994). At the extreme end of the spectrum relationship violence can be very severe; female homicide victims are murdered more often by their partners than any other class of assailant (Browne & Williams, 1993).

The prevalence of male-to-female versus female-to-male violence is approximately equal (Straus & Gelles, 1986). Furthermore, in the majority of couples in which there is physical aggression, both the man and the woman report being violent toward each other (Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Smutzler & Vivian, 1994; O'Leary et al. 1994; O'Leary, Barling, et al. 1989, Straus & Gelles, 1986). However, relative to female-to-male physical aggression, male-to-female physical aggression typically is more severe, more likely to lead to physical injury, and more often associated with the victim feeling fearful of their partner (Cascardi, Langhinrichsen & Vivian, 1992).

Aggression in relationships often occurs early in the relationship, with engaged and newly married couples having the highest rates of aggression (O'Leary et al. 1989; McLaughlin, Leonard, & Senchak, 1992). In couples that report physical aggression during engagement or the first year of marriage, further episodes occur, and the average severity of aggression escalates (O'Leary et al. 1989). The occurrence of relationship aggression in the early years of marriage is a strong predictor of separation in the first three or four years of marriage (Rogge & Bradbury, 1999). Given its high prevalence and damaging effects, preventing the occurrence of violence in couple relationships should be a key strategy for promoting strong couple relationships. Moreover, the prevention of relationship aggression should be an outcome variable when assessing the success of relationship education.

[ top ]

Defining strong couple relationships

Based upon the above discussion I define a strong, healthy long term couple relationship as: "A developing set of interactions between partners which promotes the individual well-being of each partner and their offspring, assists each partner to adapt to life stresses, engenders a conjoint sense of emotional and sexual intimacy, and which promotes the long term sustainment of a mutually satisfying relationship within the cultural context in which the partners live."

The most fundamental measure of strong couple relationships that seems appropriate, and which is practical to use in routine service delivery, is relationship satisfaction. Attempting to promote mutually satisfying relationships that both partners wish to remain within, seems a very important goal for marriage and relationship education. It would be helpful if, as a routine part of marriage and relationship education service delivery, satisfaction measures of couples were taken at the beginning of programs, reassessed at the end of programs, and if some sort of follow-up assessment was routinely done. This would give a better indication of whether relationship education programs are achieving the objective of promoting mutually satisfying relationships.

Given that we can identify certain aspects of couple expectations and interaction that are associated with low relationship satisfaction and instability, evaluation of the effects of marriage and relationship education on couple expectations and interaction also is desirable. Observational measures of couple interaction are desirable for rigorous research, but are too expensive for routine program evaluation. The use of self-report measures of couple communication in program evaluation is needed. Such self-reports measures show if the education has achieved its short-term educational goals.