FaHCSIA Internet > Subject Areas > Families & Children > Publications & Articles > Australian Couples in Millennium Three > 5. Specific Research and Development Proposals

• Project 1: Promoting empirically supported skills training approaches to relationship education.
• Project 2: Development and preliminary evaluation of Flexible Delivery Relationship Education Program
• Project 3: Enhancing access to relationship education by high risk and low referral couples
• Project 4: Randomized controlled trials of the medium and long-term effects of best practice approaches to relationship education.
• Summary and conclusions

In this chapter there are four specific action research projects recommended. The projects cover the span of the general principles and recommendations enunciated in the previous chapter. More specifically, the proposals have four broad aims. The first aim is to promote the use of empirically supported approaches to marriage and relationship education through the development of resource materials and training opportunities for educators. Second, it is proposed to develop forms of the resource materials that can be used as flexible delivery, self-directed learning programs to enhance accessibility of education. The third aim is to promote accessibility of relationship education by diversifying the points of entry to relationship education, and promoting access by couples who currently under utilize relationship education. The final aim is to conduct rigorous scientific evaluation of the long-term effects of relationship education.

Project 1: Promoting empirically supported skills training approaches to relationship education.

Skills based relationship education programs have the strongest empirical support for their effectiveness, and yet are not widely used by marriage and relationship educators in Australia. Two likely barriers to adoption of skills based relationship education programs are: a lack of resource materials to assist educators to deliver such programs, and lack of training opportunities to develop adequate skills in the delivery of such programs. In this project it is proposed that tenders be called for people who have experience in delivery of skills based relationship education programs to develop resource materials that can be used by educators in the delivery of skills based education programs. In particular, the use of videotaped materials which demonstrate key skills would be useful, as well as the preparation of written materials that could serve as leaders' manuals, and written materials that could serve as handouts to promote structured learning activities amongst couples.

The development of such materials should be complemented by additional training opportunities for marriage and relationship educators who wish to avail themselves of the opportunity to deliver skills based education programs. It would be best if the training programs were integrated with the development of resource materials, so that an integrated package of resource materials and training could be available to marriage and relationship educators.

Suggested content of resource materials

Currently the provision of marriage and relationship education is focused largely on pre-marriage and the transition into a committed relationship. This is a very appropriate point at which to offer relationship education, and many couples currently seek relationship education at this point. Hence one focus of resource material development should be to provide resources for programs for couples at around the time of marriage or cohabitation. Based on the content of empirically supported programs such as PREP (Markman et al. 1994) and SELF-PREP (Halford et al. 1999) it is suggested that the content of such resource materials should cover the topics identified in Table 5. Table 5: Overview of possible content in a six-module set of resource materials for a skill based premarital relationship education program

Additional transition points at which couples are likely to be responsive to marriage and relationship education include the transition to parenthood, formation of step-families, providing mutual support during times of severe illness, relocation, and retirement. The development of a series of resource materials for each of these transitions should be encouraged. The resource materials should focus on skills based approaches to relationship education, and should include a combination of videotape and written materials. These resource materials could utilize some of the materials developed for programs for couples entering committed relationships. For example, materials on couple communication skills and conflict management would be relevant for programs for couples at a variety of points in their relationship. Resource materials could then be developed that would complement these general materials and provide specific content for particular life transitions. In Table 6 a number of key life transitions are identified, with suggestions of possible resource material content. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but an indicative list of possible skill domains for different key transitions.

Table 6: Suggested content of specialized relationship education resource materials

As noted previously, continuing contact between educators and couples seems likely to enhance the long-term effects of relationship education. In the development of resource materials attention needs to be paid to promoting such ongoing contact. It is suggested that the resource materials be developed in such a manner so that couples can take away resources at the end of education programs. This provides the opportunity for self-directed review of materials at a later stage. In addition, the resource materials can provide for follow-up reviews between the educator and the couple; for example, follow-up letters could be included in the resource materials. These letters could review key concepts in the relationship education program, and provide advice of further opportunities for relationship enhancement. Follow-up sessions or telephone calls also could be used to maintain contact with couples, and promote long-term engagement with relationship enhancement.

[ top ]

Suggested people to develop the materials.

In order for the development of resource materials to produce optimal products, collaboration would be needed across a team with diverse expertise. The team would need to include collaboration between experienced relationship educators operating across different agencies, who would provide input as the potential end users of resources. Experts in skills based approaches to relationship education would be needed to work with these educators to develop the content details for the resource materials. In addition these experts could provide the training for educators in running skills based programs. Audiovisual production experts would be needed to develop professional quality materials. People with adult learning design expertise would also be needed to ensure the materials followed good educational design principles such as promoting self-directed learning. Finally, researchers would be needed to design and carry out evaluation of the materials developed.

Timeline and evaluation of project

The development of resource materials can make a significant contribution to the development of empirically supported approaches to relationship education. The process of consultation and collaboration between a large team with diverse skills, and the actual process of production of materials will require a significant investment of time and money. It is recommended that a period of at least two years be allowed for production and evaluation of the resource materials. A possible timeline is provided below.

Year 1: Development of material outlines and production of materials.

• Months 1-3: Appointment of staff, consultation between team members and relationship educators on the brief, development of detailed concept for resource materials including videotaped materials outline and written material content.
• Months 4-8: Audiovisual production of materials, and writing of draft printed materials. Development of detailed evaluation protocol.
• Months 9-12: Use of focus groups to assess materials, and modification as required. Consultation with relationship educators for further feedback on materials, modifications as required. Negotiation with educators to engage them in the pilot testing and evaluation phase.

Year 2: Training of relationship educators, implementation and evaluation of materials.

• Months 1-2: Training of relationship educators, dissemination of training materials.
• Months 3-8: Running of programs by trained educators using resource materials
• Months 9-12: Collation and analysis of evaluation data, preparation of final report.

The project should include an evaluation of the effectiveness of the dissemination of the skills training programs, as well as the short-term effects of the materials and programs delivered. More specifically, it is suggested that the delivery of programs by the educators should be evaluated in terms of the appropriate use of the resource materials, and skilled of use of appropriate learning strategies with participants. Educators who have been trained also should be asked to report on their perceptions of running the program. The effects of the programs should be assessed in terms of consumer satisfaction with the programs, as well as the acquisition of targeted relationship knowledge and skills.

[ top ]

Project 2: Development and preliminary evaluation of Flexible Delivery Relationship Education Program

The heavy reliance on face-to-face contact between relationship educators and couples is a significant limitation to the accessibility of relationship education in Australia. There is ample evidence that flexible delivery education programs can be effective in a range of areas, and there is some preliminary evidence that it may be effective in marriage and relationship education. A pilot program should be initiated to develop at least one flexible delivery relationship education program. Such a program could consist of a mixture of audio-visual and written materials, possibly supplemented by telephone-based educator services. Halford et al. (1998) developed a similar program called Relationship Education and Enhancement (REDEE). That program consists of a video, a workbook and a telephone educator service. Preliminary evaluation of pre- to post-program changes with this program show high satisfaction with the program by participants.

In the development of such a program it is desirable that collaboration occur between established researchers who could assist in evaluating the program, relationship education service providers who would collaborate in the development and delivery of the program, and people with expertise in the development of adult learning materials and audio visual production. The materials developed need to be subjected to a preliminary evaluation looking at the retention of couples in such a program, levels of consumer satisfaction, and the extent to which key targeted relationship skills change across the course of the program. It is recommended that the core content of the flexible delivery program be secular in nature, so that it can appeal to the broadest range of couples possible. An additional module on spiritual and religious aspects of marriage can be added for couples who wish to address that aspect of their relationship. The materials should have a skills training focus. Should such a program prove successful, it has the potential to greatly enhance the accessibility of marriage and relationship education to couples.

Videotape and written materials developed for a flexible delivery program could be adapted to other media such as CD Rom or a web site. Given that video players currently are more widely accessible to Australians than computers or web access, video materials should be the first priority in development of self-directed skills based learning materials. However, the rapid expansion of computer ownership in Australia means the expansion to computer-based delivery needs to be considered in the design of materials.

It would be most cost effective if the developments in this project and Project 1 were integrated. Many of the audiovisual materials developed for face-to-face delivery of skills based relationship education could be adapted to flexible delivery mode. For example, videotaped demonstration of couple communication skills might be used both by a leader in a group skills training program and by a couple in a flexible delivery self-directed learning mode. There would need to be different explanations and somewhat different footage around the communication skill demonstrations for these different modes of delivery of relationship education, but there would be considerable cost saving if there was maximum use of material developed. (The approximate cost of professional production of videotaped materials is between $1500 and $2000 per finished minute, so reusing high quality materials across multiple delivery formats should be explored.)

[ top ]

Year 1: Development of material outlines and production of materials.

• Months 1-3: Appointment of staff, consultation between team members and relationship educators on the brief, development of detailed concept for resource materials including videotaped materials outline and written material content. Educational design of self-directed learning program.
• Months 4-8: Audiovisual production of materials, and writing of draft printed materials. Development of detailed evaluation protocol.
• Months 9-12: Use of focus groups to assess materials, and modification as required. Consultation with relationship educators for further feedback on materials, modifications as required. Negotiation with educators to engage them in the pilot testing and evaluation phase.

Year 2: Training of relationship educators, implementation and evaluation of materials.

• Months 1-2: Training of relationship educators, dissemination of training materials.
• Months 3-8: Running of programs by trained educators using resource materials in flexible delivery mode.
• Months 9-12: Collation and analysis of evaluation data, preparation of final report.

[ top ]

Project 3: Enhancing access to relationship education by high risk and low referral couples

The accessibility of relationship education can be enhanced in a number of ways. I recommend that three approaches to enhance access be given priority. First, couples at high risk for relationship problems probably do not access relationship education at rates that seem desirable. Assessment of the risk profiles of couples who do access programs would quantify the representation of high-risk couples in current relationship education users. Developing outreach strategies to attract high-risk couples to education programs would be the logical next step. Second, rates of referrals by civil celebrants to relationship and marriage educators are low. Development of strategies to enhance rates of referral could significantly enhance access to relationship education by couples. Third, Indigenous Australians and people from non-English speaking backgrounds are under-represented in users of current relationship education services. Relationship education services need to be developed that are effective and are attractive to those groups of Australians.

Assessment and enhancement of access of relationship education by high risk couples

Given that couples at high risk of relationship problems are most likely to benefit from relationship education, it is important that such couples do have ready access to relationship education. Currently little is known about the extent to which highrisk couples do present for relationship education, and the focus of the proposed action research project is to evaluate rates of presentation. The second proposed step is to develop strategies to enhance engagement of high-risk couples in relationship education collaboratively with relationship education providers.

It is proposed that one aspect of this project would involve the development of a self-report assessment for couples of relationship risk profile. This self-report assessment should target risk indicators and risk factors known to put couples at high risk for relationship problems, and which the couple can reliably assess. Example of items that might be included are: exposure to parental divorce, exposure to parental aggression, young age at the time of marrying or cohabiting, low religiosity, disapproval of the spouse by extended family and friends, the presence of hazardous drinking in either partner, or the presence of relationship aggression in the current relationship. Without wishing to be restrictive in what might be developed, Table 7 is a listing of some possible items for a self-report measure of relationship risk profile.

In the conduct of this proposal it is suggested that a series of relationship education providers plus a researcher in the marriage and relationship education area be selected to conduct research in developing the relationship risk profile self-assessment. These same agencies would administer the measure to couples attending relationship education across a wide range of agencies. This would establish an initial base line rate of the risk profile of couples presenting to relationship education agencies. The rates of presentation to agencies of people with particular risk indicators could be compared with the known level of risks across the whole population. This would enable the researchers and service providers to identify whether high-risk couples currently were well represented in the couples presenting to the various agencies.

It is assumed that the rates of presentation by high-risk couples are likely to be low, as that is what the available research suggests. The relationship agencies would then work with the researchers to develop strategies to enhance presentation of high-risk couples to relationship education agencies. For example, media articles might be used to help couples self-assess their current relationship risks, and to promote the presentation for relationship education by those with higher risk profiles. This strategy has been used in research by Halford and colleagues (Halford et al. 1999) and did result in a high proportion of high-risk couples presenting for relationship education.

[ top ]

Table 7: Possible items in a self-assessment of relationship risk profile

Relationship experiences and influences

Name:______________________________ Date:_________________

The aim in this form is to help review your past close relationships and other factors that may effect your current relationship. Please place a tick beside the answer that best describes what you have experienced.

1. Were your parents married?

   • If yes, did they separate or divorce before you turned 18?

2. Did you ever witness your parents do any of the following?

   • Calmly discuss an issue they disagreed about?
   • Shout loudly at one another?
   • Call each other names or insult each other?
   • Hit, push or slap the other?

3. Have you previously lived with or married another partner?

   • If yes, have you been married before?
   • If you have been married before, how long were you married?

4. Are either you or your partner 21 years of age or less?

5. In the last six months have you attended a religious service?

6. Do you have any children from a past relationship?

   • If yes, do your children live with you one or more days per week?
   • If yes, how many days per week do your children usually live in your home?

7. Have you ever received help from a doctor or psychologist for any of the following problems?

   • Depression
   • Stress or anxiety

8. Do you ever drink alcohol?

   • If yes, on about how many days per week do you drink?
   • About how many standard drinks would you drink on those days?
   • What is the maximum number of drinks you ever drink on any given day?
   • How often do you drink this amount?

9. In your current relationship have any of the following ever happened?

   • Calmly discuss an issue you disagreed about?
   • Shouted loudly at one another?
   • Called each other names or insulted each other?
   • Hit, pushed or slapped your partner?
   • Been hit, pushed or slapped by your partner?

[ top ]

The likely benefits of this project are several. First, it will provide information on rates of presentation of high-risk couples. Second, the collaborative project between relationship educators and researchers is likely to foster greater attention to the individual learning needs of couples, and this might result in the adaptation of programs to meet particular needs. For example, if significant numbers of couples were presenting in which hazardous drinking was evident in one or both partners, then programs might be developed specifically to meet the needs of those couples. Third, the project would enhance the chance of couples most likely to benefit from relationship education programs accessing programs.

Timeline and evaluation

The initial development of a pool of items for a self-report measure of relationship risk could be done relatively quickly. The research reviewed in this report could serve as the basis for identification of items. Some pilot testing with couples would be advisable at that point to evaluate that items were easy to understand. Ideally, the scale should be easily read and understood by someone with Grade 6 reading level. The development of a psychometrically sound measure then needs to follow some well recognized steps including collection of normative data, establishment of the construct validity, reliability, and convergent and divergent validity of the scale.

The engagement of relationship education providers is needed early in the project. This would ensure the content of the scale is acceptable to educators who would be asked to give the scale to partners. A baseline assessment of risk profiles of couples presenting for relationship education would be undertaken. This descriptive data would be collated and presented to agencies. That data may well indicate that there are unmet learning needs of particular couples presenting to agencies. For example, if a substantial proportion of presenting couples were reporting drinking alcohol at hazardous levels, then brief interventions designed to promote safe drinking might be incorporated into programs for couples with hazardous drinking. (Bouma, Halford and Young, 1999 reported on significant levels of hazardous drinking in newly married couples, and how this can be reduced by brief relationship- and alcohol-focused education).

The baseline data would also indicate if there were categories of high-risk couples who were not accessing services. For example, it might be found that the proportion of couples attending relationship education who report parental divorce in the family of origin is lower than might be expected in a representative sample of couples. Outreach strategies could then be devised to attract couples to education programs. Continuing monitoring of the rates of presentation of highrisk couples could be used to evaluate whether the outreach strategies were effective. A possible timeline for this project would be as follows.

• Months 1 and 2: Appointment of staff, engagement of relationship education providers into project, development of preliminary pool of items for risk assessment measure.
• Months 3-5: Preliminary collection of baseline data, psychometric development of scale.
• Month 6: Analysis of baseline data, and development of report on risk profiles of presenting couples.
• Months 7-10: Development and implementation of outreach strategies for high-risk couples.
• Months 8-11: Continuing assessment of risk profiles of presenting couples.
• Month 12: Analysis of risk profiles of presenting couples after outreach strategy.
• Months 13-15: Preparation of final report and recommendations for future engagement of high risk couples in relationship education.

The primary evaluation of the success of the trial would be to ascertain if access of relationship education by high-risk couples were increased in the agencies involved with the project. It would be good to randomly assign agencies to begin the outreach to high- risk couples at different times. In this way a controlled trial design could be used to establish if the outreach strategies caused an increase in rates of accessing education by high-risk couples.

Enhancing rates of referral to relationship education by civil celebrants

One concern expressed by many civil celebrants was the lack of quality information and materials about relationship education that they could provide to couples (Telephone conference 6, 7). Whilst it is clear that some relationship education service providers have gone to significant trouble to develop materials to provide to civil celebrants, in other areas of Australia civil celebrants report relatively little information and materials are available. It is recommended that an action research project be developed to look at ways in which civil celebrants might be provided with better materials, and assisted in the process of referring couples to marriage and relationship education providers.

A useful strategy would be to select two areas in which there are significant numbers of civil celebrants, and where those two areas are geographically widely separated. In one area a project would be developed collaboratively between relationship education providers and civil celebrants to develop materials to provide to couples, and to civil celebrants, informing them about the range of relationship services available to the couples.

A series of strategies would be developed by the service providers to enhance rates of referral. For example, individual telephone calls to selected celebrants could be used to discuss the availability of services, and discuss barriers to referral. When referrals occurred, the agencies would be encouraged to write acknowledgement letters back to the referring celebrants, advising them of the attendance at the programs by couples, and providing brief informative feedback. (Issues of confidentiality of information for couples need to be respected here, but it is a common professional courtesy in many professional areas to give feedback to referring agents about the outcome of their referrals.) Encouraging couples to present for relationship education at any time in the first few years of their marriage might enhance presentation. (Many celebrants report couples are preoccupied with wedding plans when they present to celebrants to arrange marriage (Telephone conference 6, 7). Providing access to self-directed learning materials, or even brief introductions to such materials as samplers might encourage couples to access relationship education.

Baseline rates of referrals to marriage and relationship education by civil celebrants would be monitored prior to the development of the program designed to enhance referral, and would continue to be monitored across the course of the program. The specific hypothesis to be tested is that the intervention program would increase rates of referral.

The likely benefits of the program include interaction between civil celebrants and marriage and relationship educators to enhance the responsiveness of education programs to the needs of couples. Second, this process of collaboration is likely to enhance rates of referral to marriage and relationship education, and should improve the quality of information available to couples about the services that are open to them.

[ top ]

Timeline and evaluation of project

• Months 1 and 2: Appointment of staff, consultations with relationship education agencies in target areas, development of measures of rates of referral to relationship education by civil celebrants.
• Months 3-5: Monitoring of rates of referral by civil celebrants, consultation with relationship educators on strategies to enhance referrals.
• Months 6-8: Consultations with civil celebrants about means of enhancing referrals, production of materials to promote referrals.
• Months 9-12: Implementation of strategies to enhance referrals, monitoring of rates of referral.
• Months 13-15: Analysis of data and preparation of report.

Enhancing access to relationship education by indigenous and culturally diverse non-English speaking background Australians

Cultural diversity is one of Australia's great strengths as a nation. In an area like relationship education, it is crucial to attend to the cultural dimensions of what are desirable forms of couple relationships and how to support strong couple relationships. Indigenous Australians and ethnic minority groups from non-English speaking backgrounds do not access programs at the same rate as other Australians, and attempts should be made to enhance access to relationship education for these groups of people.

Both the process and content of relationship education need to be culturally appropriate. For example, in many cultures marriage and relationships are seen as private, and attending group programs is quite an alien concept. In some cultures, the extended family would expect to be involved in the education process for young couples. In terms of content, the communication that is culturally appropriate between partners varies greatly by culture. For example, eye contact that is seen as active attending in one culture can be felt as rude and aggressive in another culture.

Many Australians do not view attending relationship education as socially normative, but the notion of attending relationship education programs is particularly alien within many indigenous and culturally diverse ethnic groups. Attempts to recruit Indigenous or ethnic minority groups into existing programs are likely to have very limited success. Instead, relationship education program content and process need to be developed within particular cultural traditions, and delivered by people seen as appropriate within the culture.

There are a number of programs offered around Australia that attempt to provide relationship education to Indigenous Australians and ethnic communities from non-English speaking backgrounds (Telephone conference 3, 5). Some of these programs report they have developed content and process of delivery of relationship education programs specific to the needs of Indigenous communities, and ethnic minority groups. However, none of the programs has been evaluated for their effectiveness. Given that few, if any, of the programs offer culturally sensitive skills training approaches to relationship education, it has to be questioned if programs that are developed are truly effective.

A frequent concern expressed by workers who had developed marriage and relationship education programs for Indigenous communities, and for ethnic minority groups, was that it took considerable time and expenditure to develop such programs (Telephone conference 3, 5). The need for community development work to engage the community in the active development of the program, building up sources of referral to programs, and developing the skills of Indigenous Australians and ethnic minority workers to deliver programs, all were reported to be very time consuming. Many of the current pilot programs were seen as being funded on too short a time scale to allow all this work to occur.

Another difficulty with many existing programs is that they have not lead to the development of resource materials that can be more widely used. Every community is different, and there will need to be tailoring of programs to meet local needs. However, there seems to be a process whereby every time a program is offered to a new community the development process begins all over again, with limited access of cumulative wisdom from prior attempts.

It is recommended that the development of resource materials which are culturally sensitive, but which include a skills training focus, be a major emphasis in program development for Indigenous Australians and ethnic minority groups. The content of such programs should be developed in collaboration with members of the target Indigenous or ethnic communities. The focus should be on resource materials that could be used for self-directed learning or individual couple or group programs so these materials could be adapted for use as seen as appropriate. For example, videotaped materials that discuss culturally appropriate communication could be viewed privately by a couple or individual partner. The same resources could be adapted for use in group programs, or for private use by extended families.

Engagement with Indigenous Australian communities and ethnically diverse community groups who have interest in developing resource materials to support couples relationship education would be the first step. Collaboration also is needed with people who have expertise in adult learning, delivery of skills based relationship education, audiovisual production, and evaluation of relationship education programs. Such collaborative initiatives can be completed successfully by the right team. Recently, a collaborative project successfully developed written and audiovisual resource materials on the challenges of parenting adolescents. This programs was based on a program offered to all Australians, but the content and process of the program was re-developed by and for Indigenous Australians (Clarke, Harnett and Shochet, 1999). The program was delivered by members of the Indigenous communities in which it was made available, with the assistance of psychologists and researchers who developed the original prototype program.

[ top ]

Timeline and evaluation

Year 1: Consultation with community groups, development of material outlines and production of materials.

• Months 1-6: Appointment of staff, consultation between team members, Indigenous and ethnic groups and relationship educators on the brief, development of detailed concept for resource materials including videotaped materials outline and written material content. Educational design of self-directed learning program.
• Months 7-12: Audiovisual production of materials, and writing of draft printed materials. Development of detailed evaluation protocol.
• Months 9-14: Use of focus groups to assess materials, and modification as required. Consultation with relationship educators for further feedback on materials, modifications as required. Negotiation with educators from Indigenous or ethnic groups to engage them in the pilot testing and evaluation phase.

Year 2: Training of relationship educators, implementation and evaluation of materials.

• Months 1-2: Training of relationship educators, dissemination of training materials.
• Months 3-8: Running of programs by trained educators using resource materials in flexible delivery or other appropriate mode.
• Months 9-12: Collation and analysis of evaluation data, preparation of final report.

Project 4: Randomized controlled trials of the medium and long-term effects of best practice approaches to relationship education.

As noted previously, skills training approaches are the best researched approaches to marriage and relationship education and have the strongest evidence of their long-term effectiveness. However, the existing studies do have some significant methodological problems. One key limitation of existing evidence is that the effectiveness of skills training programs in routine practice of relationship education has not been evaluated. (Though an ongoing study by Stanley, Markman and colleagues is evaluating the effects of PREP in a study in religious organizations in the United States.) A large scale randomized controlled trial of this approach conducted in Australia is highly desirable. It is recommended that a group of relationship education agencies and experienced researchers familiar with the skills training approach be commissioned to conduct the trial.

The inventory programs of PREPARE and FOCCUSS are widely used in Australia, and the programs are based on known predictors of relationship satisfaction and stability. Whilst the provision of ideas and feedback via inventories may be of assistance to couples, it also is possible that these programs do not accrue substantial long-term benefits to couples. Given the plausibility of the interventions, and their widespread use, it is highly desirable that a randomized controlled trial of either PREPARE, FOCCUSS or both should be conducted.

Each of the two proposed randomized controlled trials should involve a large number of agencies that agree to participate. In both trials careful training of educators in the best practice approaches should occur before the trial begins, and monitoring of the quality of education service provision should be included in the research protocol. Assessment of the effects of the programs should be evaluated with a range of self-report and observational measures. Each trial would need to include sufficient numbers of couples to allow adequate statistical power to detect moderate effect sizes of the programs. (Statistically a moderate effect size is usually defined as an effect of 0.5 standard deviations on a key measure such as a standardized index of relationship satisfaction. Having sufficient numbers of couples in the trial to allow adequate power to detect such an effect is important.) Evaluation should continue for at least a four-year follow up of couples after the completion of the relationship education program.

The measures to evaluate programs should include assessment of relationship satisfaction, communication skills, individual partner well being, relationship aggression, and relationship stability. A list of possible measures to evaluate the programs is included in Table 8. The inclusion of direct videotaping of couple communication is costly and adds to logistic difficulties in conducting the study. However, all the available research suggests that the direct observation of couples is the most sensitive index we have of the short-term effects of relationship education that impact upon long-term relationship outcomes (Dyer & Halford, 1998; Silliman et al. in press). Hence, it is strongly recommended the trials include these observational measures.

[ top ]

Controlled trial of skills training relationship education

A randomized controlled trial provides the opportunity to test if skills based relationship education increases the chance of long-term maintenance of couples' relationship satisfaction and stability, and partner well being. Agencies that agreed to participate would be randomly assigned to receive either immediate or delayed training of their educators in skills based relationship education. Those agencies that received immediate training would provide the skills training approach to presenting couples. Those agencies assigned to delayed training would continue their current information and awareness type programs. This design provides for all agencies to have their educators trained in the skills training approach, and also provides a true randomized controlled trial design.

The skills training program should be PREP, or an adaptation of PREP, since that is the most strongly empirically supported approach to relationship education. The PREP should be provided by relationship educators who have received extensive training in the delivery of the approach. This would necessitate access to resource materials to ensure high quality delivery of the program. The materials developed in proposed Project 1 could be used in the controlled trial. The sessions that are offered in the PREP condition should be monitored for quality control over delivery. In order to retain couples in the long-term outcome study, it is recommended that couples receive newsletters on a regular basis informing them about relationship issues and the progress of the project.

Table 8: Suggested measures to evaluate the effects of relationship education

Domain	Measure	Explanation
Relationship satisfaction	Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1976) Positive and Negative Marital Qualities Scale (Fincham & Linfield, 1997)	A widely used 32-item self-report measure of general relationship satisfaction with good reliability and validity (Carey, Spector, Lantinga,& Krauss, 1993) A brief 6-item rating scale assessing satisfaction with positive and negative aspects of the relationship. This measure is included as it may be a more sensitive measure of changes in marital quality for currently satisfied couples, since it avoids the focus on conflict characteristic of other marital quality measures which have come out of the couple therapy research literature.
Relationship stability	Relationship Status Inventory (RSI; adapted from Weiss & Cerreto, 1980),	A 12-item True/False questionnaire assessing steps taken towards separation or divorce; this is a more sensitive index of stability than simply asking if the couples are still together and can detect early signs of steps toward separation.
Relationship aggression	Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS II) (Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy,& Sugarman, 1996).	A 30-item self-report measure of the occurrence of relationship aggression and other coercive relationship behaviours over the previous 12 months. The revised scale adds items on sexual coercion, restriction of freedom, and additional acts of aggression to the items in the original CTS.
Individual partner well being	Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale (DASS; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995)	A 21-item self-report measure of depression, anxiety and stress.
Couple communication	Videotaped couple problem solving discussion ( Weiss & Heyman, 1997) Videotaped couples support discussion (Bradbury & Pasch, 1994)	Couple discusses a difficult issue in their relationship for 10 minutes. Interaction is coded using the Brief Interactional Coding System (BICS) or similar standardized system. The BICS is reliable and sensitive to change as the result of interventions (Behrens, Sanders, & Halford, 1990; Halford et al. 1993; Halford, Sanders, & Behrens, 1999; Sanders et al. 1999). Couple discuss issue(s) unrelated to the relationship but which are of concern to individual partners. This task assesses ability to effectively support each other. The interaction is coded using the Social Support Coding system (Bradbury & Pasch, 1999), or similar standardized system. Social support has been shown to predict relationship satisfaction beyond the variance accounted for by conflict management communication.

[ top ]

Controlled trial of inventory programs

The PREPARE and FOCCUSS programs should be compared to information and awareness type programs. A randomized controlled trial is needed to evaluate whether programs do enhance maintenance of relationship satisfaction and stability. To date there is no research evaluating whether completion of inventories and feedback do impact upon relationship outcomes. If couples were to select which approach they receive then self-selection factors might account for any observed effects. If different educators offer the information and awareness programs versus the inventories, then educator skills might be confounded with the type of relationship education being offered.

It is proposed that educators be recruited who would be willing to recruit couples into the study. Couples would be randomly assigned to either the inventory or information and awareness programs. A written protocol for the delivery of the inventory programs would need to be developed. This in itself would be useful to do, as there is great variation in how the PREPARE and FOCCUS inventories are used by educators. Developing some consensus about best practice in the use of inventories would be useful to the field. It is also likely that there would be some differences in best practice of how FOCCUS and PREPARE are used. Having two separate protocols for the two inventories would accommodate that.

Timeline and evaluation

In order to do a world class, best practice evaluation it is necessary to recruit large numbers of couples into the controlled trials to provide the power to detect effects. A minimum of 60 couples completing programs in each condition in each trial is needed. (That is 120 couples for each of the two randomized controlled trials, or 240 couples in total). It is assumed that 15 to 20% of the couples would drop out from the study by the time of the 4-year follow-up assessment, (this a reasonable estimate based on the few existing long-term trials), approximately 50 couples per condition would be available at follow-up assessments. That number provides the statistical power referred to earlier to detect moderate effect sizes. The approximate time frame for this considerable undertaking would be as follows:

Year 1: Appointment and training of staff, engagement of relationship education providers in controlled trials process, negotiation of logistics of agency involvement, preparation and dissemination of materials and assessment procedures, training of relationship educators in the specific protocols.

Year 2-3: Recruitment of participants, delivery of relationship education programs, assessment of couples at pre- and post-program times, establishment of central data base for results, analysis of pre- and post-program results. Production of short-term effects report and publications.

Year 4-7: Conduct of 1, 2, 3 and 4-year follow ups of couples, production of report on 2-year follow-up results.

Year 8: Data analysis and write up of final results.

The benefits of the trials

The benefits of controlled trials of skills training programs, and inventory based programs would be considerable. If these studies were well done they would provide benchmarks of excellence in service delivery. The conduct of these controlled trials would require extensive documentation about the programs being delivered, and this documentation would be a significant advantage in disseminating those programs found to be effective.

[ top ]

Summary and conclusions

The above set of projects has the possibility of important synergies. The focus on development of resource materials across multiple projects seeks to promote the use of empirically supported approaches. The development of a broad range of resource materials attempts to diversify the content of programs so that the needs of a wide range of couples can be addressed. The attention to utilizing variations of these materials in different delivery formats, including flexible delivery of selfdirected learning, maximizes accessibility and cost-effectiveness of relationship education. The suggested randomized clinical trials would add substantially to existing knowledge on the effectiveness of relationship education.

In addition, the very process of conducting research will promote collaboration between educators and researchers in the development and evaluation of programs. The training of educators involved in the research is intended to enhance continuing education opportunities for educators, and enhance the quality of routine program delivery. Commitment to the program of research and development suggested in this project would significantly enhance the accessibility and effectiveness of relationship education in Australia.

Previous: 4. Challenges and opportunities in making marriage and relationship education more effective Next: 6. Conclusion