ESUT JSS co iaS l f So c l iea nJnrs ocue co iaS l f So c l iea nJnrs ocue co iaS l f So c l iea nJnrs ocue SE SS JUT Volume 5, Issue 2, 2020 Enugu State University of Science & Technology Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U L OG GU YNE Journal of Social Sciences Published by the Faculty of the Social Sciences published by Faculty of Social Sciences Enugu State University of Science & Technology www.esutjss.com Editor-In-Chief Prof. Oby Omeje Managing Editor Barnabas E. Nwankwo, Ph.D Associate Editor Nicholas Attamah, Ph.D F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U L OG GU YNE F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U L OG GU YNE F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U L OG GU YNE Journal of Social SciencesJournal of Social SciencesJournal of Social Sciences Published by the Faculty of Social Sciences F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U L OG GU YNE F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U L OG GU YNE Journal of Social SciencesJournal of Social Sciences THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEXUAL SATISFACTION AND MARITAL SATISFACTION AMONG UNIVERSITY MARRIED STAFF Raphael Ugwu Anike Valentina Chinenye Marire-Nwankwo Department of Psychology, Enugu State University of Science and Technology Enugu anikeugwu@yahoo.com Abstract This study investigated the relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction among University married staff. A total of 175 participants comprising 70 males and 105 females’ staff were drawn from Caritas University in Enugu East of Enugu State. The participants are between the ages of 24-63 years. They were selected making use of convenience sampling technique in which only the participants who were available participated. The participants were administered two questionnaires of 25-items each with a Likert type response format designed to measure sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction. The statistical test used for the analysis was Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient while survey design was adopted based on the large number of participants. However, the findings revealed that a positive significance relationship was observed between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction. Marital satisfaction had a mean of 59.46 and a standard deviation of 18.33 and sexual satisfaction had a mean of 81.78 and a standard deviation of 17.83 with r=.59, P<.01 indicating a positive significant relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction. The findings were discussed in relation to literature reviewed and recommendations were made. Keywords: intimacy, love making, happiness, marriage, satisfaction. Introduction Marriage is described as a normative, personal life event in adulthood and involves the cohabitation of two people with different characteristics and needs (Sevinc & Garip 2010). In general, people get married for specific purposes such as finding meaning in life and loving for a better quality of married life. It is worth noting that continuation of marriage may depend on factors like martial relationship; because matrimony is more successful when couples establish a sense of satisfaction with each other (Hassan 2010; Lucas, Parkhill, Wendorf, Imamoglu, Weisfeld & Weifeld, 2008). Marital satisfaction is simply the degree of contentment regarding certain aspects of marital relationship as well as the whole relationship. According to some previous researchers, marital satisfaction refers to a subjective and global evaluation of the relationship (Daiuto, Baucom, Epstein & Dutton, 1998; Marcaurelle, Belanger & Marchand, 2003). It is a situation in which, the couples are satisfied and feel happy and living together (Shakerian, 2010). The concept of marital satisfaction is a multifaceted and multidimensional concept including psychological, socioeconomic and spiritual component. Measures of marital satisfaction in mailto:anikeugwu@yahoo.com MARITAL SATISFACTION 189 fact, vary from one researcher to another and the operational definition of marital satisfaction. In particular, the criteria for a satisfying marital satisfaction may be highly varied and may depend on a unique set of culturally enforced norms, obligations and values (Lucas et al., 2008; Wang 1994). Indeed, marital satisfaction is influenced by many factors, for example, safe and pleasurable sexual relationship is mentioned to be one of the most important factors noticed in many researchers (Rahmani, Alahgoti, & Merghati 2009). Studies have reported a significant positive association between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction (Blumatein & Sahwartz 1983; Cupach & Comstock, 1990; Edward & Booth, 1994; Henderson-King & Veroff, 1994; Lawrence & Byers, 1995; Oggins, Leber & Veroff, 1993; Young, Luquis, Denny & Young, 1998). A few longitudinal studies also reported that sexual satisfaction was negatively predictive of marital instability (Edwards et al., 1994; Oggins et al., 1993; Veroff, Douvan & Hatchett 1995; White & Keith, 1990). Karney and Bradbury’s (1995) review of longitudinal studies of marriage also showed that marital satisfaction was merely strongly related to marital stability than most other predictor variables. However, the causal sequences sexual satisfaction, marital satisfaction and marital stability have not been carefully examined. Sexual satisfaction plays an important role between couples in marital satisfaction. Sexual relationship influenced marital satisfaction which is accomplished through studying on couples (Tuinmann, Fleer, Sliejfer, Hoekstra, & Hoekstra 2005). Human usually consider sex as a communication tool and as a means to express feelings intimacy, love anger, and also as a relaxing and enjoyable activity. Sexual experience is personal and private and all people have unique thoughts and feelings of sexual relations. Sexual satisfaction was defined as “an emotional response from the subjective assessment of the positive satisfaction is when couples enjoy together, these happened by mutual love, care for each other, acceptance, understanding and meeting their needs such as sexual need (Kalantari, Esfahani, & Bayat 2012). Communication and response of couples create intimate relationship with the emphasis of sexual satisfaction. Marital satisfaction depends on many factors. A good sexual life is an important part of marriage that creates the strong relationship between sexual relationship and marital satisfaction (Minakshi, 2012). Sexual satisfaction within marriage would be positively related to overall marital satisfaction. Not surprisingly, researchers would have looked beyond frequency and asked respondents about their feelings about sex have found evidence of a significant, positive relationship between sexual satisfaction and measures of overall marital satisfaction (Cupach et al., 1990; Hudson, Harrison & Crosscup, 1981; Snyder, 1979) have found correlations ranging from .59- .68 between the two, in a marriage of cohabiting couples. (Perlman & Abramson, 1982) found that overall relationship satisfaction correlated with sexual satisfaction and with the absence of sexual anxiety. We should expert, therefore to find a positive relationship and a negative relationship of both kinds of evaluation to experiencing problems or difficulties in marital sex. In terms of control in marriage, sex might come to play as one of the things that spouses feel they can rely on to improve negative situations or to make time spent together especially pleasant, especially for men. Rubin (1976) describes how men may attempt to end argument by making love, whereas women are more likely to seek emotional intimacy before engaging in sex. According to the importance of sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction in family functioning, it is important to understand factors in predicting and sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction. This study intends to find an answer to the problem stated as; will there be a significant relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction among married staff of Caritas University Amorji-Nike, Enugu. When two people marry, in some cases, they hope their marriage will last all their lives. Others believe that the relationship will last as long as they love the other person. Also, there are people who condition their marital status to the satisfaction of their sexual needs and their requirements in terms of affection and protection (Bradbury, Fincham & Beach, 2000; Sabatelli & Ripoll, 2004). On the other hand, when people live together as couples, they may reassess their goals and wishes of remaining together and decide to end the relationship (McNulty & Karney, 2004). In other cases the idea of continuing the relationship may persist for many years, as there may be personal powerful factors that motivate doing so and because there is a great deal of satisfaction derived from the relationship. A marital trajectory may be defined as the description of the course of a marital relationship that may or may not end in divorce and separation. The course of the relationship is determined by the continuous evolution of the satisfaction derived by the couples’ overtime. Thus, the stability of the marital satisfaction is demonstrated by the fact that it ends or remains intact (Karney et al., 1995; Karney et al., 1999). One hand, an evolutionary approach proposes that in order to conserve the union, the individuals in the couple should be faithful, have children together, be well to do, friendly, generous, understanding and they should sexually neglect or reject their partners (Buss, 2007). That is, in order to maintain a relationship its members are expected to display desirable attitudes in their thoughts, feelings, and behaviours, reflecting in that manner, the best possible version of themselves. On the other contemporary behavioral tendencies indicate that those actions necessarily guarantee a lasting marriage. Equity theory consists of four interlocking propositions (Hatfield, Utne & Traupmann, 1979c). Theorists argue that individuals try to maximize their outcomes (proposition 1). Groups can maximize collective outcomes by devising an equitable system for sharing resources. Thus, groups try to induce members to behave equitably. They can do this in only one way by making it more profitable to be generous than to be greedy. They reward those who behave and punish those who do not (proposition 2). When socialized persons find themselves enmeshed in inequitable relationships, they experience distress (proposition 3) and are moved to reduce such distress, by restoring either actual equity or psychological equity to the relationships (proposition 4). There is great evidence that equity theory considerations are critically important in determining how people act in relatively superficial encounters. Equity considerations have been found to be important in such diverse areas as employer/employee relationships, exploiter/victim relationships, and philanthropist/ recipient relationships (Walster, Walster, & Berscheid, 1978). Recently, equity theory has been applied to intimate relationships to dating couples encounters (Hatfield, Walster, & Traupmann 1979b), to married MARITAL SATISFACTION 191 couples interactions (Traupmann, Peterson, Utne & Hatfield, 1981; Traupmann & Hatfield 1983), and even to extramarital liaisons (Hatfield, Traupman, & Walster 1979a). Sexual satisfaction generates marital satisfaction; sociologists argue that sex is critically important to couples. Intensely passionate or companionate feelings contribute to marital happiness, routine, dismal, frustrating sex can threaten the best of relationships (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948, 1953; Bell, 1966; Hunt, 1974; DeLamater & McCorquodale, 1979). Marital satisfaction on the hand generates sexual satisfaction; sex is a delicate interaction. If couples like or love one another, if they feel equitably treated, if they feel comfortable with one another, sex may go well. If couples dislike or hate one another, feel trapped in inequitable relationships, feel comfortable in one another’s presence, their deep-seated resentment or guilt may corrode their sexual encounters (Kinsey et al, 1948, 1953; Berne, 1964; Masters & Johnson, 1966, 1970, 1976; Hunt, 1974; Safilios-Rothschild, 1977). Similarly, Timm (1999) sampled married individuals and found a relationship between marital satisfaction and sexual satisfaction. Sexual communication was also found to be related to both sexual and marital satisfaction. Renaud and Byers (1997) investigated the sexual relationship and factors related to sexual satisfaction of married Chinese men and women in another study. Results indicated that, the greater the relationship satisfaction, the greater the level of sexual satisfaction. Greater sexual satisfaction was also associated with a greater frequency of affectionate and sexual behavior and fewer sexual concerns and problems. It also appears that sexual difficulties of women play a greater role in the relationship satisfaction of both men and women than do the sexual difficulties of men. Hypothesis This study tested the hypothesis below; There will be no significant relationship sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction among married University staff. Method Participants A total of 175 participants comprising of 70 males and 105 female staff which were drawn from the non-academic staff population of Caritas University. The participants are between the ages of 24-63 years. The participants were selected making use of convenient sampling technique, in which only those participants who were available and willing were used. Instruments Two types of psychological instruments were used to gather information for the study and they are; Index of Marital Satisfaction (IMS) (Hudson, 1982) and Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS) (Hudson 1982) Index of Marital Satisfaction (IMS) (Hudson 1982) The instrument was developed by Hudson (1982). The index of marital satisfaction (IMS) is a questionnaire with25 items. The 25 item inventory is designed to measure the degree, severity or magnitude of the problems one spouse or partner perceives to be having in the marital relationship with his or her partner. The focus is on current problems which have reduced marital satisfaction. The scale does not, therefore, measure marital adjustment, a condition in which couples may have adjusted to lingering problems in their relationship even though the problems have not been solve. It is a likert type response format. The items were worded 1- Rarely or none of the time, 2- A little of the time, 3- Some of the time, 4- Good part of the time and 5- Most of all of the time. It uses direct scoring and direct scoring of the items. Direct score items include, 2,4,6,7,10,12,14,15,18,22,24, and 25 and the reverse score items 1,3,5,8,9,11,13,16,17,20,21, and 23. The reliability coefficients reported by Hudson (1982) are, Cronbach Alpha internal consistency = .96, 2-hour-test-retest = .96. A concurrent validity coefficient of .48 was a obtained by Anene (1994) by correlating IMS with Marital Stress Inventory (MSI) (Omoluabi, 1994). Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS) (Hudson 1982) The Index of Sexual Satisfaction was developed by Hudson in 1982. It was designed to measure problems in sexual satisfaction. It is a 25 – item measure, severity or magnitude of a problem in the sexual component of a couple’s relationship. The ISS measures the respondent’s feelings about a number o behaviours, attitudes, events and preferences that are associated with the sexual relationship between partners. Score range from 1-7 with 1 representing none of the time, 2-Very rarely, 3-A little of the time, 4-Some of the time and 5-A good part of the time. The ISS is scored by first reverse-scoring the items listed at the bottom scale, totaling these and the other item scores giving more evidence of the presence of sexual dissatisfaction. The reverse scores are as follows, 4,9,10,12,16,17,19,21,22 and 23 and the direct scores are as follows 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,11,13,14,15,18,20,24 and 25. The ISS has a mean alpha of .92, indicating high internal consistency (Hudson, 1982). The ISS has excellent concurrent validity, correlating, significantly with the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Scale and the Index of Marital Satisfaction and has also shown to be excellent construct validity (Touliatos, Perimutter and Strauss, 1990). For this current sample, high internal consistency was found with a Cronbach’s Alpha of .93 and .94 respectively for husband and wife sexual satisfaction. Procedure A total of 200 (two hundred) copies of the questionnaire on sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction were conveniently distributed within the period of one week to the target population. Each participant was instructed on how to fill the instrument and how they should MARITAL SATISFACTION 193 give their response. In all, 175 copies of the instruments were collected back. The remaining 25 copies of the questionnaires where either discarded due to incorrect or incomplete filling of the questionnaires by the participants. So the researcher made use of the questionnaires filled by those who were married. Finally, at the end of the administration and collection of the questionnaire, 175 copies were eventually used for the analysis. Design/Statistics Based on the large number of my participants and the nature of the research and also how it was carried out Survey Design was adopted while Pearson Product - Moment Correlation Coefficient was applied as a statistics to analyze the data in order to test the hypothesis. Results Table 1; Summary Table of Mean, Standard Deviation and Inter-Correlation of Variables Sexual Satisfaction and Marital Satisfaction. S/N Source Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 1 Marital Satisfaction 59.46 18.33 1 2 Sexual Satisfaction 81.78 17.83 .59** 1 3 Gender 1.59 .49 -.08 .06 1 4 Age 2.29 1.68 .08 .08 -.10 1 5 Marital Status 1.06 .23 .14 .10 -.10 .02 1 **P<.01, N=175 The correlation table revealed that among the control variables, gender, age and marital status, there is no significant relationship. This indicates that all the control variables, gender, age and marital status did not relate with marital satisfaction. Also, the control variables did not relate among themselves. However, there is a significant positive relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction (r=.59, P<.01). The table also showed the mean and standard deviation using one hundred and seventy five participants. Discussion The findings of this study revealed that the hypothesis tested was not confirmed. In view of this, the hypothesis which stated “There will be no significant relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction” was not confirmed. This means that there is a positive relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction amongst married University staff. However, the positive relationship is not a surprise because a couple cannot have a satisfied marriage without being sexually satisfied. A couple can be marital satisfied but not sexually satisfied likewise vis-à-vis, which affects the marriage. Sexual satisfaction plays an important role between couples in marital satisfaction. Sexual relationship influenced marital satisfaction which is accomplished through studying on couples (Tuinmann, Fleer, Sliejfer, Hoekstra, & Hoekstra, 2005). Humans usually consider sex as a communication tool and as a means to express feelings intimacy, love anger, and also as a relaxing and enjoyable activity. Sexual experience is personal and private and all people have unique thoughts and feelings of sexual relations. Many studies investigating the relationship between sexual and marital satisfaction indicated that these two variables significantly predict each other (Brezsnyak, 2001; Fielder, 2001). Klemer (1970) states that “A good sexual adjustment usually, but not always, requires a fairly good total marriage relationship” (p.215). It is also stated that, in the process of treating sexual problems, important marital problems may affect negatively the outcomes (Kayır, Yüksel, & Tükel, 1987) and treating couple’s marital problems sometimes should be the first choice (Uçman, 1982). It is also reported that, in sex therapy process, some spouses seem reluctant to solve sexual problems that couple encountered. They want to continue the positive marital outcomes (such as manipulating the partner who seems responsible for the sexual problems) which were given by the sexual problems (Uçman, 1982). Additionally, sexual dysfunctions are more commonly seen in unconsummated marriages (Uçman, 1982) and treating sexual problems might result in an increase in marital satisfaction (Kabakçı & Batur, 2002). These findings might be the indicators of the relationship between sexual and marital issues. Implications of the Study The outcome of this study has obvious implications. First and foremost, this study will serve as an empirical study for future researchers. The findings of this study have also made it obvious that a couple cannot say they are satisfied or happy in their in marriage without being sexually satisfied. The two variables are the main factors or keys to a happy and satisfied relationship. This study will help therapist in the management of relationships between couples. With the knowledge acquired in this study, therapists will henceforth understand the sexual and marital problems of their clients knowing that each factor plays a significant role in the happiness and satisfaction in a couple’s relationship. Suggestions for Further Research Based on the outcome of this study, I hereby suggest that future researcher should increase the number of their participants. In addition, similar studies such as the factors that could influence marital satisfaction and sexual satisfaction should be carried out by future researchers. Limitations of the Study MARITAL SATISFACTION 195 One major problem encountered during the data collection was the refusal of some of the staffs in collecting the questionnaires. Some refused to respond to the items of the questionnaires saying that it was too deep (invading their private lives). Some refused filling the questionnaire until I tell them what I was measuring. But after generating much rapport and explaining to them to high level of confidentiality attached to the research, some complied towards the objective completion of the questionnaire. In view of the above findings, the researcher hereby recommends that similar study or investigation be carried out in other schools and also in the working sector where more strenuous works are done e.g. banking sector, manufacturing sector, industries, big organizations etc. Further study should be carried out on other control variables like educational level, socio-economic status etc. Conclusion There is a significant positive relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction and also the satisfaction of a relationship both sexually and maritally does not depend on the age, gender, marital status or any demographic factor. References Acker, M., & Davis, M. H. (1992). Intimacy, passion and commitment in adult romantic relationships: A test of the triangular theory of love. Journal of Social and Persona1 Relationships. 9 ( 1 ), 2 1-50. Aldao, A. (2013). The future of emotion regulation research: Capturing context. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 155–172. Doi: 10.1177/1745691612459518. Amato, P. R. & Booth, A. The legacy of parents’ marital discord: Consequences for children’s marital quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 627-638. Anene, R. N. (1994). A comparative analysis of marital stress. Unpublished B.Sc Thesis, Department of Psychology, University of Lagos. Araújo, M. F. (2005). Diferença e igualdade nas relações de gênero: Revisitando o debate. Clinical Psychology, 17(2), 41-52. doi:10.1590/S0103-56652005000200004. Ball, F. L. J., Cowan, P., & Cowan, C. P. (1995). Who’s got the power? Gender differences in partners’ perceptions of influence during marital problem-solving discussion. Family Process, 34, 303–321. doi:10.1111/ j.1545-5. Barnett, L. R., & Neitzel, M. T. ( 1979). Relationship of instrumental and affectional behaviors and self-esteem to marital satisfaction in distressed and nondistressed couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 47, (946-957. 300.1995.00303. Baron, Robert. (2006). Social psychology. Translation by Yousof Karimi. Tehran: Ravan publications. Baucom, D. H., Notarius, C. I., Burnett, C. K., & Haefner, P. (1990). Gender differences and sex- role identity in marriage. In F. D. Fincham & T. N. Bradbury (Eds.), The psychology of marriage: Basic issues and applications (pp. 150–171). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Baumeister, Roy F., & Kathleen D. Vohs. “Sexual Economics: Sex as Female Resource for Social Exchange in Heterosexual Interactions.” Personality and Social Psychology Review.7 Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychology Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529. Berg-Cross, L. (2001). Couples therapy. Binghamton: The Haworth Press, Inc. Blumstein P., Schwartz P. (1983) American couples: Money, work, sex. New York: William Morrow. Bolsoni-Silva, A. T., & Marturano, E. M. (2010). Procedimento de avaliação em terapia de casais a partir de múltiplos instrumentos. Temas em Psicologia, 18(1), 31-34. Bradbury, T. N., Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2000). Research on the nature and determinants of marital satisfaction: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 964-980. Brezsnyak, M. (2001). Sexual desire and relationship functioning: The effects of marital satisfaction and power. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Sciences Behavioral and Brain, 12, 1-49. Buss, D. M. (1994). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6(1), 1-30. Buss, D. M. (2007). La evolución del deseo. Estrategias del emparejamiento humano. (The Evolution of Desire. Strategies for Human Pairing) Alianza Editorial. Madrid, España. Butler, E. A. (2011). Temporal interpersonal emotion systems: The “TIES” that form relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 367–377. Carbonneau, N. & Vallerand, R. J. (2013). On the role of harmonious and obsessive romantic passion in conflict behavior. Motivation and Emotion, 37(4), 743-757. Carlson, John, Denik Mayer, & Dan. (2002). It is time for wives and husbands to live better. Translation by MehrdadFirouzbakht, Tehran, Danzheh publications, pp. 99-104. Christopher, F.S., & Sprecher, S. (2000). Sexuality in marriage, dating, and other relationships: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 999- 1017. 93.doi:10.1177/1088868311411164. Coan, J. A. (2008). Toward a neuroscience of attachment. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 241–265). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Cohen, Laurie L. R. Lance Shotland. “Timing of First Sexual Intercourse in a Relationship: Expectations, Experiences, and Perceptions of Others.” The Journal of Sex Research. 33, pp291- 299. Colebrook Seymour, III, J. (1998). Sexual satisfaction in marriage during the childbearing years. Unpublished masters thesis, University of California. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1989). Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture, part II. Case study: A computational theory of social exchange. Ethology and Sociobiology 10, 51-97. MARITAL SATISFACTION 197 Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In: J. Barkow; L. Cosmides & J. Tooby. The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 19-136. Crowe, M. (1995). Couple therapy and sexual dysfunction. International Review of Psychiatry, 7, 195-205. Crowe, Michael, & Reedly, Jean (2000).. The applied couple therapy with systemic- behavioral procedure. Translation by Ashraf al sadatMousavi. MehrKaviyan publications. Cupach W.R., & Comstock J. (1990). Satisfaction with Sexual Communication in Marriage: Links to Sexual Satisfaction and Dyadic Adjustment: Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 179-86. Daiuto A. D., Baucom D. H., Epstein N., & Dutton S. S. (1998). The application of behavioral couples therapy to the assessment and treatment of agoraphobia: Implications of empirical research. Clinical Psychological Review; 18(6), 663-87. Darwin, C. (1871/2003). El origen del hombre. México: Editores Mexicanos Unidos. Dela Coleta, M. F. (1989). A medida da satisfação conjugal: Adaptação de uma escala. Psico, 18(2), 90-112. DeLamater, J., & MacCorquodale, P. (1979). Premarital Sexual Attitudes’ Relationships, Behaviours. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Diamond, L. M., & Aspinwall, L. G. (2003). Emotion regulation across the life span: An integrative perspective emphasizing self-regulation, positive affect, and dyadic processes. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 125–156. doi:10.1023/A:1024521920068. Dziegielewski, S.F, & Resnick, C. (1998). Treatment of sexual dysfunctions : What social workers need to know. Research on Social Work Practice, 8, 685-698. Edwards, J. N., & Booth, A. (1994). Sexuality, marriage and well-being: The middle years. In A. S. Rossi (Ed), Sexuality across the life course (pp. 233-259). Chicago: University of Chigaco press. Ellis, Albert, Harper, Robert. Ways of successful marriage. Translation by ElhamShafiee. RASA cultural services institution, (1995) page 45. Feldman, S. S., & Wentzel, K. R. (1990). Relations among family interaction patterns, classrom self- restraint, and academic achievement in preadolescent boys. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 813-819. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.813. Ferrer, E., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2003). Modeling affective processes in dyadic relations via dynamic factor analysis. Emotion, 3, 344–360. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.3.4.344. Fielder, K.V. (2001) Stress, marital quality, and menopausal symptomatology in midlife women. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University. Fisher, H. (2004). Por qué amamos: La naturaleza and química del amor romántico. (Why we love: The Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love). Santillana Ediciones Generales. Madrid, España. Fisher, T. D. & McNulty, J.K. (2008). Neuroticism and marital satisfaction. The mediating role played by the sexual relationship. Journal of Family Psychology, 225, 112, 122. Fortin, N., & Thériault, J. (1995). Intimité et satisfaction sexuelle. Revue Sexoloaiaue. 3 (l), 37-58. Garcia, M. L. T., & Tassara, E. T. O. (2003). Problemas no casamento: Uma análise qualitativa. Estudos de Psicologia (Natal), 8(1), 127-133. doi:10.1590/S1413-294X2003000100014. Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., & Lindzey, G. (1998). The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, 4th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Ginsberg, D., & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Conversations of college roommates: Similarities and differences in male and female friendship. In J. M. Gottman & J. G. Parker (Eds.), Conversations of friends: Speculations on affective development. Studies in emotion and social interaction (pp. 241–291). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Glasser, William, Glasser, & Carlin. (2007), Eight lessons for happier marital life. Translation by MehrdadFirouzbakht, Tehran, Virayesh publications, pp.111-115. Gottman, J.M. (1993). A theory of marital dissolution and stability. Journal of Family Psychology,7(1), 57-75. Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1988). The social psychophysiology of marriage. In P. F. Noller & M. A. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Perspectives on marital interaction (pp. 182–200). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health. Journal of Personlity and Social Psychology, 63, 221- 233. Hatfield, E., Utne, M.K., & Traupmann, J. (1979b). Equity and premarital sex. In M. Cook and G. Wilson (eds). Love and Attraction: An International Conference, pp. 309-322. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Hatfield, E, Utne, M.K, Traupmann, J. (1979c). Equity theory and initimate relationships. In R. Burgess and T.L Huston (eds). Social Exchange in Developing Relationships, pp.99-133. New York: Academic press. Hatfield, E, Utne, M.K, Walster, G.W. (1979a). Equity and extramarital sex. In M. Cook and G. Wilson (eds). Love and Attraction: An International Conference, pp. 309-322. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Hawton, K. (1985). Sex therapy: A practical guide. New York: Oxford University Press. Hayden, R. L. (1999). Women’s orgasm inconsistency in heterosexual marriage. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. Henderson-King, D.H, & Veroff, J. (1994). Sexual satisfaction and marital well-being in the first years of marriage. Journal of social and personal relationships, 11, 509-534. Hudson, W.W. (1982). Index of marital satisfaction. The Clinical Measurement Package: A Field Manual. Chicago: Dorsey Press. Hudson, W.W, Harrison D.F, Crosscup, P.C, (1981). A Short-Form Scale to Measure Sexual Discord in Dyadic Relationships. The journal of sex research 17, 157-74. Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual Behaviour in the 1970s. New York; Dell. Hunt, M. Sexual behavior in the seventies Chicago, play body press, (1974). MARITAL SATISFACTION 199 Hurlbert, D.F. & Apt, C. (1994). Female sexual desire, response, and behavior. Behavior Modification, 18(4), 239- Kabakçı, E. & Batur, S. (2002). Vaginismus tanısı ile izlenen bir grup hastanın bilişsel-davranışçı yönelimli tedavisi ve sonuçları. XII. Ulusal Psikoloji Kongresi. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları. Kalantari F., Esfahani M, Bayat M., 2012. The relationship between sexual issues and marriage satisfaction among married women, International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences. 3(s): 2691-2694. Kalantarkousheh S.M. Hassan S.A., Function of life meaning and marital communication among Iranian Spouses in Universiti Putra Malaysia, Procedia Soc behave Sci 2010; 5(10): 1646-9. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The Longitudinal Course of Marital Quality and Stability: A Review of Theory, Method and Research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3- 34. Karney, B. R., Bradbury, T. N., & Johnson, M. D. (1999). Deconstructing Stability: The Distinction between the Course of a Close Relationship and Its Endpoint. En Adams, J. M. & Jones, W. H. (Eds.). Handbook of Interpersonal Commitment and Relationship Stability. New York: Kluwer Academic. Kayır, A., Yüksel, Ş., & Tükel, R.M. (1987). Vaginismus nedenlerinin tartışılması. Psikoloji Dergisi, 6(21), 107-111. Kinsey, A.C, Pomeroy, W.B, Martin, C.E. (1948). Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male. Philadelpia: W.B. Saunders. Kinsey, A.C, Pomeroy, W.B, Martin, C.E, Gebhard, P.H. (1953). Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female. New York: Pocket Books. Klemer, R.H. (1970). Marriage and family relationships. New York: Harper & Roe, Publishers. Lavner, J. A., & Bradbury, T. N. (2012). Why do even satisfied newlyweds eventually go on to divorce? Journal of Family Psychology, 26(1), 1-10. doi: 10.1037/a0025966. Lavner, J. A., Bradbury, T. N., & Karney, B.R. (2012). Incremental Change or Initial Differences? Testing Two Models of Marital Deterioration. Journal of Family Psychology, 26(4), 606-616. Lawrence, K., Byers E.S, (1995). Sexual satisfaction in heterosexual relationships: the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 2, 267-285. Levenson, R. W., Carstensen, L. L., & Gottman, J. M. (1994). Influence of age and gender on affect, physiology, and their interrelations: A study of long-term marriages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 56–68. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.1.56. Lucas, T., Parkhill, M.R, Wendorf, C.A, Imamoglu, E.O, Weisfeld, C.C, Weisfeld, G.E, et al. (2008) Cultural and evolutionary components of marital satisfaction: A multidimensional assessment of measurement invariance. J Cross-Cult Psychol 29(1); 109-23. Marcaurelle , R, Belanger, C. & Marchand, A. (2003). Marital relationship and the treatment of panic disorder with agoraphobia: A critical review. Clin Psychol Rev23(2), 247-76. Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V.E. (1966). Human Sexual Response. Boston: Little Brown. Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V.E. (1970). Human Sexual Inadequacy. Boston: Little Brown. Masters, W. H., Johnson, V.E. (1976). The Pleasure Bond. New York: Bautam Books. Masters, W.H., Johnson, V.E., & Kolodny, R.C. (1995). Human sexuality. Boston: Longman. McNulty, J.K., & Karney, B.R. (2004). Positive expectations in the Early Years of Marriage: Should Couples Expect the Best or Brace for the Worst? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 86(5), 729-743. Meadow, R.M. (1982). Factors contributing to the sexual satisfaction of married women: A multiple regression analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University. 102. Menandro, P. R. M., Rölke, R. K., & Bertollo, M. (2005). Concepções sobre relações amorosas/ conjugais e sobre seus protagonistas: Um estudo com provérbios. Psicologia clínica, 17(2), 81- 100. doi:10.1590/S0103-56652005000200007. Merves-Okin, L., Amidon, E., & Bernt, F. (1991). - 118. Perceptions of intimacy in mamage: A study of mamed couples. The American Journal of Familv Therapv, 19 (2), 1 10 Milhausen, Robin R. and Edward S. Herold. “Does the Sexual Double Standard Still Exist?: Perceptions of University Women.” The Journal of Sex Research. Vol 36, pp361-368. Minakshi, D, Desai, Hetal M, 2012. Sexual satisfaction and life satisfaction among married couples. Journal of the 224 Indian Academy of Applied Psychology. 38(3) (special issue): 265-270. Morokoff, P. J. &Gillilland, R. Stress, Sexual functioning, and marital satisfaction, Journal of Sex Research, (1993). 30 (1). pp. 43-53. Mosmann, C., Wagner, A., & Féres-Carneiro, T. (2006). Qualidade conjugal: Mapeando conceitos. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 16(35), 315-325. doi:10.1590/S0103-863X2006000300003. Murray, S.L., Rose, P., Bellavia, G.M., Holmes, J.G., & Kusche, A.G. (2002). When rejection stings: How self-esteem constraints relationshipenhancement processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 556-573. Nasechi, A, Raeis F, Jafari M, Rahmani M. 2004; [ The degree of martial compatibility on dormitory resident university students.] Iran J Psychiatry Clin Psyc 10(1-2): 111-6, Persian. Navran, L. ( 1967). Communication and adjusûnent in mamage. Familv Process, 6, 173- 1 84. Nolen–Hoeksema, S., & Jackson, B. (2001). Mediators of the gender difference in rumination. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25, 37–47. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00005. Noller, P., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Perspectives on marital interaction. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Oggins, J, Leber D, Veroff, J. (1993). Race and gender differences in black and white newlywed’s perceptions of sexual and marital relationships. Journal of sex research, 30, 152-160. Oliya, Narges, Fatehizadeh, Maryam, Bahrami, Fatemeh. Teaching of marital life enrichment. Tehran Danzheh publications, (2011), pp. 18-29. Overall, N. C., & Simpson, J. A. (2013). Regulation processes in close relationships. In J. A. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 427–451). New York: Oxford University Press. MARITAL SATISFACTION 201 Patton, D., & Waring, E.M. (1985). Sex and marital intimacy. Journal of Sex and Marital Thera-. 11 (3), 176-1 84. Pazak, S. (1997). Predicting sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, United States International University. Perlin, G., & Diniz, G. (2005). Casais que trabalham e são felizes: Mito ou realidade? Psicologia Clínica, 17(2), 15-29. doi:10.1590/S0103-56652005000200002. Perlman, S.D., & Abramson, P.R. (1982). Sexual satisfaction among married and cohabiting individuals; Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 458-60. Poma, H. K. (2012). Spirituality, sexual intimacy, and marital satisfaction in mixed orientation marriages. (Order No. 3510563, Regent University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 231. Prager, K.J. (1995). The ~svchsloev of intimacy. New York: Guilford. Rahmani, A., Alanghoti, L., & Merghati Khuee E. (2009) How does sexual satisfaction relate to marital satisfaction among Iranians? Int J Obstet Gynecol 107(2), S558-9. Rampage, C. (1994). Power, gender, and marital intimacy. Journal of Family Therapy,, 16 125-137. -7. Renaud, C. & Byers, E.S. (1997). Sexual and relationship satisfaction in Mainland China. Journal of Sex Research, 34(4), 67-79. Roughan, P. & Jennkins, A. A. , (1990). systems developmental Approach to counseling couples with sexual problems. A.N. Z. Journal of Family Therapy, 2, 12, 139. Rubin, L.B, (1976). Worlds of pain. New York; Basic Books. Safilios-Rothchild, C. (1977). Love, Sex and Sex Roles. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Spectrum Books. Sabatelli, R. M., & Ripoll, K. (2004). Variations in Marriage Over Time: An Ecological/Exchange Perspective. En Coleman, M. & Ganong, L. H. (eds.). Handbook of contemporary families: considering the past, contemplating the future. (pp.79-95). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. Samelson, D.A. & Hannon, R. (1999). Sexual desire in couples living with chronic medical conditions. Family Journal, 7(1), 29-39. Schaefer, M.T., & Olson, D.H. (1981). Assessing intimacy: The PAlR Inventory. Journal of Marital and Familv Thera~v. 7,47-60. Sherman, R. (1993). Marital issues of intimacy and technique for change: An Adlerian systems perspective. Individual Psvcholow. 49 (34), 3 1 8-329. Sevinc, M, Garip, E. (2010). A study of parent’s child raising styles and marital harmony. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2(2), 1648-53. Shackelford, T. K. (2001). Cohabitation, Marriage and murder, woman–killing by male romantic partners, Aggressive Behavior, 27, 284-291. Shackelford, T. K, Buss D.M. (2000) Marital satisfaction and spousal cost-infliction. Pers Indiv Differ 28(5): 917-28. Shakerian, A. (2010) [Evaluation of the factors influencing marital satisfaction in the students of Islamic Azad Uiversity in Sanandaj. I Sci J Kurdistan Univ Med Sci 14(4); 40-9. Persian. Silliman, B., Stanley, S. M., Coffin, W., Markman, H. J., & Jordan, P. L. (2002). Preventive interventions for couples. In H. A. Liddle, D. A. Santisteban, R. F. Levant, & J. H. Bray (Eds.), Family psychology: Science-based interventions (pp. 123-146). Washington: American Psychological Association. Sprecher, Susan. “Social Exchange Theories and Sexuality.” The Journal of Sex Research, 35, 32- 43. Stanley, S. M., Blumberg, S. L., & Markman, H. J. (1999). Helping Couples Fight for Their Marriages: The PREP Approach. Berger, Rony (Ed); Hannah, Mo Therese (Ed), Preventive approaches in couples therapy, (pp. 279-303). Philadelphia, PA, US: Brunner/Mazel, xxi. Sternberg, R. J. ( 1986). A tnangular theory of love. PsvchoioPical Review, 93, 1 19-1 35. Stemberg R.J., & Barnes, M. (1985). Real and ideal others in rornantic relationships: 1s four a crowd? Journal of Personalitv and Social Psvcholoy. 49, 1589-1596. Southern, S. (1999). Facilitating sexual health: Intimacy enhancement techniques for sexual dysfunction. Journal of Mental Health Counselling, 21, 15- 33. Synder, D.K. (1979). ‘Multidimensional Assessment of Marital Satisfaction’, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 813-823. Tahmasebi, S., Moghadasi, J., Alayi, A., & Moradi M.T.( 2005)[Comparative investigation of marital satisfaction in house wives and employed women in Shaharekord.] Sci J Hamdan Univ Med Sci 14(2): 20-30, Persian. Timm, T.M. (1999). The effects of differentiation of self, adult attachment, and sexual communication on sexual and marital satisfaction: A path analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University. Tolstedt, B.E., & Stokes, J.P. (1983). Relation of verbal, affective, and physical intirnacy to marital satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychofom,30 (4), 573-580. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2005). Conceptual foundations of evolutionary psychology. En David Buss (ed.). The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. New Jersey: Wiley, Hoboken. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2007). Evolutionary psychology, ecological rationality, and the unification of the behavioral sciences. Comment on A framework for the unification of the behavioral sciences by Gintis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30(1), 42-43. Traupmann, J, Hatfield, E. (1983). How important is marital fairness over the lifespan? International Journal of Ageing and Human Management. 17, 34-53. Traupmann, J, Petersen, R, Utne, M, Hatfield, E. (1981). Measuring equity in intimate relationships. Applied Psychological Measurement, 5, 467-480. Uçman, P. (1982). Cinsel sorunların tedavisinde yeni yaklaşımlar. Psikoloji Dergisi, 14-15, 3-7. Veroff, J, Douvan, E., & Hatchett S.J, (1995). Marital Instability: A social and behavioural study of the early years. Westport, CT: Praeger. MARITAL SATISFACTION 203 Villa, M. B. (2005). Habilidades sociais no casamento: Avaliação e contribuição para a satisfação conjugal. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP. Villa, M. B., Del Prette, Z. A. P., & Del Prette, A. (2007). Habilidades sociais conjugais e filiação religiosa: Um estudo descritivo. Psicologia em Estudo, 12(1), 23-32. doi:10.1590/S1413- 73722007000100004. Waller, W. (1937). The rating and dating complex. American Sociological Review. 2, 727-734. Walster, E, Walster, G.W, & Berscheid, E (1978). Equity: Theory and Research. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Wang, G.T. (1994). Social development and family formation in China. Fam Pers 28, 283-301. Watson, J. P. & Davies, T. (1997). Psychosexual problems. British Medical Journal, 315(7102), 239- 243. 107. Yoon, J. E., & Lawrence, E. (2013). Psychological victimization as a risk factor for the developmental course of marriage. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(1), 53-64. Young, M, Luquis, R, Denny, G, & Young, T. (1998). Correlates of sexual satisfaction in marriage. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 7, 115-128. Page 1