Presentation on theme: "Predicting Marital Success with PREPARE: A Predictive Validity Study Article by B.J Fowers and D.H Olson Presentation by: Aylin Atabek Elissa Vaidman Qiana."— Presentation transcript:
Predicting Marital Success with PREPARE: A Predictive Validity Study Article by B.J Fowers and D.H Olson Presentation by: Aylin Atabek Elissa Vaidman Qiana LaCroix Aracely Miron Fowers, B.J. and Olson, D.H. Predicting Marital Success with PREPARE: A Predictive Study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy vol.12 No. 4, 403-413, 1986.
PREPARE 90% of the population marries at least once. 40% of all marriages end in divorce Average length of marriage: 6-7 years In order to avoid a incompatible marriage or prolong a struggling marriage there needs to be an instrument that can identify these at-risk couples validly and reliably in order to help them.
Previous Research Little work has been done in terms of preventing marital problems or helping couples prepare for marriage. Evidence is primarily descriptive and based on small samples. Only a few longitudinal follow up studies of couples in the early years of marriage.
Criticisms of Previous Marital Programs 1.Lack of information of the needs of engaged couples. 2.Lack of theoretical basis for the work being done. 3.Inadequate methodology of the assessments of premarital programs.
PREPARE PREPARE is a “premarital inventory that can be used for preventative work with couples before marriage.” “…More predictive analysis of relationship variables that seem important in the early dissolution of marriages.” PREPARE scales are based on theoretical and empirical indicators of critical tasks related to early marital adjustment.
PREPARE 125-item inventory Identifies relationship strengths and weaknesses in 11 relationship areas. Background information For each scale an Individual Scale is given as well as a Positive Couple Agreement (PCA) score.
PREPARE 11 Relationship Areas Realistic expectations Personality issues Communication Conflict resolution Financial management Leisure activities Sexual relationship Children and marriage Family and friends Equalitarian roles Religious orientation Background Information Age Education Monthly income # of months known each other # of months prior to marriage took inventory Parent’s reaction to marriage Friend’s reaction to marriage Parent’s marital status Birth position # of siblings Pop of current residence and pop of childhood residence.
PREPARE Validity and Reliability Concurrent validity: significant relationship with The Marital Adjustment Scale (MAS) at p<.01 Internal consistency.7 Test-retest reliability.78
Methodology Subjects 164 couples, 328 individuals who had been married 2-3 years Average age males: 25.2 females: 23.2 Most had attended some college Combined median income of $14,000 Caucasian, Christian, identified by clergy as… Divided into subgroups based on responses i. married satisfied (59 couples) ii. married dissatisfied (22 couples) iii. cancelled (52 couples) iv. divorced/separated (31)
Cont’d Instruments Questionnaire with two sections 1. Demographic: age, sex, children, education, time as a married couple, income, living area population, parents’ marital status, any counseling 2. Idealistic Distortion and Marital Satisfaction scales: from ENRICH, Idealistic scale is a 5-item version of the 15-item version; marital satisfaction scale is a 10- item scale, each assessing a major content category.
Cont’d Procedure Clergy members who had used PREPARE were sent clergy questionnaire and couple questionnaire and asked to select 2-5 couples in the following categories: 1.Satisfied –2. Dissatisfied –3. Couples who cancelled or delayed Couples were not informed of their categories Only the married couples completed the couple questionnaire Couples were instructed to complete questionnaires separately Return rate of 49% Clergy category decision was no longer a good basis; rely on couples’ assessment based on their scores Median of 41, chosen as cutoff to separate satisfied from dissatisfied, only used scores of those couples who BOTH responded.
Results Three data tables were used for data. Data on Table 1 shows the comparison between four marital groups on 11 subscales of the PREPARE: Realistic Expectations, Personality Issues, Communication, Conflict Resolution, Financial Management, Leisure Activity, Sexuality, Children and Marriage, Family and Friends, Equalitarian Roles, and Religion. The four marital groups were: (a) married-satisfied couples, (b) married-dissatisfied couples, (c ) couples who cancelled or delayed their marriage, and (d) couples who were separated or divorced. Significant differences between groups were found in 8 of the 11 subscales: ANOVA and Linear Trend Between Groups were used.
More Results… Data in table 2 used linear trends and a t-test, in positive couple agreement in the order of married-satisfied, married-dissatisfied, cancelled/delayed, and separated/divorced. The linear trend was highly significant in all of the 8 premarital areas for which difference between groups were found. Significant differences between between satisfactorily-married couples and separated or divorced couples were of particular interest. Differences between the two groups in premarital couple agreement existed in 10 of the 11 PREPARE categories, and in the overall positive couple agreement score. Married-satisfied couples had significantly higher couple agreement scores in the areas of communication, conflict resolution, leisure activity, financial management, sexuality, equalitarian roles, and overall average couple positive agreement.
Even More Results… Comparing couples who were married-satisfied and couples who decided to delay or cancel their marriage, differences in couple- positive agreement were found in 7 of the 11 categories and in the average couple positive agreement. The final analysis was geared toward the capability of the PREPARE scores to differentiate between satisfactorily married couples, and the others. Table 3 of the data uses discrimination analysis results between the groups, and indicate the the percent of couples correctly classified into each group and total percent of correct discrimination. The results give ample support to the predictive power to PREPARE scores.
Interesting Points of the Study PREPARE is useful to identify couples who are in high risk of dissatisfaction or divorce. It has a preventative function as a result of its predictive validity. Many low scoring couples decided not to get married based on their score on PREPARE. The best predictive score was the positive agreement score. It identifies some relevant topics and important issues that the premarital programs should address.
Weaknesses of the Study Although the study differentiates successful relationships from unsuccessful relationships, it cannot be used for predicting the success rates for individual couples. The subjects were not representative of the society. Subjects were primarily Caucasians and Christian. Participation was voluntary and included only couples who remained in the parish where they were married. They also received feedback at least twice. The study doesn’t include marriages where only one partner is satisfied or unsatisfied.