HOSTILITY IN MARRIAGE The Behavioral Effects of Trait Hostility on Marital Interaction & Satisfaction

OVERVIEW Introduction Introduction Brief View of Personality & Marriage Brief View of Personality & Marriage What does Hostility do? What does Hostility do? Goals of this Study Goals of this Study Methods/Procedure Methods/Procedure Sample Sample Results Results Implications Implications

INTRODUCTION  Why do some marriages fail, while others last until the death of one spouse?  What are the behaviors that contribute to marital distress?  What role does conflict play in marital dissolution?  Does support or positive affect matter?

Personality & Marriage Negative traits associated with less satisfaction & more distress Negative traits associated with less satisfaction & more distress (Karney & Bradbury, 1995; Kelly & Conley, 1987; Watson, Hubbard, & Wiese,2000) (Karney & Bradbury, 1995; Kelly & Conley, 1987; Watson, Hubbard, & Wiese,2000) Positive traits associated with relationship satisfaction (Watson, Hubbard, & Wiese, 2000) Positive traits associated with relationship satisfaction (Watson, Hubbard, & Wiese, 2000) Personality characteristics have been known to predict perceptions of support/positive behaviors (Pasch, Bradbury, & Lewis, 1997) Personality characteristics have been known to predict perceptions of support/positive behaviors (Pasch, Bradbury, & Lewis, 1997)

What Does Hostility Do? Traits in the hostility domain include: cynicism, anger, mistrust, and aggression (Barefoot et al. 1989) Traits in the hostility domain include: cynicism, anger, mistrust, and aggression (Barefoot et al. 1989) Hostile persons display low levels of social support and high levels of social conflict (Gallo & Smith, 1999) Hostile persons display low levels of social support and high levels of social conflict (Gallo & Smith, 1999) Hostility predicts deterioration in personal relations (Newton & Kiecolt-Glaser, 1995) Hostility predicts deterioration in personal relations (Newton & Kiecolt-Glaser, 1995)

What Does Hostility Do? Greater marital instability has been associated with more hostility and less warmth (Matthews & Wickrama, 1996) Greater marital instability has been associated with more hostility and less warmth (Matthews & Wickrama, 1996) Tend to interrupt, acknowledge spouses verbal contributions less in interactions (Kiecolt-Glaser et al. 1998) Tend to interrupt, acknowledge spouses verbal contributions less in interactions (Kiecolt-Glaser et al. 1998) One hostile person in a marital couple escalates the overall level of expressed negativity (T.W. Smith et al., 1990) One hostile person in a marital couple escalates the overall level of expressed negativity (T.W. Smith et al., 1990)

First-Year Project: Goals  Goals were to examine:  Role of hostility in newlywed relationship  Association between hostility & specific conflict behaviors/affect  Link between hostility & marital satisfaction

First-year Project: Hypotheses (1) Level of hostility would be positively associated with frequency of negative affect (1) Level of hostility would be positively associated with frequency of negative affect (2) Level of hostility would be negatively associated with frequency of positive affect (2) Level of hostility would be negatively associated with frequency of positive affect (3) Hostility would be associated with lower levels of marital satisfaction (3) Hostility would be associated with lower levels of marital satisfaction

First-year Project: Sample  Subset of 66 of 105 couples participating in Marital & Family Development Project  Principal Investigator: Erika Lawrence, Ph.D  4-yr. longitudinal study of newlywed couples in their first marriage

First-year Project: Sample  Age  Husbands averaged 26.4 (S.D.=4.7) yrs of age  Wives averaged 25.0 (S.D. =4.3) yrs of age  Race/Ethnicity  Husbands: 89% Caucasian  Wives: 92% Caucasian  Education  16 years on average for both

 First-Year Project: Procedure  Completed questionnaires prior to an in lab session  Interviewed separately about marriage  10-min. videotaped discussions of topic of his/her choosing regarding a conflict issue  9 mo. Follow-up questionnaires

Measures: Hostility & Anger  Cook-Medley Hostility Scale  50 True/False Questions  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.88), wives (.87)  Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire  Hostility Subscale  8 questions in Likert format  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.86), wives (.75)

Measures: Hostility & Anger  Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire  Anger Subscale  7 questions in Likert format  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.64), wives (.62)

Measures: Marital Satisfaction  Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMS)  3 items with Likert response format  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.93), wives (.96)

Measures: Marital Satisfaction  Norton’s Quality of Marriage Index (QMI)  6 items with Likert format  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.95), wives (.94)

Measures: Marital Satisfaction  Marital Adjustment Test (MAT)  15 items with mixed format  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.60), wives (.63)

Measures: Negative Temperament  Schedule for Adaptive & Non-adaptive Personality (SNAP)  Negative Temperament Subscale  28 True/False items  Coefficient alpha: husbands (.87), wives (.88)  Means: Husbands (M=52.75, S.D.= 6.69), wives (M=45.28, S.D.=7.45)

Measures: Behavioral Coding  Specific Affect Coding System (SPAFF)  Facial expression  Vocal tone  Speech content  5 positive codes  10 negative codes  1 neutral  Percent agreement ranged from 82%-100%

RESULTS

RESULTS: Hypothesis 1 (1) Level of hostility would be positively associated with frequency of negative affect (1) Level of hostility would be positively associated with frequency of negative affect A significant positive association was found between husbands’ and wives’ hostility and sadness. A significant positive association was found between husbands’ and wives’ hostility and sadness. However for wives, a negative association between disgust and hostility was found. However for wives, a negative association between disgust and hostility was found.

RESULTS: Hypothesis 2 (2) Level of hostility would be negatively associated with frequency of positive affect (2) Level of hostility would be negatively associated with frequency of positive affect A significant negative association was found between affection and hostility for wives. A significant negative association was found between affection and hostility for wives. However no other negative associations with positive behaviors were found. However no other negative associations with positive behaviors were found.

RESULTS: Hypothesis 3 (3) Hostility would be associated with lower levels of marital satisfaction (3) Hostility would be associated with lower levels of marital satisfaction Significant negative associations were found between both husbands’ and wives’ hostility and their self-reported marital satisfaction. Significant negative associations were found between both husbands’ and wives’ hostility and their self-reported marital satisfaction.

Discussion: Strengths Multiple measures of target constructs Multiple measures of target constructs Controlled for variability across relationships Controlled for variability across relationships Comprehensive examination of marital interaction Comprehensive examination of marital interaction

Discussion: Limitations Sample Sample Self-selected Self-selected Homogeneity Homogeneity Non-hostile Non-hostile Measures Measures Psychometrics (MAT, Cook) Psychometrics (MAT, Cook) Conceptualization of SPAFF codes (sadness vs disappointment) Conceptualization of SPAFF codes (sadness vs disappointment) Cross-sectional, correlational Cross-sectional, correlational

Implications/Future Directions Behavioral Interaction at later time point Behavioral Interaction at later time point Possible relationship between the effects of trait level hostility in marital dyad and health perceptions/outcomes Possible relationship between the effects of trait level hostility in marital dyad and health perceptions/outcomes Integrate positive and negative Integrate positive and negative Integrate traits and behaviors Integrate traits and behaviors