7/27/2019 350313.pdf

1/7

Person Perception and Courtship Progress among Premarital Couples

Author(s): Bernard I. MursteinSource: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Nov., 1972), pp. 621-626Published by: National Council on Family RelationsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/350313 .

Accessed: 11/10/2013 02:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Journal of Marriage and Family.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll bj JSTOR T d C di i

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfrhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/350313?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/350313?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr

7/27/2019 350313.pdf

2/7

Person Perception and CourtshipProgressAmong Premarital Couples*BERNARDI. MURSTEIN

Departmentof Psychology,ConnecticutCollege,New London, ConnecticutPredicated on the belief that person perception was related to courtshipprogressandthat men are more importantto courtshipprogressthan women, a college sampleof98 premaritalcouplesreceiveda shortened orm of theMaritalExpectation Test takenunder eight different "sets": self, ideal-self, ideal-spouse, partner; how partnerperceivesyou, his ideal-spouse,himself,and his ideal-self Hypotheses predicted thatsix months later Ss makinggood courtshipprogresswould be those who earlierhadconfirmed their partners' self and ideal-self concepts and also accuratelypredictedthese concepts. It was also predicted that the man is a more important perceptualtargetthan the woman.Hypotheseswereessentiallyconfirmed.

The perceptions of an individual regardinghimself and his spouse have been shown to beassociatedwith maritaladjustment n a consid-erable numberof studies(Preston,Peltz, Mudd,and Froscher, 1952; Dymond, 1954; Corsini,1956; Eastman, 1958; Luckey, 1960a, 1960b;Stuckert, 1963; Kotlar, 1963, 1965; Pickford,Signori,and Rempel, 1966; HurleyandSilvert,1966; Taylor, 1967), but the relationof personperception to marital choice has been largelyignored. A recent theory called Stimulus-Value-Role(SVR), however, focusesheavilyonthe role of communicationand person percep-tion in maritalchoice (Murstein,1970).The theory postulates that the more "A"likes "B," the more he discloses his "privateworld" to "B." In a "dating" situation,therefore, if "B" already has some positivefeeling for "A," "A's" disclosure to "B" isrewardingbecause it marks "B" as worthy ofreceiving intimate information. Accordingly,"A's" communicationraises "B's"self-esteem,and "B" is thereby encouragedto reciprocateby also disclosingintimate information abouthimself(Worthy,Gary,andKahn,1969).The act of disclosure o a receptive istenerisnot only rewardingto the listener but alsoserves as a catharticagent for the teller, whomay express feelings perhaps not heretoforeexpressed. The repetition of these mutuallyrewardingexperiences over a variety of topicsleads to an increase in the attraction of themembers of the couple toward each other.

Because the members of such couples arestrongly attracted to each other, it is furtherhypothesized that the information they revealto each other is retained better than informa-tion obtained by individuals in less intimaterelationships; consequently, couples who de-velop a closer relationship o each othershouldbe more accurate in their perceptions of eachother's feelings, aspirations, and beliefs thancouples whose relationship does not deepenwith time. Further,because intimatedisclosurefrom a liked person is rewardingin that itconveys a feeling of respect and trust in thelistener, such communication increases theprobability of the listener accepting what theindividual aysabouthimself.So far the discussionhas been pursuedwiththe implicit assumptionthat both membersofthe couple possessed equal ability to rewardeach other; however, this is not necessarilythecasewith respectto maritalchoice. Historically,men have manifested greater control overwomen thanvice-versaMurstein, n press),and,despite much change, economic and socialpower in the United States today is stilldisproportionately distributed by sex to thewoman'sdisadvantage.It is further hypothesized in SVR theory,therefore, that the cost of abstaining frommarriage is still currently greater for womenthan for men, since the former tend to improvetheir standard of living and status more bymarriage than do men. To compound thedifficulty for women, the age difference be-tween marriageable men and women, thewomen's shorter age range of marriageability,and their longer life-spanput them in greatersupply andin less demandthan men. The effect

*This research was conducted under NIMH grant08405 in 1968. The author is indebted to BarbaraBaldridge, Shirley Feldman, and Regina Roth whogave the manuscript the benefit of their criticisms.November 1972 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGEAND THE FAMILY 621

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/27/2019 350313.pdf

3/7

of the greaterpower of men, therefore, s that,in courtingsituations,the manis... the one who usually takes the most activerole. He often is the one who actively initiatesthe relationship by asking for a date. He also ismore often the one who is the first to commithimself to the relationship and who, in theeveryday aspects of the courtship, decides aboutsuch activities as dinner arrangements, movies,and dances. The woman occupies the morepassive role as the recipient of the man's wooing.She is not as likely to manifest signs of distur-bance during the courtship simply because shehas less role-prescribed need to initiate thecontact and to make decisions ... .If she acceptsthe man as a legitimate suitor, he is expected toshoulder most of the interpersonal responsibil-ities from that point on. [Murstein, 1967:450]Becausethe man's power in maritalchoice isgreaterthan that of his partner, t is hypothe-sized that confirmation1by the woman of hisself and ideal-selfconcepts should have greaterconsequences for courtshipprogressthan con-firmation of the woman's self and ideal-selfconcepts. The man's tendency to confirm thewoman's self and ideal-selfimage should makeher like him a great deal but should not affectcourtship progress as much as in the formercase, because of his greater power in therelationship.Moreover,since the initial step isup to him, and because she as the less powerfulindividual in the relationship stands to losemore by the collapseof courtshipthan he does,the woman will focus on his needs andself-imagemore thanhe will on hers;as a result,it is hypothesized that women who makegoodcourtship progress (move closer to marriage)should be able to predict their boyfriends'selfand ideal-self mageswith greateraccuracy hanwomen who do not make good courtshipprogress.Conversely,the lesser importanceofthe woman's self andideal-self magesshouldbereflected in the fact that good and poorcourtship progress men should not differgreatlyin their ability to predicttheirpartners'

self andideal-selfconcepts.The greater importance of the man shouldalso make his intraperceptual world moreimportant to courtship progress than theintraperceptualworld of the woman. Intraper-ceptions refer to a comparisonof two percep-tions which stem from the sameperson. Theyare to be distinguishedfrom interperceptions

which refer to a comparisonof two perceptionswhere each perception comes from a differentperson; hence, a man's comparisonof percep-tion of his self with his perception of hispartner'sself is an intraperception;his predic-tion of his partner'sself-concept when com-pared to her actual self-concept comprisesaninterperceptualmeasure.It is hypothesizedthatthe man's perception of the degree of fulfill-ment of his expectationsis moreimportant orcourtship progressthan his girlfriend'spercep-tion in this regard.The hypotheses alluded to may be summa-rized as follows:1. Accuracy in predictingthe partner'sselfand ideal-selfconceptswill be more characteris-tic of couples making good courtshipprogressthan of those makingpoor courtship progress.2. Because men exercise a superior statuscompared to women in our society, theirimportanceas a perceptual arget the objectofperception) is greater than that of women.Therefore, the association between courtshipprogressand predictiveaccuracywill be greaterfor women predictingmen's self and ideal-selfconceptsthanvice-versa.3A. The tendency for the woman'spercep-tions to confirm the man's self and ideal-selfconcepts will be significantlygreater for goodcourtship progresscouples as opposed to poorcourtshipprogresscouples.3B. No significantdifferences are predictedbetween good and poor courtship progresscouples regarding he tendency for the man toconfirm the woman's self and ideal-self con-cepts.4A. The intraperceptual congruencies (thetendency for any two perceptionsof a personto coalesce) of good courtship progressmenwill be significantlygreaterthan those of poorcourtshipprogressmen.4B. However, the intraperceptual ongruen-cies of good courtship progresswomen shouldnot differ significantly from those of poorcourtshipprogresswomen.

METHODSubjects

The sujects consisted of 98 couples whovolunteered to participate in a study oninterpersonalrelationships.Most of the coupleshad gone together for a considerable ength oftime, the average ength of acquaintancebeingslightly less than two years. All the womenwere students at ConnecticutCollege. Most ofthe men also were college students comingmainly from a number of easterninstitutions.1The distinction between confirming and predictingshould be noted. Confirming involves the tendency toperceive the partner in the same way as he perceiveshimself. Predicting in the paper signifies forecastinghow the partner will see himself or his ideal-self.

622 JOURNALOF MARRIAGEAND THE FAMILY November1972

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/27/2019 350313.pdf

4/7

EachS wasto receivefive dollarsas paymentfor his serviceswhich included takinga batteryof tests and questionnaires.The woman re-ceived a packet containingher tests, and,uponsuccessfully completing all of the materials,asimilar packet was mailed to her boyfriendsince almost all boyfriends lived out of town.All Ss were told not to communicateabout theresponsesto the test and that evidence of suchcommunication would result in invalid proto-cols andnonpaymentfor participation.On the return of the boyfriend'spacket, asagreedearlier,eachS receivedtwo of the totalof five dollars which he was to receive.Approximatelysix months after the returnofthe girlfriend'spacket, each S was mailed afive-point follow-up questionnairewhich askedthe subject to choose which of five alternativesbest characterized the present state of thecouple's courtship: We are very much closerthan before and moving towards being apermanent couple, or we are a permanentcouple (5); We continue to have a very closerelationship,and we may become a permanentcouple although our relationship has notchangedradically n the last six months (4); Wecontinue to see a lot of each otherbut we havenot really become much closer in the last sixmonths (3); We still see each other but therelationship shows a considerable amount ofstrain. We are further apart than we were sixmonths ago (2); Wehave broken up and/orarenot a couple any more (1). Each subject wasmailed three dollars on the return of hisfollow-up questionnaire.One hundred thirty-six women filled outtheir packets,but only 101 of theirboyfriendsreturned theirs. Of these 101 couples, 98returned their follow-up questionnaires,andthose constituted the subjectsanalyzedin thisstudy.Criterion

All couples in which the combinedcourtshipprogressscore of the couple totaled 8 or morewere designated as making good courtshipprogress,whereas those with a score of 7 or lesswere designated as poor courtship progresspersons. This procedure of combining thecouple's courtship progress scores for greaterstabilityappeared ustifiedsince the correlationbetween couples for courtshipprogresswas .86.By virtue of the cutting score employed, 64couples were designated as good courtshipprogress,and 34 as poor courtshipprogress.Test

Each S received, along with other tests, the

Marital Expectation Test (MET) which is afactor analytically derived inventory con-structed by the author. Each item is rated on afive-point scale from very true or very fre-quently, to most untrue or very infrequently.The stems measure stimulus attributes, valueorientations, and role behaviors desired inmarriage. Although the eventual use of theMETwill involvescoresfor the separate actors,the presentuse was simply to compareeach ofthe items for similarityof response when thetest was taken under differentperceptual"sets"or points of view, as will be explainedshortly.There is a male version (135 items) and afemale version (130 items), but the first 76items are identical for both sexes, and thesewere used in the present analysis.The test-re-test reliabilityof the eight different "sets"afteran interval of several weeks using anothercomparablegroup varied from .49 to .99 withan averagevalueof .76.The test was taken under eight different"sets" randomlyarrangedwith slightmodifica-tion in the wording of each item so as to beappropriate to the "set." Each "set" had adifferent object of perceptionas follows: Self,Ideal-Self,Ideal-Spouse,Boyfriend(Girlfriend),How Boyfriend (Girlfriend) Sees You, HowBoyfriend (Girlfriend) Sees His (Her) Ideal-Spouse, How Boyfriend(Girlfriend)Sees Him-self (Herself), and How Boyfriend (Girlfriend)Sees His(Her)Ideal-Self.2

RESULTSThe firsthypothesiswas tested by comparingthe accuracy of prediction for the self andideal-self of good courtship progress couplesagainst the accuracy of prediction of poorcourtship progress couples. The score for agiven predictionwas the absolutesumof the 76METitem discrepanciesbetween his predictionand his partner's perception. The results areexpressed as four t-tests (prediction of man'sself, man's ideal-self, woman's self, woman'sideal-self)in Table 1. In the interestsof space,

the origin of the percept is identified by asubscript;hence Ideal-SelfMndicatesthe man'sideal-selfconcept. A captialized etter followedby an arrow indicates the person doing theprediction; hence W-- Ideal-SelfMrepresentsthe woman's prediction of her boyfriend'sconcept of his ideal-self.2Two other "sets" were given: Importance of ItemsAbout Partner to You, Importance of Items AboutYou to You. However, interviews after testing indi-cated that some Ss confounded their rating of anitem's importance with their personal viewpoint aboutthe item; consequently, these "sets" have been omit-ted from the analysis.

November1972 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGEAND THE FAMILY 623

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/27/2019 350313.pdf

5/7

TABLE 1. MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND t VALUES, BETWEEN GOOD AND POORCOURTSHIP PROGRESS MEN AND WOMEN FOR INACCURACY OF PREDICTION OF SELF ANDIDEAL-SELF CONCEPTSGood Courtship Poor CourtshipProgress(N=64) Progress (N=14)

Variables Mean S.D. Mean S.D. t/Ideal-SelfM--W--- Ideal-SelfM/ 56.78 13.17 64.32 15.44 2.41**/Ideal-Selfw-M--o Ideal-Selfw/ 58.29 15.52 67.21 15.74 2.66**/SelfM-W--+ SelfM/ 60.47 11.19 67.06 10.90 2.77**/Selfw-M-. Selfw/ 61.09 12.72 61.71 11.85 .23

Note: The higher the score the more inaccurate the prediction.**p < .01

Inspection of Table 1 indicates that Hypoth-esis 1 is generallyconfirmed n that both of thegood courtship progresswomen's predictionsand one of the two good courtship progressmen's predictions are significantlymore accu-rate than the poor courtship progresspersons'predictions.The sole nonsignificant inding layin the failureof good courtshipprogressmen topredict their girlfriends' self-concepts moreaccurately hanpoor courtshipmen.The second hypothesis which called forsuperiorityof good courtshipprogresswomen'spredictions over those of good courtship pro-gress men was tested by computing bi-serialcorrelations between accuracy of predictionand courtshipprogressstatus. As hypothesized,the associationbetweenpredictiveaccuracyandcourtship progressstatus for self-concept wassignificantlyhigher for women (rbis=.65) thanfor men (rbis=.06), the differencebeing signifi-cant at the .01 level. Contraryto prediction,TABLE 2. t VALUES BETWEENGOOD AND POORCOURTSHIP PROGRESS GROUPS FOR CONFIR-MATIONOF SELF AND IDEAL-SELFCONCEPTSBY THE PARTNER'SIDEAL-SPOUSEAND PER-CEIVED PARTNER PERCEPTIONS

Variable t

/SelfM-Boyfriendw/ 1.68*/SelfM-Ideal-SpouseW/ 2.98**/Selfw- GirlfriendM/ .29/SelfW-Ideal-SpouseM/ .11/Ideal-SelfM-Boy friendW/ .92/Ideal-SelfM-Ideal-SpouseW/ 1.75*/Ideal-SelfW-Girlfriend M/ .35/Ideal-Selfw--Ideal-SpouseM/ 1.72*

Note: Discrepancies were always smaller for goodcourtship progress couples.*p < .05**p < .01

however, no difference was found in accuracyof prediction of the ideal-self concept, thevalues for women and men being, respectively,.63 and .61.Hypothesis 3A was tested by obtaining theunsigned discrepancy between each person'sself and ideal-self concepts and the partner'sperceptionof his ideal-spouseandhis boyfriend(girlfriend).Table 2 indicatesthat, aspredicted,the self-concepts of the men in the goodcourtship progressgroupwere significantly essdiscrepant from their partner's perceptions ofthem and also less discrepant from theirpartners' deal-spouseperceptions,thanwas thecase for poor courtship progress couples.Similarly, the Ideal-SelfM-Ideal Spousew dis-crepancy,as predicted,was significantlysmallerfor good courtship progress couples than forpoor courtship progress ones. Contrary toHypothesis 3B, however, the Ideal-Selfw-Ideal-SpouseM discrepancy also was signifi-cantly smaller for the good courtshipprogressTABLE 3. t VALUES FOR SIGNIFICANTINTRAPERCEPTUAL COMPARISONS BETWEENGOOD AND POOR COURTSHIP PROGRESS MEN

Variable t/SelfM-M-o Selfw/ 2.12*/SelfM-M-i Ideal-Selfw/ 2.03*/Ideal-SelfM -Ideal-Spouse 1.98*/Ideal-SelfM-M--- Ideal-Spouse 2.02*/Ideal-SelfM-M--- Ideal-Selfw/ 2.86**/Ideal-SelfM--M-o- Selfw/ 1.93*/Ideal-SelfM-M-- Boyfriendw/ 1.81*/GirlfriendM-M-. Boyfriendw/ 1.74*

Note: All discrepancies were smaller for good court-ship'progress men.*p < .05**p < .01624 JOURNALOF MARRIAGEAND THE FAMILY November 1972

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/27/2019 350313.pdf

6/7

couples than for the poor courtship progressones.The fourthhypothesiswas tested by comput-ing t tests between, good and poor courtshipmen and good and poor courtshipwomen forall intraperceptual omparisons.Since the num-ber of variables for each sex was eight, allpossible comparisonsof two variablesat a time[n(n-1)/2], or a total of 28 intraperceptualcomparisons was computed for each sex. Ofthese, eight were significantas predicted (Hy-pothesis 4A) for men and, also as predicted(Hypothesis 4B), none were significant forwomen. The significant comparisons for themen areshown in Table3.DISCUSSION

The results generally support the four hy-potheses with the exception, that, contrary toprediction, the ideal-self concepts of thewomen tended to be predictedmore accuratelyby good courtship progressmen than by poorcourtship progress men and also confirmedmore by the men's ideal-spouseexpectations.This unexpected finding may have resultedbecause good courtship progresswomen weremore revealingof theiraspirations ideal-selves)than poor courtship progresswomen, thoughnot of their self-concepts.Perhapswomen aremore apt to discuss their ideals than theirself-concepts. This might be because theybelieve that focusing too much on the self willnot get a man to proposeto them.Table 1 reveals that although the goodcourtship progressmen were somewhat moreinaccurate in predicting their girlfriends'self-concepts compared to their girlfriends'ideal-self concepts, exactly the opposite was true ofthe poor courtship progressmen. It may wellbe, therefore, that the poor courtshipprogresswomen talk as much about themselvesas goodcourtship progresswomen, but theirboyfriendsarenot favorably mpressedby what they hear.Obviously, these speculations await furtherstudy.

The main conclusions stemming from thisstudy are that ability to predict the partner'sself and ideal-selfconcepts andthe tendency toconfirm them in terms of one's own expecta-tions for the partner are predictive of goodcourtship progresssix months later. However,the women proved much more influential inthis regardboth aspredictorsandconfirmersofmen's self-concepts than men vis-'a-viswomen.Focusingon the intrapsychicworldasmeasuredby comparingany two perceptionsby the sameperson, the congruence of the men's percep-tions was positively associated with good

courtship progress, but the women's percep-tions werenot.It is difficult to escape the conclusion fromour findings that men are more powerful thanwomen in determining he course of courtship.Because they usually have greaterrewardstooffer women in termsof economicsecurityandstatus than women can offer them, they mayselect women who arehighly sensitiveto theirneeds but not too demandingof sensitivityandattention from them. Or, it may be that thesewomen are not so much selected as convertedto this differential in attention during thecourseof courtship.There is another possibility. The averagelayman thinks that women arenaturallymoreinterested in interpersonal relationships andpeople than men, and the researchliteraturegives moderate support to the claim thatwomen are more accurate hanmen in interper-sonal perception in general.It is conceivable,therefore, that becausewomen's inferiorstatushas existed since the onset of history(Murstein,in press), selection has taken place, with themore perceptually accurate and amenablewomen being selected for marriage.The onlyway to test this thesis in even the broadestsense, however, would be for society to grantequality of status for women, thus permittingan investigation of whether their superioracuity diminisheswith statusachievement.There are severalalternateways of account-ing for our findings which ought to beconsidered. It might be thought that accuracyof perceptionand the tendency to confirmthepartner'sself and ideal-selfperceptionsare notrelated to courtship progressbut area functionof length of courtship.However,a comparisonbetween the mean length of acquaintanceshipfor poor and good courtship progresscouplesshowed no significantdifference. Moreimpor-tant in this regardwas the fact that the goodcourtship progress couples, at the time oftesting, were significantlymore confident thattheir courtship would terminate in marriagethan were poor courtshipprogress ouples, andthe accurateand supportiveperceptionsof thepartner may well havebeen associatedwith thisconfidence.It might also be argued hat the roles of menare more stereotyped in our society than arethose of women, and hence the former areeasier to predict. This assertion may well betrue, but it does not explain why the goodcourtship progresswomen were more accurateand confirming than the poor courtship pro-gress women unless it is assumed that goodcourtship progress men adhere more to the

November1972 JOURNALOF MARRIAGEAND THE FAMILY 625

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/27/2019 350313.pdf

7/7

societal stereotype than do poor courtshipprogressmen. If true, this would not invalidatethe presentfindingsbut would point to the roleof sociological norms in influencing maritalchoice. Corsini(1956) found some support forthis viewpoint a long time ago, but regrettablynot much effort has been expended in thisdirectionsince then.In sum, the present study indicatesthat for acollege volunteer group, perceptualscores areassociated with marital choice, and that theman as a perceptual target is of considerablygreater mportance n maritalchoice thanis thewoman.REFERENCES

Corsini,R.1956 "Understandingndsimilarity n marriage."Journalof AbnormalandSocialPsychology52:327-332.Dymond,R.1954 "Interpersonal erceptionand maritalhap-piness." Canadian Journal of Psychology8:164-171.Eastman,D.1958 "Self acceptanceand maritalhappiness."Journalof ConsultingPsychology22:95-99.Hurley,J. R. andD. M.Silvert1966 "Mate-imageongruity and maritaladjust-ment." Proceedings of the AmericanPsychological Association Convention:219-220.Kotlar,S. L.1965 "Middle-classmarital role perceptionsandmaritaladjustment."Sociology and SocialResearch 9:284-291.Luckey,E. B.1960a "Implicationsormarriageounselingof self

perceptionsand spouse perceptions."Jour-nalof CounselingPsychology7:3-9.1960b "Marital satisfaction and congruent self-spouse concepts." Social Forces39:153-157.Murstein,B. I.1967 "Therelationshipof mentalhealth to mari-tal choice and courtshipprogress." ournalof Marriagendthe Family29:447-461.1970 "Stimulus-value-role: theory of maritalchoice."Journalof Marriagendthe Family32:465-481.(in press) Love, Sex, and MarriageThroughoutHistory.NewYork:Springer.Murstein,B. I. andG. D. Beck(in press)"Personperception,marriage djustment,and socialdesirability."Journalof Consult-ingand ClinicalPsychology.Pickford,J. H., E. I. Signori,and H. Rempel1966 "The intensity of personalitytraitsin rela-tion to maritalhappiness."Journalof Mar-riageandthe Family28:458-459.Preston,M. G., W. L. Peltz, E. H. Mudd,and H. B.Froscher1952 "Impressions f personalityas a function ofmaritalconflict."Journalof AbnormalandSocialPsychology47:326-336.Stuckert,R. P.1963 "Roleperceptionand marital atisfaction-aconfigurational approach." MarriageandFamilyLiving25:415-419.Taylor,A. B.1967 "Role perception, empathy, and marriageadjustment."Sociologyand SocialResearch52:22-34.Worthy,M.,A. L. Gary,andG. M.Kahn1969 "Self disclosure as an exchange process."Journalof Personalityand Social Psychol-ogy 13:59-63.

626 JOURNALOF MARRIAGEAND THE FAMILY November 1972

This content downloaded from 111.68.100.252 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 02:48:43 AMAll bj JSTOR T d C di i

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp