The Marital Satisfaction Scale: Development of a Measure for Intervention ResearchAuthor(s): Arthur J. Roach, Larry P. Frazier and Sharon R. BowdenReviewed work(s):Source: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Aug., 1981), pp. 537-546Published by: National Council on Family RelationsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/351755 .Accessed: 29/05/2012 23:04

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 ofcontent 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 toJournal of Marriage and Family.

http://www.jstor.org

The Marital Satisfaction Scale:

Development of a Measure for Intervention Research*

ARTHUR J. ROACH** Texas A. & M. University

LARRY P. FRAZIER*** Southern Arizona Mental Health Center

SHARON R. BOWDEN**** University ofArizona Student Counseling Services

This study reviews the development of the Marital Satisfaction Scale (MSS). The MSS was designed to assess one's level of satisfaction toward his or her own mar- riage. Marital satisfaction was defined as an attitude of greater or lesser favorabil- ity toward one's own marital relationship. Measurement of the perception of one's marriage by means of an attitude scale was the focus of the effort. Design objec- tives for developing the measure were to generate a new set of items, to utilize a single-item style with an easy scoring system, to guard against contamination by marital conventionalization and social desirability, and to provide items which could reflect attitudinal change likely to occur as a result of marital intervention. Research results indicate that the instrument has very high internal consistency, sufficient test-retest reliability and validity, and a low degree of contamination with social desirability.

This study is an attempt to develop a reliable and valid scale designed to measure the de- gree of favorableness of attitude the respon-

dent has toward his or her own marriage. For purposes of this study, marital satisfaction is defined as an attitude of greater or lesser fa- vorability toward one's own marital relation- ship. This study also attempts to provide an ship. It is not attempt to assess the status or quality of the marital relationship. This study also attempts to provide an administratively instrument based on a clear and consistent conception of marital satisfaction.

It is hoped that the instrument will be capable of reflecting changes in one's level of marital satisfaction which may occur in response to various types of helping inter- ventions. The helping professional typically sepks to modify behaviors, especially atti- tudes, by means of relatively brief interven- tions. There is a need for effective instruments which can assess changes in the

*Research on this paper was conducted from 1975 to 1980. Part of the research contributed by the second author, Larry P. Frazier, was presented at the 23rd annual convention of the Southwest Psychological Asso- ciation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1976. Part of the research was conducted in 1975 and 1976 as part of the second author's dissertation, and part in 1976 and 1977 as part of the third author's dissertation.

**Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas 77843.

***Southern Arizona Mental Health Center, Tucson, Arizona 85721.

****University of Arizona Student Counseling Services, Tucson, Arizona 85721.

August 1981 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 537

level of attitudes in both pretest and post- test evaluations. In marriage therapy, in par- ticular, as well as in developmentally oriented marriage communication or enhancement workshops, effectiveness may best be mea- sured in terms of change in attitude toward one's own marriage.

NEED FOR THE STUDY

Although there might seem to be a plethora of adequate instruments available as mea- sures of marital satisfaction, actually such is not the case. Straus (1969) surveyed 319 family-related instruments published prior to 1965, of which 34 would be likely to be used in marriage counseling. Of these 34, only 14 have established reliability and validity, and of these 14, only four are related conceptually to marriage satisfaction. These four deal with marital success (Bernard, 1933), marital adjustment (Bowerman, 1957; Locke and Wallace, 1959), and marital happiness (Terman, 1938). Other surveys by Bonjean et al. (1967), Lake et al. (1973), Phillips (1973), Bowerman (1964) and Cromwell et al (1976) failed to list other measures dealing with satisfaction with one's own marriage among those instruments with acceptable validity and reliability. Frazier (1976) surveyed the best known and respected sources of test information. He listed 30 separate measures which would possibly be used in marriage counseling. Only five of these tests reported adequate data on reliability or validity. How- ever, none of these measured marital satis- faction, adjustment, or happiness.

In addition to this paucity of worthwhile instruments, the related instruments which do meet the requirement of validity and reliability fall prey to the attack of conceptual soundness. Lively (1969) deemed the con- tinued use of the concepts of marital happiness, success, and adjustment to be detrimental to effective research. These concepts suggest static states, levels of achievement, or ultimate conditions, none of which is a realistic conceptualization of the interrelational dynamics of marriage. More- over, the meanings of these concepts of success, adjustment, or happiness, while related, are dissimilar.

Historically, most studies dealing with the quality of marriages have in actuality used inventories of marital adjustment rather than measures of attitude or satisfaction. The most

notable and widely used of these inventories is the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment In- ventory (1959). Locke and Wallace put the capstone on the lengthy effort to develop a suitable, yet brief, instrument for such a measure. They defined marital adjustment as accommodation of a husband and wife to each other at a given time, which suggests the measurement of a dyadic process rather than that of an individual's attitude. Experience has shown, however, that it simply is not possible to assess the state of a subject's marriage from a self-report instrument, since self-reporting is strongly contaminated with the individual's perception of the state of his marriage. One solution to this conceptual bind is to measure the perception or attitude toward the marriage relationship, rather than to attempt to measure the quality of the relationship or the dyadic adjustment.

Another weakness in traditional measures of marital adjustment, happiness, success, or satisfaction has been the problem of marital conventionalization or social desirability, the tendency of subjects to distort their responses in the direction of looking good. Edmonds (1967) and Crowne and Marlowe (1964) have signaled the presence of social desirability contamination and have seen it as a cause for serious concern.

While the presence of social desirability contamination in self-report instruments is a fact, whether or not it should be cause for concern is a moot question. Hawkins (1966) demonstrated that social desirability ac- counted for only a small part of the variance and did not, therefore, preclude the use of the Locke-Wallace scale. Murstein and Beck (1972) did not find that marital convention- alization was a major contaminating factor in assessing marital adjustment. They con- cluded that happily married couples do exaggerate their spouses' qualities, but that this overstatement does not affect the relationship of various perception scores to marital adjustment.

In spite of this disagreement regarding the ill effects of social desirability contamination, it seems appropriate to circumvent the phe- nomenon by careful construction of items which do not have a strong or easily apparent social desirability loading.

Existing measures of marital adjustment or satisfaction lack various characteristics de- sired in sound psychological tests. In this

538 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1981

respect, the Locke-Wallace scale suffers from the fact that it contains three different types of item styles and involves a complicated, weighted scoring system. From a test construction standpoint, the avoidance of such characteristics would enhance the administrability of a test. There is also a marked disparity in the weight of the items. The first item is scored up to 35 points, ap- proximately one fourth of the total possible score.

Spanier's Dyadic Adjustment Scale (1976) was an attempt to start afresh in measuring marital adjustment. Although he utilized items from all previous scales, his results seem primarily to be a revision of the Locke- Wallace scale and an improvement upon it. The four factors derived from the Spanier scale have greater conceptual clarity than those derived from the Locke-Wallace scale. Spanier's work was well done, and his instru- ment deserves greater use than is apparent from the literature. His instrument, however, by his own admission, suffers from problems of direction of wording and halo effects. Practically, from a test-taking point of view, there are six different item formats, although scoring has been simplified relative to the Locke-Wallace scale. From the point of view of attitude measurement, Spanier's instru- ment focuses heavily on estimates of fre- quency and degrees of difference. Such esti- mating may involve more cognitive and recall processes than affective or attitudinal responses.

Recently Snyder (1979) developed the Marital Satisfaction Inventory, a multidi- mensional measure which includes Edmonds' Marital Conventionalization Scale (1967). While drawing from the same item pool as the Locke-Wallace and Spanier instruments, this instrument avoids one of the difficulties of previous marriage satisfaction measures by taking a measure of social desirability directly into account. By using a profile of scale scores, the marital conventionalization scale functions as a measure of truth telling, thus affecting the clinical interpretation of the remaining scales. However, the MSI may be too lengthy for some evaluative research uses. Also, some items involve historicity and recall of events and patterns of behavior. Such factual reporting items do not contain the element of opinion or projection necessary in the assessment of attitudes. Because of this,

Snyder's MSI may be measuring something other than attitude toward one's own mar- riage. Nevertheless, Snyder's instrument is based on careful research and holds promise for the future.

Existing measures of marital quality suffer from an array of conceptual difficulties, con- tamination with social desirability, and lack of sufficient reliability and validity. The use of behavioral measures has certainly done much to offset such ills. The fact remains, however, that in most studies of effectiveness of marital intervention, present behavioral approaches are impractical. Rather than argue for the complete dismissal of these self- report instruments, it seems more practical to place greater emphasis on their careful construction and evaluation and to establish firmly their reliability and validity.

THE SCALE

Design The concept of attitude toward one's own

marriage utilized in the present study repre- sents an attempt to measure a changeable perception or readiness to respond in the individual, not an assessment of the state of the individual's marriage. For purposes of this study, marital satisfaction is defined as the perception of one's marriage along a con- tinuum of greater or lesser favorability at a given point in time. Satisfaction is by defini- tion an attitude, which like any perception, is subject to change over time, and especially in relation to significant life experiences. Considering marital satisfaction as an atti- tude is in contrast to past trends in the liter- ature which attempted to measure marital adjustment, success, or happiness as rela- tively fixed properties or behavior states.

One objective in the development of the MSS was to develop a single-factor measure of favorability of attitude toward one's marriage. The major previously established measures of marital adjustment have at- tempted to assess the dyadic relationship, have drawn from essentially the same item pool, and have yielded four or more factors. Especially, these three characteristics are found in the Locke-Wallace, Spanier, and Snyder instruments. In each of these instru- ments, there is one factor which seems related to global satisfaction with the marriage, although in some of these instruments, the

August 1981 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 539

factor comprises so few items that reliability of the measure is at risk. An objective of the present study was to focus on developing an effective measure of this single factor.

Orden and Bradburn (1968) found sep- arate clusters of items for marital satisfaction and marital tension or dissatisfaction and concluded that marital happiness is a two- dimensional structure. Their findings make it clear that a measure of marital satisfaction alone is not a sufficient predictor of marital happiness, although it is a necessary one. The present effort is geared only toward devel- oping a measure of marital satisfaction, leaving the adequate measurement of marital tensions to further research.

Since the purpose of the study was to treat marital satisfaction as an attitude, Edwards' (1957) guidelines for constructing Likert-type attitudinal scales were selected as a design model. One important design consideration affected by this selection is scale length. Increasing the number of items will increase reliability of the measure. A longer measure also allows finer discriminations where data may at least be assumed to be continuous. Increasing scale length also enables sufficient sampling of the pool of topics generally considered to be related to marital satisfac- tion. On the other hand, the feasibility of using the scale in connection with typical marital intervention efforts precludes undue length. In the development of attitude scales, the procedure outlined by Edwards is to begin with a large selection of about 70 items and to retain only those 20 or so which contribute most effectively to the performance of the total instrument.

A major set of design considerations relates to item characteristics. Attitude scale items are appropriately comprised of items which evoke affect or opinion rather than cognition. When each item in a scale evokes an affective response toward some aspect of the attitu- dinal object, the total scale cumulatively and effectively samples the attitude or affectional orientation toward the object. Traditional marital satisfaction measures have included some items which involve historical recall and estimation of amounts and frequencies of behavior. One design criterion for construc- ting the MSS was to avoid cognitive or recall items and to require that they deal with opinion toward some aspect of one's

marriage. An additional requirement was that each item have the anticipated proba- bility of evoking divided agreement and disagreement from subjects in a normal population. At the same time, following Edwards' suggestion, items eliciting extreme favorability and unfavorability would be pre- ferred to more neutral items.

Other item.-characteristic design consid- erations required that each item be capable of reflecting change between pretest and post- test usage. A test item could not reflect change if the same response were required on both the pretest and the posttest. (For ex- ample, an item which asked whether either partner had experienced an affair, if an- swered affirmatively on the first usage, could not be answered differently in a posttest situ- ation even if the respondent's attitude toward his/her marriage had changed in a positive direction.) Only where there is the possibility that the posttest response can be different from the pretest response can the test item detect attitude change between two points in time.

Another item design criterion was to select items which prevented contamination with social desirability or marital conventional- ization as much as possible. Items should not tend to evoke unreasonable responses in the subject. Attributions of perfection to the spouse or the relationship should be avoided.

An additional requirement was that the items should be fresh and not drawn from the traditional item pool used by Locke and Wallace, Spanier, and Snyder. The intent here was to emphasize the switch from marital adjustment and concern with the quality of the relationship toward the respon- (dent's attitude toward his marital relation- ship by generating new items.

Yet another design characteristic was to produce a scale which had a single-item style throughout and which would have as simple a scoring scheme as possible. Both these requirements were met by adopting the Likert-type attitude scale format.

D)evelopment In keeping with the desired design charac-

teristics outlined above, items pertaining to satisfaction with various aspects of marriage were generated. Content for these items was suggested by the literature on marriage rela-

540 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1981

tionships and by the senior author's experi- ence in marital therapy and marital enhance- ment workshops.

Seventy-three suitable items were collected and formed into an initial version of the scale, which was originally entitled The Marital Satisfaction Inventory (MSI). Response categories were: strongly agree, agree, neu- tral (undecided), disagree, and strongly disagree. Items were phrased positively (favorable toward marriage) and negatively (unfavorable toward marriage) in approxi- mately equal proportions. Three experienced judges agreed completely on the favorability or unfavorability of the items. These statements were assembled in random order, and a set of introductory instructions was supplied in order to complete the inventory. Scoring on each item ranged from 1-5, with 5 indicating the most favorable attitude toward one's marriage and 1 the least favorable attitude. For the 73 items, the maximum possible score was 395 (Roach, 1975). The development of the scale and the ensuing pilot study were the work of the senior author.

STUDIES BASED ON THE INVENTORY

The Pilot Study An initial administration of the inventory

utilized 88 volunteer subjects, ranging in age between 20 and 65, with the largest propor- tion (44 percent) being in the 30-39 age group. Two thirds of this initial group were females, and the majority (80 percent) of subjects were professionals in education. About half of these subjects (48 percent) were black. The subjects consisted in part of a group of Texas school counselors, attending their annual statewide conference, and another group of students in counselor education classes both on and off the campus of Prairie View A & M University.

Total scores of this initial study group ranged from 138 to 361. The mean was 282.46, and the standard deviation was 54.81. Eighty percent of the scores were indi- cative of satisfaction (256 or above). The results were skewed, with the majority of scores being high and indicating satisfaction.

Item analysis of the data obtained in this pilot administration indicated that all but three items (7, 16, and 43) were correlated with the total score within the .05 level of

confidence. Of these 70 significantly related items, all but 10 were related within the .01 level of confidence.

Cronbach's alpha, which is similar to KR20 as a measure of internal consistency and which considers all possible split halves, was .982. This measure provided an initial indication of very high internal consistency.

A factor analysis of the data was conducted using the 70 items surviving the item analysis. Results indicated one dominant factor ac- counting for 40.33 percent of a trace of 70.00 on a principal axis rotation. This factor had 57 items with loadings above a conservative criterion of .50. Although 15 other factors with eigenvalues above 1.0 were extracted mathematically, only two factors had three item loadings above the criterion level and another two had only two item loadings above criterion.

This initial study of the instrument indi- cated that the items constituted a single- factor scale. Of the 70 items subjected to factor analysis, all were significantly related to the single factor at the .01 level of confi- dence, with the exception of four items. Thus, including the three items failing the item analysis, only seven of the original 73 items could be considered insufficiently related to a single factor.

Results of this initial study indicated that, in general, items correlated well with the total scale, that there was a very high level of internal consistency, and that the scale involved a single factor. These findings justi- fied further study of the instrument.

The Frazier Study

A subsequent investigation of the 70-item MSI (omitting items 7, 16 and 43) was con- ducted by Frazier (1976). He employed a sample of 309 individuals, including the 88 in the previous study. The majority of the sample were young white adults in their twenties, college educated, and married 1-4 years with no children; 19 percent were black and 8 percent were Mexican-American. The majority had a family income of less than $6,000. There were 139 males and 170 fe- males included in this study.

Subjects were volunteers from a variety of settings, mostly academic, in southeast and central Texas. The largest segment consisted of graduate students and faculty from the

August 1981 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 541

Texas A & M University campus and from the Bryan-College Station area.

Item discrimination was studied on the basis of item-total score correlation. All items were significant at or beyond the .01 level of confidence, and 52 of the items had a dis- crimination index above .50. The internal- consistency reliability as calculated by Cron- bach's alpha formula was .9699, which was slightly less than in the initial study (.982), but still quite high.

Subjects who had requested feedback on their responses to the original testing were asked to retake the MSI after a period of three weeks, for the purpose of estimating test-retest reliability. Twenty subjects re- sponded a second time. The test-retest coef- ficient was .76. This coefficient is probably a conservative estimate, since some of the sub- jects took as long as seven months to respond a second time. The standard error of mea- surement based on internal consistency reli- ability was 7.01, and based on test-retest reli- ability, it was 19.49.

To determine concurrent validity of the MSI, the Marital Adjustment Test (MAT) (Locke and Wallace, 1959) was used as a criterion variable and administered at the same time as the the MSI to the 221 subjects who were not also in the pilot study. The con- current validity coefficient was .7851, a rela- tively high figure for this type of psychological measure.

In order to assess contamination of MSI scores with social desirability, 20 subjects who responded to the retesting for deter- mining test-retest reliability also responded to two measures of social desirability, the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (SD) (Crowne and Marlowe, 1964) and the Edmonds Marital Conventionalization Scale (MC) (Edmonds, 1967). The correlation between the MSI and the Marlowe-Crowne SD was .33, which is not significant. This re- sult suggests that the MSI is low on contami- nation with social desirability. This compares suitably with Hawkins' (1966) reported cor- relation between the Locke-Wallace MAT and the Marlowe-Crowne SD of .31 for hus- bands and .37 for wives. In this instance, Hawkins found that social desirability, while significantly correlated with the MAT, did not preclude the use of the MAT, since SD accounted for only a small portion of the variance.

The correlation between the MSI and the Edmonds MC scale was -.13 (sic). However, this result seems too specious to warrant any conclusions. The subsample of 20 respon- dents may have been unique in regard to marital conventionalization. Further and careful sampling would be required before supportable conclusions can be drawn. By way of comparison, Edmonds (1967) reported a correlation of .63 between his scale and the Locke-Wallace MAT.

To check for sex bias in responses, an analysis of variance was calculated. There was no sex difference for scores on the MSI (F ratio = 0.000, df = 1,307, p = 1.000).

In a factor analysis of the MSI results, only one factor, which accounted for 36 percent of the variance, was significant. Although 14 factors with an eigenivalue of 1.0 were ex- tracted, only this one had item loadings of .5 or better, the criterion used by Kimmel and van der Veen (1974) in their factor analysis of the MAT.

The Bowden Studv

A third study was conducted by Bowden (1977) to determine the validity of the MSI. In order to assess concurrent validity, cri- terion groups of satisfied and dissatisfied couples were identified by peer ratings and by professional marriage counselors. Thirty married couples (15 satisfied and 15 dissat- isfied) volunteered and completed the instru- ments involved. Satisfied couples were mar- ried for at least one year, and dissatisfied couples were not divorced for more than one year. The sample was predominantly 20-39 years of age, white, college educated, with family incomes beyond $8,000 per year, while 30 percent had incomes of $20,000 or more per year. Subjects in this study consisted of couples in therapy with private practitioners in Austin and College Station, Texas, and of volunteer couples in the same geographic location. None of these couples had partici- pated in the pilot or Frazier studies.

The mean satisfaction score for the satis- fied group was 306.27 with a standard deviation of 22.33. The dissatisfied group had a mean score of 221.30 with a standard devi- ation of 30.91. The t-test for difference between means was significant (t = 112.204, df' = 58, p < .0001).

A correlation of MSI scores and scores on the Marriage Problem Checklist (MPC), an

542 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1981

instrument for identifying marital problems (Roach, 1977), was calculated as a measure of discriminant validity. Mean scores on the MPC were 4.10 for the satisfied group and 14.17 for the dissatisfied. Standard devi- ations were 3.16 and 5.35, respectively. The correlation coefficient was -.73. Thus, more satisfied couples reported fewer problems, and dissatisfied couples reported more problems.

The Thompson Study After an instrument is developed and its

reliability and validity are established, its research practicality must also be demon- strated. The MSI was designed to measure change in marital satisfaction as a result of an intervention such as marital therapy or a marriage communication workshop. One in- dication of its proper development should be that it will function appropriately when used as intended.

Thompson (1978) used the original 73-item MSI to study change in the level of marital satisfaction related to a sex therapy treatment program. The principle component of the treatment utilized a weekend sex therapy workshop format with nine couples. Subjects in this study consisted of volunteers in Corpus Christi, Texas. They were predominantly Anglo-American, well educated and middle class, and ranged in age from 22 to 50 years of age.

Thompson reported means and standard deviations for MSI scores as follows: pretest, M = 277.39, SD - 32.47; posttest M = 301.44, SD = 30.83; post-posttest M =

295.89, SD = 31.37. MSI scores showed sig- nificant change between the pretests and posttests, which were administered three weeks apart (t = -2.86, df = 17, p<.01). When a post-posttest was conducted eight weeks later, there was no significant differ- ence between MSI scores on the two posttests (t = .76, df= 17, n.s.). However, there continued to be a difference between the pretest and post-posttest measures of marital satisfaction (t = -2.39, df= 17, p < .05). These results indicate that the MSI can reflect the types of attitudinal change likely to occur in a relatively brief marital interven- tion, while not reflecting significant change during a period of nonintervention.

Revised Forms

As part of his reliability study, Frazier (1976) studied the internal consistency of the MSI, eliminating 20 items with item-whole score correlations of less than .50. Cron- bach's alpha for this short form was .9713, which was higher than for the total 73-item instrument. An editorial check of these items with whole-score correlations of less than .50 indicated that they did indeed fail to fit the same conceptual pattern of items correlating with the total score beyond .50. In the revised form, these items have been eliminated. Four other items have been eliminated, three because they were quite similar to others, and one because it seemed inconsistent with the definition of marital satisfaction as an indi- vidual perception. In addition, some of the items have been slightly edited for greater clarity and brevity. This shorter form is now under study to determine its reliability and validity. However, the preceding research on which it is based strongly suggests that it is at least of the same quality as its parent instru- ment.

Frazier's study (1976) indicated that an even briefer version of the scale would still retain a high degree of the scale characteris- tics. Edwards (1957) suggests that a scale length of approximately 20 items is adequate. Research with an even shorter form, Marital Satisfaction Scale, Form B, involving only the 20 items with the highest item-whole score correlations is also underway. Since this is the scale length suggested by Edwards, it is hoped that this form will have the greatest practicability as a research measure.

TITLE CHANGE

Snyder's article introducing his Marital Satisfaction Inventory (1979) appeared in print while the present report was being pre- pared. Up to that point, the instrument being developed in the present study bore the same title as Snyder's instrument. Although ap- propriate copyright protection extended back to 1975, the title of the revised, shorter form of the scale developed in the present research has been changed to avoid needless confu- sion. As a result, the research studies involved in developing the instrument now called the Marital Satisfaction Scale have potentially confusing references to the

August 1981 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 543

Marital Satisfaction Inventory in their titles. It should be made clear that these references are to the parent instrument of the Marital Satisfaction Scale (MSS) and not to Snyder's instrument.

Items retained in the revised, shorter form, now entitled the Marital Satisfaction Scale, are presented in Table 1. Coefficients of correlation with the whole-scale scores of the original, 73-item scale, which provided the research base for their retention, are also included in the table.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

An instrument in the form of a Likert-type attitudinal scale was developed for the purpose of assessing marital satisfaction. Originally entitled the Marital Satisfaction Inventory, it was administered to a total of 369 subjects. Items had very high discrimin- ation, and the instrument proved to be of sufficient reliability and of high internal con- sistency. The original items were found to constitute a single-factor scale which possesses

TABLE 1. WHOLE-SCORE CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS IN THE MARITAL SATISFACTION SCALE

Item Correlationa

1. I know what my spouse expects of me in our marriage. .518 2. My spouse could make things easier for me if he/she cared to. ..582 3. 1 worry a lot about my marriage. .687 4. If I could start over again, I would marry someone other than my present spouse. .662 5. I can always trust my spouse. .596 6. My life would seem empty without my marriage. .522 7. My marriage is too confining to suit me. .661 8. I feel that I am "in a rut" in my marriage. .714 9. I know where I stand with my spouse. .676

10. My marriage has a bad effect on my health. .633 11. I become upset, angry, or irritable because of things that occur in my marriage. .550 12. I feel competent and fully able to handle my marriage. .649 13. My present marriage is not one I would wish to remain in permanently. .622 14. I expect my marriage to give me increasing satisfaction the longer it continues. .559 15. I get discouraged trying to make my marriage work out. .747 16. I consider my marital situation to be as pleasant as it should be. .754 17. My marriage gives me more real personal satisfaction than anything else I do. .638 18. I think my marriage gets more difficult for me each year. .688 19. My spouse gets me badly flustered and jittery. .710 20. My spouse gives me sufficient opportunity to express my opinions. .626 21. I have made a success of my marriage so far. .717 22. My spouse regards me as an equal. .571 23. I must look outside my marriage for those things that make life worthwhile and interesting. .630 24. My spouse inspires me to do my best work. .635 25. My marriage has "smothered" my personality. .613 26. The future of my marriage looks promising to me. .816 27. I am really interested in my spouse. .714 28. I get along well with my spouse. .769 29. I am afraid of losing my spouse through divorce. .566 30. My spouse makes unfair demands on my free time. .565 31. My spouse seems unreasonable in his/her dealings with me. .613 32. My marriage helps me toward the goals I have set for myself. .718 33. My spouse is willing to make helpful improvements in our relationship. .688 34. My marriage suffers from disagreement concerning matters of recreation. .511 35. Demonstrations of affection by me and my spouse are mutually acceptable. .606 36. An unhappy sexual relationship is a drawback in my marriage. .522 37. My spouse and I agree on what is right and proper conduct. .513 38. My spouse and I do not share the same philosophy of life. .569 39. My spouse and I enjoy several mutually satisfying outside interests together. .535 40. I sometimes wish I had not married my present spouse. .676 41. My present marriage is definitely unhappy. .572 42. I look forward to sexual activity with my spouse with pleasant anticipation. .605 43. My spouse lacks respect for me. .691 44. I have definite difficulty confiding in my spouse. .644 45. Most of the time my spouse understands the way I feel. .638 46. My spouse does not listen to what I have to say. .608 47. I frequently enjoy pleasant conversations with my spouse. .559 48. I am definitely satisfied with my marriage. .792

altem score correlations are with whole scores on the original 73-item MSI for 309 subjects in the Frazier study. All correlations are significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.

544 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1981

both concurrent and discriminant validity. These findings indicate that the scale has merit and deserves further investigation.

A shorter, revised form of the scale was developed based on research involving the original, 73-item scale. The resulting 48-item scale is now entitled the Marital Satisfaction Scale.

Additional study is now being devoted to further establishing the reliability and va- lidity of the instrument with different popu- lation samples, especially since the validity studies of the instrument to date have been with nonrandom samples. Further study of validity and of possible distortion by social desirability is also being pursued, and a number of correlational studies utilizing the revised instrument are nearing completion.

An even briefer scale would be more de- sirable and practical in field situations. Development of an even shorter form (Form B) is currently underway.

REFERENCES

Bernard, J. 1933 "An instrument for measurement of success in

marriage." Publication of the American Socio- logical Society 27 (May):94-106.

Bonjean, C. N., R. J. Hill, and S. D. McLemore 1967 Sociological Measurement: An Inventory of

Scales and Indices. San Francisco:Chandler Publishing Company.

Bowerman, C. E. 1957 "Adjustment in marriage: Overall and in

specific areas." Sociology and Social Research 42 (March-April):257-263.

1964 "Prediction studies." Pp. 215-246 in H. T. Christensen (Ed.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family. Chicago: Rand McNally and Com- pany.

Bowden, S. R. 1977 An Assessment of the Validity of the Marital

Satisfaction Inventory. Doctoral dissertation, Texas A & M University. Dissertation Ab- stracts International, 38, 4671 A. (University Microfilms No. 77-32141, 74.)

Cromwell, R. E., D. H. Olson, and D. G. Fournier 1976 "Tools and techniques for diagnosis and eval-

uation in marital and family therapy." Family Process 15 (March):1-32.

Crowne, D., and D. Marlowe 1964 The Approval Motive: Studies in Evaluative

Dependence. New York:John Wiley and Sons.

Edmonds, V. H. 1967 "Marital conventionalization: Definition and

measurement." Journal of Marriage and the Family 29 (November):681-688.

Edwards, A. L. 1957 Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction.

New York:Appleton-Century Crofts. Frazier, L. P.

1976 An Evaluation of the Marital Satisfaction In- ventory. Doctoral dissertation, Texas A & M University. Dissertation Abstracts Interna- tional, 37, 5062 A. (University Microfilms No. 77-02620, 61.)

Hawkins, J. L. 1966 "The Locke marital adjustment test and social

desirability." Journal of Marriage and the Fam- ily 28 (May):193-195.

Kimmel, D., and F. van der Veen 1974 "Factors of marital adjustment in Locke's

Marital Adjustment Test." Journal of Mar- riage and the Family 36 (February):57-63.

Lake, D. G., M. B. Miles, and R. B. Earle 1973 Measuring Human Behavior. New York:

Teachers College Press. Lively, E. L.

1969 "Toward a concept clarification: The case of marital interaction." Journal of Marriage and the Family 31 (February):108-114.

Locke, H. J., and K. M. Wallace 1959 "Short marital-adjustment and prediction tests:

Their reliability and validity." Marriage and Family Living 21 (August):251-255.

Murstein, B. I., and G. D. Beck 1972 "Person perception, marriage adjustment, and

social desirability." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 39 (3):396-403.

Orden, S. R., and N. A. Bradburn 1968 "Dimensions of marriage happiness." Ameri-

can Journal of Sociology 73 (May):715-731. Phillips, C.

1973 "Some useful tests for marriage counseling." The Family Coordinator 22 (January):43-53.

Roach, A. J. 1975 "The Marital Satisfaction Inventory." Pp. 45-

50 in L. P. Frazier, An Evaluation of the Mari- tal Satisfaction Inventory. Doctoral disserta- tion, Texas A & M University, 1976. Disserta- tion Abstracts International, 1976, 37, 5062 A. (University Microfilms No. 77-02620, 61.)

1977 "Marriage Problem Checklist." Pp. 62-63 in S. R. Bowden, An Assessment of the Validity of the Marital Satisfaction Inventory. Doctoral dissertation, Texas A & M University, 1977. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, 4671 A. (University Microfilms No. 77-32141, 74.)

Snyder, D. K. 1979 "Multidimensional assessment of marital satis-

faction." Journal of Marriage and the Family 41 (November):813-823.

Spanier, G. B. 1976 "Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for

assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads." Journal of Marriage and the Family 38 (February):15-38.

August 1981 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 545

Straus, M. H. 1969 Family Measurement Techniques. Minneapo-

lis:University of Minnesota Press. Terman, L. M.

1938 Psychological Factors in Marital Happiness. New York:McGraw-Hill.

Thompson, R. R. 1978 "Effects of a sex therapy treatment program on

couple relationships." Unpublished master's thesis, Texas A & I University, Kingsville.

SAVE THESE DATES November 18-21, 1981

Philadelphia, Pa.

Seventh NASW

National Professional

Symposium

Social Work Practice in a Turbulent World

IN SW I

For information write: Symposium National Association of Social Workers Suite 600 1425 H St., NW. Washington, D. C. 20005

546 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1981