This study investigates how self-construals (autonomy, relatedness, and autonomous-relatedness) and conflict resolution styles predict marital satisfaction and adjustment in a Turkish sample using structural equation modeling (SEM). A total of 1,037 married individuals (68.8% women) participated in the study. Results revealed that self-construals significantly associated with conflict resolution styles, which in turn were associated with marital outcomes. Specifically, autonomous-related self-construal was associated with increased use of constructive conflict strategies and decreased use of destructive or passive strategies (e.g., withdrawal, submission). These patterns were consistent across gender, though effect sizes varied. Notably, passive strategies such as withdrawal (in men) and submission (in women) were significantly negatively associated with marital adjustment and satisfaction. Conversely, constructive conflict resolution styles and autonomous-related self-construal have been found to be positively associated with marital quality. The model accounted for 75.9% of the variance in marital satisfaction for women and 73.2% for men. The findings support the notion that culturally grounded self-construals shape interpersonal behavior in intimate relationships and highlight the adaptive value of autonomous-relatedness in collectivistic-modernizing societies. These results have practical implications for culturally sensitive couple interventions. Future research should explore these dynamics using dyadic and longitudinal data to clarify causal pathways.
AkanM.ÜnalS.GürerH. (2023). Is marital satisfaction different in women and men?Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 44, 513–538. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.1323885
2.
BeckerR. (2022). Gender and survey participation: An event history analysis of the gender effects of survey participation in a probability-based multi-wave panel study with a sequential mixed-mode design. Methods, Data, Analyses, 16(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2021.08
3.
BurgessE. W.LockeH. J.ThomesM. M. (1963). The family from institution to companionship (3rd ed., p. 582). American Book Company.
4.
BülbülK.OdaciH.TürkkanT. (2024). Examination of the relationship between conflict resolution styles and marital satisfaction: The mediating role of emotion regulation difficulties. Journal of Family Social Work, 27(3–4), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10522158.2024.2420928
5.
CrawfordD. K.BodineR. J. (1996). Conflict resolution education: A guide to implementing programs in schools, youth-serving organizations, and community and juvenile justice settings. ABD: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, US Department of Justice.
6.
DupuisH. E.GirmeY. U.OverallN. C.CrossE. J.SibleyC. G. (2025) Changes in well-being and relationship satisfaction in the years before and after marriage in a sample of New Zealand adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 42(4), 1079–1101. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075251315199
7.
EsplinC. R.RasmussenB. D.HatchS. G.HawkinsA. J.BraithwaiteS. R. (2024). Neuroticism and relationship quality: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 128(3), 594–610. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000463
GottmanJ. M.KrokoffL. J. (1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57(1), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.57.1.47
10.
GottmanJ. M.SilverN. (2015). The seven principles for making marriage work: A practical guide from the country’s foremost relationship expert (2nd ed.). Harmony Books.
11.
GrauI.MikettaL.EbbelerC.BanseR. (2025). Cultural differences in correlations with marital satisfaction: The vulnerability-stress-adaptation model in 65 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 56(5), 528–557. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221251323216
12.
Gunay-OgeR.OshioA.IsikliS. (2023). Culture and individualistic self-construal moderate the relationships between childhood experiences and narcissistic personality psychopathology level in adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 201, Article 111948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111948
13.
HeymanR. E.SayersS. L.BellackA. S. (1994). Global marital satisfaction versus marital adjustment: An empirical comparison of three measures. Journal of Family Psychology, 8(4), 432–446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.8.4.432
14.
HoulgateL. D. (2017). Philosophy, law and the family. Springer International Publishing AG.
İnceoğluF.ZaymanE. P. (2023). Moderator effect of chronic disease on the relationship between marriage adjustment and satisfaction in married couples. European Journal of Therapeutics, 29(3), 459–468. https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1722
17.
ImamoğluE. O.Karakitapoğlu-AygünZ. (2007). Relatedness of identities and emotional closeness with parents across and within cultures. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 10(3), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2007.00221.x
18.
KağıtçıbaşıÇ. (1996a). Family and human development across cultures: A view from the other side. Psychology Press.
19.
KağıtçıbaşıÇ. (1996b). Autonomous-related self: A new synthesis. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 11(37), 36–43.
20.
KlineR. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford publications.
21.
KublayD.OktanV. (2015). Marital adjustment: The examination in terms of value preferences and subjective happiness. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 5(44), 25–35.
22.
KurdekL. A. (1994). Conflict resolution styles in gay, lesbian, heterosexual nonparent, and heterosexual parent couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 56(3), 705–722. https://doi.org/10.2307/352880
23.
LeaseS. H.MontesS. H.BaggettL. R.SawyerR. J.Fleming-NorwoodK. M.HamptonA. B.BoyrazG. (2013). A cross-cultural exploration of masculinity and relationships in men from Turkey, Norway, and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(1), 84–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111432293
24.
MadduxW. W.BrewerM. B. (2005). Gender differences in the relational and collective bases for trust. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302050510
25.
MartinsL. B.MarengoL. A. S.CasalecchiJ. G. S.de Almeida FigueiredoM. J.Silva JúniorM. D. (2023). A systematic review of the relationship between marital satisfaction and adult’s attachment styles: An evolutionary and cross-cultural perspective. Trends in Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-023-00325-4
26.
MentserS.SagivL. (2025). Cultural and personal values interact to predict divorce. Communications Psychology, 3(1), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-025-00185-x
PriyadharshiniS.GopalanR. T. (2020). Marital adjustment, love, personal intimacy, personality, dyadic coping and spirituality on marital stability. Asian Journal of Advanced Research and Reports, 7(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajarr/2019/v7i430186
29.
RoblesT. F.SlatcherR. B.TrombelloJ. M.McGinnM. M. (2014). Marital quality and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), 140–187. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031859
30.
SchumackerR. E.LomaxR. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.
31.
ŞenerA.TerzioğluG. (2008). Study on some socio-economic and demographic variables and communication effect on the marital adjustment. Sosyal Politika Çalışmaları Dergisi, 13(13), 7–20. https://doi.org/10.21560/spcd.04987
32.
SingelisT. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 580–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294205014
33.
SmithC. G. (1966). A comparative analysis of some conditions and consequences of intra-organizational conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(4), 504–529. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391573
34.
SoyluY.KağnıcıD. Y. (2015). Predicting marital adjustment according to empathic tendency, communication and conflict resolution styles. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 5(43), 44–54.
35.
SpanierG. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/350547
36.
SunarD.FişekG. O. (2005). Contemporary Turkish families. In GielenU.RoopnarineJ. (Eds.), Families in global perspective (pp. 169–183). ABD: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson.
37.
TaylorS. E.KleinL. C.LewisB. P.GruenewaldT. L.GurungR. A.UpdegraffJ. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychological Review, 107(3), 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.107.3.411
38.
TehraniH. D.YaminiS. (2020). Personality traits and conflict resolution styles: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 157, Article 109794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109794
39.
TezerE. (1994). The effects of conflicts between spouses and various demographic variables on marital satisfaction: A study on couples where the wife is employed and not employed. Psikiyatri, Psikoloji ve Psikofarmakoloji Dergisi, 2(3), 209–217.
40.
TezerE. (1996). Satisfaction derived from the marital relationship: The marital life scale. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 2(7), 1–7.
41.
Tutarel KışlakŞ. (1999). Reliability and validity study of the marital adjustment scale. Psikiyatri Psikoloji Psikofarmakoloji Dergisi, 7(1), 50–57.
42.
ÜnalÖ.AkgünS. (2022). Relationship of conflict resolution styles in marriage with marital adjustment and satisfaction. Current Approaches in Psychiatry, 14(3), 322–330. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1016806
43.
VignolesV. L.OweE.BeckerM.SmithP. B.EasterbrookM. J.BrownR.BondM. H. (2016). Beyond the ‘east–west’dichotomy: Global variation in cultural models of selfhood. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(8), 966–1000. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000175
44.
YaminiS.FousianiK.Dabiriyan TehraniH.WisseB. (2025). Culture and conflict management strategy: The mediating role of instrumental concerns. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 56(3), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221241312414
45.
ZhangQCaoH. (2024). Relationships between dyadic coping, marital adjustment, and post-traumatic growth in patients with maintenance hemodialysis patients and their spouses. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1487355. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1487355
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
