Marital and life satisfaction in Eastern Himalayan Foothills: Role of partner responsiveness

Abstract

Perceived Partner Responsiveness (PPR) is vital in establishing a sense of well-being within marital relationships. However, the existing corpus of research primarily relies on Western samples, thus limiting its generalizability. Therefore, the current study, focusing on 152 couples from Northeast India, explores the role of PPR in explaining the relationship between marital and life satisfaction through the lens of interpersonal flourishing and psychological needs fulfilment. Simultaneously, employing the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model extended to Mediation (APIMeM), we analyse the mediating role of PPR, uncovering significant actor effects. Our analysis considers covariates such as marital duration, income, number of children, family structure, and positive affect. The mediation results are explained under the framework that PPR is essential for fulfilling psychological needs and allowing for individual thriving. Consequently, the study’s findings underscore the importance of prioritising PPR in relationship interventions. Tailored strategies should guide couples in aligning their life and marital satisfaction goals to bolster individual well-being.

Keywords

Actor-partner interdependence model dyadic analysis life satisfaction Indian married couples marital satisfaction mediation perceived partner responsiveness

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman

Kenny

D. A.

(2016). APIMPower: An interactive tool for actor-partner interdependence model power analysis. [Computer software]. https://robert-a-ackerman.shinyapps.io/apimpower/

Aggarwal

Raval

V. V.

Sathiyaseelan

Trevethan

Luebbe

A. M.

(2022). Scripts about happiness among urban families in South India. Journal of Happiness Studies, 23(5), 2059–2082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-021-00485-z

Allendorf

(2012). Marital quality from a rural Indian context in comparative perspective. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 43(4), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.43.4.527

Allendorf

(2013). Schemas of marital change: From arranged marriages to eloping for love. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 75(2), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12003

Allendorf

Ghimire

D. J.

(2013). Determinants of marital quality in an arranged marriage society. Social Science Research, 42(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.09.002

Bar-Kalifa

Hen-Weissberg

Rafaeli

(2015). Perceived partner responsiveness mediates the association between social anxiety and relationship satisfaction in committed couples. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 34(7), 587–610. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2015.34.7.587

Barman

J. D.

Maheshwari

Varma

(2022). The conflicts and conflict management in stable middle-class marriages: An Indian perspective. The Family Journal, 106648072211242. https://doi.org/10.1177/10664807221124231

Baron

R. M.

Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Whisman

M. A.

Uebelacker

L. A.

(2013). Prospective associations between marital adjustment and life satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 20(4), 728–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12011

10.

Bejanyan

Marshall

T. C.

Ferenczi

(2015). Associations of collectivism with relationship commitment, passion, and mate preferences: Opposing roles of parental influence and family allocentrism. PLoS One, 10(2), e0117374. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117374

11.

Borooah

(2021). Subjective well-being: Happiness and life satisfaction in India and South Africa [MPRA paper]. University Library of Munich. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pra:mprapa:112985

12.

Bühler

J. L.

Weidmann

Kumashiro

Grob

(2019). Does Michelangelo care about age? An adult life-span perspective on the Michelangelo phenomenon. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(4), 1392–1412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518766698

13.

Busby

D. M.

Christensen

Crane

D. R.

Larson

J. H.

(1995). A revision of the dyadic adjustment scale for use with distressed and nondistressed couples: Construct hierarchy and multidimensional scales. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21(3), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.1995.tb00163.x

14.

Cao

Fine

Fang

Zhou

(2019). Chinese adult children’s perceived parents’ satisfaction with adult children’s marriage, in-law relationship quality, and adult children’s marital satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(4), 1098–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518755319

15.

Chauhan

Sekher

T. V.

(2023). Early marriage and marital satisfaction among young married men in rural Uttar Pradesh, India. BMC Research Notes, 16(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-023-06271-9

16.

Coutts

J. J.

Hayes

A. F.

Jiang

(2019). Easy statistical mediation analysis with distinguishable dyadic data. Journal of Communication, 69(6), 612–649. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz034

17.

Diener

Emmons

R. A.

Larsen

R. J.

Griffin

(1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

18.

Diener

Wirtz

Tov

Kim-Prieto

Choi

D.-w.

Oishi

Biswas-Diener

(2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y

19.

Dobrowolska

Groyecka-Bernard

Sorokowski

Randall

A. K.

Hilpert

Ahmadi

Alghraibeh

A. M.

Aryeetey

Bertoni

Bettache

Błażejewska

Bodenmann

Bortolini

T. S.

Bosc

Butovskaya

Castro

F. N.

Cetinkaya

Cunha

David

Sorokowska

(2020). Global perspective on marital satisfaction. Sustainability, 12(21), 8817. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218817

20.

Duggal

Sriram

Jain

(2018). Marriage counsellors’ reflections on the counselling process in family courts in India. Psychological Studies, 63(4), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0460-z

21.

Extremera

Rey

(2018). Core self-evaluations are associated with judgments of satisfaction with life via positive but not negative affect. Personality and Individual Differences, 130(2018), 112–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.054

22.

Feeney

B. C.

Collins

N. L.

(2015). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 19(2), 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314544222

23.

Gadassi

Bar-Nahum

L. E.

Newhouse

Anderson

Heiman

J. R.

Rafaeli

Janssen

(2016). Perceived partner responsiveness mediates the association between sexual and marital satisfaction: A daily diary study in newlywed couples. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0448-2

24.

Ghimire

Baral

B. K.

Karmacharya

Callahan

Mishra

S. R.

(2018). Life satisfaction among elderly patients in Nepal: Associations with nutritional and mental well-being. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16(1), 118. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0947-2

25.

Glass

Simon

R. W.

Andersson

M. A.

(2016). Parenthood and happiness: Effects of work-family reconciliation policies in 22 OECD countries. AJS; American journal of sociology, 122(3), 886–929. https://doi.org/10.1086/688892

26.

Grover

Helliwell

J. F.

(2019). How’s life at home? New evidence on marriage and the set point for happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 20(2), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9941-3

27.

Indumathy

Kanth

(2022). Communication pattern, dyadic adjustment, and parenting practices among married couples in India: Mediating role of dyadic coping. Journal of Family Issues, 43(4), 894–922. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X21995873

28.

Itzchakov

Reis

H. T.

Weinstein

(2022). How to foster perceived partner responsiveness: High-quality listening is key. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 16(1), e12648. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12648

29.

Itzchakov

Weinstein

Saluk

Amar

(2023). Connection heals wounds: Feeling listened to reduces speakers’ loneliness following a social rejection disclosure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 49(8), 1273–1294. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221100369

30.

Joshanloo

(2023). Thirteen years of subjective well-being: Within-person association between positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-023-01223-7

31.

Kallampally

G. A.

Oakes

K. E.

Lyons

H. Z.

Greer

J. M.

Gillespie

C. K.

(2008). Gender, psychological resilience, acculturation and spirituality as predictors of Asian Indian American marital satisfaction. Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health, 10(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1300/J515v10n01_04

32.

Kapelle

Nutz

Tisch

Schechtl

Lersch

P. M.

Struffolino

(2022). My wealth your life satisfaction? Sole and joint wealth ownership and life satisfaction in marriage. European Journal of Population, 38(4), 811–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-022-09630-7

33.

Kenny

D. A.

(2015). An interactive tool for testing distinguishability and nonindependence in dyadic data. [Computer software]. https://davidakenny.shinyapps.io/Dingy/

34.

Kenny

D. A.

Kashy

D. A.

Cook

W. L.

(2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Press.

35.

Kumar

R. M.

Singh

R. M.

(2024). Couple identity in Indian arranged marriages: Perceived partner responsiveness as the mediator of attachment styles and couple identity. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 13(2), 143–155. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000220

36.

Lantagne

Furman

(2017). Romantic relationship development: The interplay between age and relationship length. Developmental Psychology, 53(9), 1738–1749. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000363

37.

Ledermann

Macho

Kenny

D. A.

(2011). Assessing mediation in dyadic data using the actor-partner interdependence model. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(4), 595–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2011.607099

38.

Lemay

E. P.

Jr. Clark

M. S.

(2008). How the head liberates the heart: Projection of communal responsiveness guides relationship promotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 647–671. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.647

39.

Markus

H. R.

Kitayama

(1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224

40.

Molero

Shaver

P. R.

Fernández

Recio

(2017). Attachment insecurities, life satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction from a dyadic perspective: The role of positive and negative affect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47(3), 337–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2276

41.

Munn

S. L.

Chaudhuri

(2016). Work-life balance: A cross-cultural review of dual-earner couples in India and the United States. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422315616342

42.

Nagargoje

V. P.

James

K. S.

Muhammad

(2022). Moderation of marital status and living arrangements in the relationship between social participation and life satisfaction among older Indian adults. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 20604. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25202-5

43.

Neff

L. A.

Karney

B. R.

(2005). Gender differences in social support: A question of skill or responsiveness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(1), 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.79

44.

Oishi

Koo

Akimoto

(2008). Culture, interpersonal perceptions, and happiness in social interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311198

45.

Onyishi

E. I.

Sorokowski

Sorokowska

Pipitone

R. N.

(2012). Children and marital satisfaction in a non-Western sample: Having more children increases marital satisfaction among the Igbo people of Nigeria. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(6), 771–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.06.005

46.

Refoua

Rafaeli

(2023). Responsive support: A matter of psychological need fulfillment. Current Opinion in Psychology, 54(2023), 101691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101691

47.

Reifman

(2020, June). A gentle introduction to preliminary distinguishability testing in APIM. Relationship Research News Official News of the International Association for Relationship Research, 19(2). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341804230_A_Gentle_Introduction_to_Preliminary_Distinguishability_Testing_in_APIM

48.

Reis

H. T.

Crasta

Rogge

R. D.

Maniaci

M. R.

Carmichael

C. L.

(2017). Perceived partner responsiveness scale (PPRS). In The sourcebook of listening research (pp. 516–521). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119102991.ch57

49.

Reis

H. T.

Gable

S. L.

(2015). Responsiveness. Current Opinion in Psychology, 1(2015), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.01.001

50.

Rice

T. M.

Kumashiro

Arriaga

X. B.

(2020). Mind the gap: Perceived partner responsiveness as a bridge between general and partner-specific attachment security. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(19), 7178. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197178

51.

Rusbult

C. E.

Finkel

E. J.

Kumashiro

(2009). The Michelangelo phenomenon. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(6), 305–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01657.x

52.

Ryff

C. D.

Singer

(2000). Interpersonal flourishing: A positive health agenda for the new millennium. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0401_4

53.

Samanta

(2019). The joint family and its discontents: Interrogating ambivalence in intergenerational relationships. Asian Population Studies, 15(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441730.2018.1560659

54.

Sandhya

(2009). The social context of marital happiness in urban Indian couples: Interplay of intimacy and conflict. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 35(1), 74–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2008.00103.x

55.

Selcuk

Gunaydin

(2023). Responsiveness in cultural-ecological context. Current Opinion in Psychology, 52(2023), 101610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101610

56.

Selcuk

Gunaydin

Ong

A. D.

Almeida

D. M.

(2016). Does partner responsiveness predict hedonic and eudaimonic well‐being? A 10‐year longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12272

57.

Shneiderman

Turin

(2006). Seeking the tribe: Ethnopolitics in Darjeeling and Sikkim. Himal Southasian, 18(5), 54–58. https://doi.org/10.17613/ne6q-jg32

58.

Sim

K. I.

Ascigil

Edelstein

R. S.

Lee

(2023). Cross-cultural differences in supportive responses to positive event disclosure. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 19(2), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2023.2169629

59.

Stanley

S. M.

Ragan

E. P.

Rhoades

G. K.

Markman

H. J.

(2012). Examining changes in relationship adjustment and life satisfaction in marriage. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 26(1), 165–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026759

60.

Subba

T. B.

(1989). Dynamics of a hill society: The Nepalis in Darjeeling and Sikkim Himalayas. Mittal Publications.

61.

Tasfiliz

Selcuk

Gunaydin

Slatcher

R. B.

Corriero

E. F.

Ong

A. D.

(2018). Patterns of perceived partner responsiveness and well-being in Japan and the United States. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 32(3), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000378

62.

Thadathil

Sriram

(2020). Divorce, families and adolescents in India: A review of research. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 61(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2019.1586226

63.

Thoits

P. A.

(2011). Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510395592

64.

TLLLF . (2018). How India perceives mental health (TLLLF 2018 national survey report (pp. 1–20). LiveLoveLaugh foundation. https://cdn.thelivelovelaughfoundation.org/the_live_love_laugh/uploads/media/source/hlUDEb-TLLLF_2018_Report_How_India_Perceives_Mental_Health.pdf

65.

Trivers

R. L.

(1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.1086/406755

66.

Verhofstadt

L. L.

Buysse

Ickes

(2007). Social support in couples: An examination of gender differences using self-report and observational methods. Sex Roles, 57(3–4), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9257-6

67.

Wellcome Global Monitor . (2021). Views on mental health and the role of science in understanding and addressing problems (pp. 8–12). Wellcome. Wellcome Global Monitor 2020: Mental Health. https://wellcome.org/reports/wellcome-global-monitor-mental-health/2020/chapter-1-views-on-mental-health-and-the-role-of-science-in-understanding-and-addressing-problems

68.

D. C.

Kim

H. S.

Collins

N. L.

(2021). Perceived responsiveness across cultures: The role of cultural fit in social support use. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(9), e12634. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12634

69.

Yeung

W.-J. J.

Desai

Jones

G. W.

(2018). Families in Southeast and South Asia. Annual Review of Sociology, 44(1), 469–495. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041124

70.

Zeifman

Hazan

(2008). Pair bonds as attachments: Reevaluating the evidence. In Cassidy

Shaver

P. R.

(Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 436–455). The Guilford Press.

71.

Zhou

Lin

(2022). Mindfulness, attachment, and relationship satisfaction among heterosexual college student couples: An actor-partner interdependence model analysis. Current Psychology, 41(9), 5771–5780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01081-9

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.

0.00 MB

0.41 MB