Relationship education (RE) interventions improve relationship quality and distress; yet, little is known about the origins of positive gains derived from RE. Couples identified benefits from the group format of RE; however, the perspective of facilitators is neglected. Therefore, the current investigation included two focus groups (N = 9) with RE facilitators from one federal RE program for low-income couples. Five themes emerged from the phenomenological analysis including (a) therapeutic factors of groups, (b) participant attributes, (c) stress, (d) insight/awareness, and (e) program attributes. Applications of RE facilitator experiences, specifically group factors observed, may inform RE facilitator training, intervention, and implementation.
AmbroseS. A.BridgesM. W.DiPietroM.LovetteM. C.NormanM. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
2.
BarkleyE. F. (2010). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
3.
BlanchardV.HawkinsA.BaldwinS.FawcettE. (2009). Investigating the effects of marriage and relationship education on couples’ communication skills: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 203–214.
4.
BlighD. A. (2000). What’s the use of lectures?New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.
5.
BradfordA.Adler-BaederF.KetringS.SmithT. (2012). The role of participant-facilitator demographic match in couple and relationship education. Family Relations, 61, 51–64.
6.
BradfordA.HawkinsA.AckerJ. (2015). If we build it, they will come: Exploring policy and practice implications of public support for couple and relationship education for lower income and relationally distressed couples. Family Process, 54, 1–16. doi:10.1111/famp.12151
7.
CarlsonR. G.BardenS. M.DaireA. P.GreeneJ. (2014). Influence of relationship education on relationship satisfaction for low-income couples. Journal of Counseling and Development, 92, 418–427.
8.
CarlsonR. G.DaireA.BaiH. (2014). Examining relationship satisfaction and individual distress for low-to-moderate income couples in relationship education. The Family Journal, 22, 282–291.
9.
CarlsonR. G.GuttierrezD.DaireA.HallK. (2014). Does the frequency of speaker-listener technique use influence relationship satisfaction?Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 24, 25–29.
10.
CarlsonR. G.RappleyeaD. L.DaireA. P.HarrisS. M.LiuX. (2017). The effectiveness of couple and individual relationship education: Distress as a moderator. Family Process, 56, 91–104.
11.
CreswellJ. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
CreswellJ. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
DaireA. P.HarrisS. M.CarlsonR. G.MunyonM. D.RappleyeaD. L.BeverlyM. G.HiettJ. (2012). Fruits of improved communication: The experiences of Hispanic couples in a relationship education program. Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy: Innovations in Clinical and Educational Interventions, 11, 112–129.
14.
FreyJ.FontanaA. (1993). The group interview in social research. In MorganD. (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 20–35). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
16.
HawkinsA. J.BlanchardV.BaldwinS.FawcettE. (2008). Does marriage and relationship education work? A meta-analytic study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76, 723–734.
17.
HawkinsA. J.StanleyS. M.BlanchardV. L.AlbrightM. (2012). Exploring programmatic moderators of the effectiveness of marriage and relationship education programs: A meta-analytic study. Behavior Therapy, 43, 77–87.
18.
HigginbothamB.MylerC. (2010). The influence of facilitator and facilitation characteristics on participants’ ratings of stepfamily education. Family Relations, 59, 74–86.
19.
KarneyB. R.BradburyT. N. (2005). Contextual influences on marriage: Implications for policy and intervention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 171–174.
20.
KetringS. A.BradfordA. B.DavisS. Y.Adler-BaederF.McGillJ.SmithT. A. (2017). The role of the facilitator in couple relationship education. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 43, 374–390.
21.
KivlighanJr, D. M.TarrantJ. M. (2001). Does group climate mediate the group leadership–group member outcome relationship? A test of Yalom’s hypotheses about leadership priorities. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 220.
22.
KruegerR. A.CaseyM. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
MaiselN. C.KarneyB. R. (2012). Socioeconomic status moderates associations among stressful events, mental health, and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 654–660.
24.
MarkmanH. J.RitchieL. L. (2015). Couples relationship education and couples therapy: Healthy marriage or strange bedfellows?Family Process, 54, 655–671.
MoustakasC. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
MurphyJ. S.NalboneD. P.WetchlerJ. L.EdwardsA. B. (2015). Caring for aging parents: The influence of family coping, spirituality/religiosity, and hope on the marital satisfaction of family caregivers. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 43, 238–250.
28.
OomsT.WilsonP. (2004). The challenges of offering relationship and marriage education to low-income populations. Family Relations, 53, 440–447.
29.
OwenJ.AntleB.BarbeeA. (2013). Alliance and group cohesion in relationship education. Family Process, 52, 465–476.
30.
OwenJ.RhoadesG.StanleyS.MarkmanH. (2011). The role of leaders’ working alliance in premarital education. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 49–57.
31.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
ProchaskaJ. O.DiClementeC. C. (1984). The transtheoretical approach: Towards a systemic eclectic framework. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones Irwin.
33.
QuirkK.StrokoffJ.OwenJ.FranceT.BergenC. (2014). Relationship education in community settings: Effectiveness with distressed and non-distressed low-income racial minority couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 40, 442–453.
34.
RandlesJ. (2014). Partnering and parenting in poverty: A qualitative analysis of a relationship skills program for low-income, unmarried families. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33, 385–412.
35.
RauerA. J.Adler-BaederF.Lucier-GreerM.SkubanE.KetringS. A.SmithT. (2014). Exploring processes of change in couple relationship education: Predictors of change in relationship quality. Journal of Family psychology, 28, 65–76.
36.
ReckK.HigginbothamB.SkograndL.DavisP. (2012). Facilitating stepfamily education for Latinos. Marriage & Family Review, 48, 170–187.
37.
ShechtmanZ.Bar-ElO.HadarE. (1997). Therapeutic factors and psychoeducational groups for adolescents: A comparison. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 22, 203–213.
38.
StanleyS.MarkmanH.JenkinsN.BlumbergS. (2008). PREP Version 7.0 Leader Manual. Greenwood Village, CO: PREP Educational Products.
39.
TuffordL.NewmanP. (2012). Bracketing in qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 11, 80–96.
40.
WilsonK. L.CharkerJ.LizzioA.HalfordK.KimlinkS. (2005). Assessing how much couples work at their relationship: The behavioral self-regulation for effective relationships scale. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 385–393.
41.
YalomI.LeszczM. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
