An analysis of survey data from random samples of 83 rural and 98 urban couples indicates that scores on an abbreviated version of the Barrett-Lennard Relationship Inventory and a short form of the Edmonds Marital Conventionality Scale are substantially correlated. Implications for use of the inventory in family research and intervention programs are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barrett-LennardG. T.Dimensions of therapist response as causal factors in therapeutic change. Psychological Monographs, 1962, 76, No. 43 (Whole No. 562).
2.
ChesserB. J.ParkhurstA. M.SchafferD. L.Marital adjustment: Controlling the tendency to distort evaluations. Home Economics Research Journal, 1979, 8(1), 27–36.
3.
CromwellR. E.OlsonD. H. L.FournierD. G.Diagnosis and evaluation in marital and family counseling. In OlsonD. H. L. (Ed.), Treating relationships. Lake Mills, IA: Graphic Press, 1976. Pp. 431–473.
4.
EdmondsV. H.Marital conventionalization: Definition and measurement. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1967, 29. 681–688.
5.
EdmondsV. H.WithersG.DibastistaB.Adjustment, conservatism, and marital conventionalization. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1972, 34, 96103.
6.
EpsteinN.JacksonE.An outcome study of short-term communication training with married couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 207–212.
7.
GladsteinG. A.Empathy and counseling outcome: An empirical and conceptual review. The Counseling Psychologist, 1977, 6(4), 70–79.
8.
GurmanA. S.Couples' facilitative communication skill as a dimension of marital therapy outcome. Journal of Marriage and Family Counseling, 1975, 1, 163–174.
9.
GurmanA. S.The patient's perception of the therapeutic relationship. In GurmanA. S.RazinA. M. (Eds.), The therapist's contribution to effective psychotherapy: An empirical assessment. New York: Pergamon, 1977. Pp. 503–543.
10.
LakeD. G.Relationship Inventory. In LakeD. G.MilesM. P.EarleR. P. (Eds.), Measuring human behavior: Tools for the assessment of social functioning. New York: Teachers College Press (Columbia Univer.), 1973. Pp. 272–276.
11.
LitwackL.GetsonR.SaltzmanG.Research in counseling. Itasca, IL: Peacock, 1968.
12.
MillerB. C.Child density, marital satisfaction, and conventionalization: A research note. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1975, 37, 345–347.
13.
NieN. H.HullC. H.JenkinsJ. G.SteinbrennerK.BentD. H.Statistical package for the social sciences. (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
14.
QuickE.JacobT.Marital disturbance in relation to role theory and relationship theory. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1973, 82, 309–316.
15.
RogersC. R.Empathic: An unappreciated way of being. The Counseling Psychologist, 1975, 5(2), 2–10.
16.
SchiaviR. C.DerogatisL. R.KurianskyJ.O'ConnorD.SharpeL.The assessment of sexual function and marital interaction. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 1979, 5, 169–224.
17.
SchummW. R.FigleyC. R.JurichA. P.Dimensionality of the Marital Communication Inventory: A preliminary factor analytic study. Psychological Reports, 1979, 45, 123–128.
18.
SchummW. R.JacksonR. W.Marital communication or marital adjustment? a brief report on the Marital Communication Inventory. Psychological Reports, 1980, 46, 441–442.
19.
WalkerB. S.LittleD. F.Factor analysis of the Barrett-Lennard Relationship Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1969, 16, 516–521.
20.
WellsR. A.FigurelJ. A.McNameeP.Group facilitative training with conflicted marital couples. In GurmanA. S.RiceD. G. (Eds.), Couples in conflict: New directions in marital therapy. New York: Aronson, 1975. Pp. 315–326.
21.
ZytowskiD. G.BetzE. L.Measurement in counseling research: A review. The Counseling Psychologist, 1972, 3(4), 72–81.
