It's About Time! Examining Received Dosage and Program Duration as Predictors of Change Among Non-Distressed and Distressed Married Couple and Relationship Education Participants

Profiles of Low-Income Help-Seeking Couples and Implications for Intervention Gains: A Couple-Centered Approach

Using a couple-centered approach, the current study seeks to understand (a) the specific ways in which help-seeking couples vary in how their relationship satisfaction changes over time, (b) whether there are important differences in relationship characteristics at the beginning of the interventions, and (c) whether couples with distinct relationship characteristics benefit equally from effective online relationship programs. Mixed-gender low-income couples (Ncouple = 659) seeking help for their relationship were randomly assigned to one of two online relationship programs (n = 432) or the wait-list control group (n = 227). Latent profile analyses were conducted to identify (a) trajectory profiles with both partners' relationship satisfaction assessed at baseline, during, and postprogram, and at 2- and 4-month follow-ups; and (b) baseline couple profiles with indicators of baseline communication, commitment, emotional support, and sexual satisfaction reported by both partners. Four unique satisfaction trajectories were identified: women-small-men-medium improvement (39%), men-only decline (25%), large improvement (19%), and women-only improvement (17%). Five unique baseline couple profiles were identified: conflictual passionate (30%), companionate (22%), men-committed languishing (22%), satisfied (16%), and languishing (10%). Compared to control couples, intervention couples' odds of following the large improvement trajectory increased and their odds of following the men-only decline trajectory decreased; the odds of following the other two intermediate trajectories did not differ by intervention status. Moreover, couples with more distressed baseline profiles were more likely to follow trajectories characterized by greater satisfaction gains regardless of their intervention status. However, program effects did not differ based on baseline couple profiles, suggesting that a universal approach may be sufficient for delivering online relationship programs to improve relationship satisfaction in this population.

Do high-risk couples profit more or less from couple relationship education programs than low-risk couples? Room for improvement and vulnerability effects

In recent years it has been discussed whether high-risk couples benefit more from Couple Relationship Education programs (CREs) than low-risk couples due to larger room for improvement, or profit less due to greater vulnerability. Pertinent response prediction studies yielded inconclusive results. Careful review suggests this may be due to: statistical handling (not disentangling room for improvement and vulnerability effects), time frame analyzed (not disentangling opposing effects during intervention and follow-up), sampling, and selection of risk factors. We used an analytic strategy that maximized odds for replicability and tested two hypotheses: (1) room for improvement: pre-intervention relationship dissatisfaction predicts gain in satisfaction during intervention, and decline during follow up, and (2) vulnerability: when adjusted for room for improvement (pre-intervention relationship dissatisfaction), risk factors show negative or negligible, but no positive associations with gain in satisfaction. Actor-Partner Interdependence Modeling (APIM) was employed in 79 self-referred (SR) couples and 50 clinician-referred (CR) couples who had completed the 'Hold me Tight' program, a CRE based on Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy. Our findings supported both the room for improvement hypothesis, with pre-intervention dissatisfaction predicting more gain during intervention (both samples) and decline during follow-up (SR sample, for the CR sample the effect was negligible), and the vulnerability hypothesis, as several negative, but no positive effects of risk factors were observed during intervention and follow-up. Specific risk factors did not replicate between samples. To promote replicable results in future research, we advocate disentangling room for improvement and vulnerability effects, separately testing effects during intervention and follow-up, purposeful sampling, and studying a large set of risk factors including partner variables.

University-church partnerships: A mechanism to enhance relationship health

Romantic relationship distress leads to decreased satisfaction and dissolution. While therapy is effective for helping distressed couples, it is often inaccessible due to cost, time, and childcare barriers. Churches are often able to offer lower-cost services and provide childcare. In partnership with a network of local churches, university staff trained lay leaders to deliver an evidence-based relationship education program and collected data from 97 couples to evaluate pre- to post-workshop changes in couple functioning. Multilevel modeling was used to examine changes from pre- to post-workshop and thematic analysis was used to analyze open-ended feedback responses. Results showed improvements in communication, relationship satisfaction, commitment, and intimacy safety, with the largest effect found for communication. Participants also reported improved communication skills were one of the most beneficial parts of the program. Through the partnership with a university, churches can offer and rigorously evaluate evidence-based programs to strengthen couple relationships in their communities.

Examining quality time as a mediator of dyadic change in a randomized controlled trial of relationship education for low-income couples

Research identifying specific mechanisms of positive change for couples participating in relationship education is scant. Recent studies have identified the potential of communication skills as a likely mechanism, yet more information is needed about the contribution of process factors. Thus, we examined the influence that quality time spent together had on positive post-intervention outcomes based on couples' reports of dyadic coping and dyadic adjustment for 1,367 low-income couples randomly assigned to receive relationship education. Results indicated that treatment couples reported significant gains in quality time spent together, and that those gains fully mediated positive changes in dyadic coping and adjustment. Additionally, actor and partner effects existed such that men's and women's reports of improved quality time influenced their own and their partners dyadic coping and dyadic adjustment. We discuss study implications for practice and future research.

The Relationship Between Social Support and Family Relationships Among Low-Income Couples Attending Relationship Education

Results are mixed for relationship education (RE) interventions with low-income couples. For couples who experienced positive changes, it is not clear what aspects of program models contributed to change. Many low-income couples attend government-funded RE with limited access to social and community resources. Program models often provide related resources complimentary to RE skill-building. We examined the relationship between income, social support, and family functioning for low-income, ethnically diverse couples (N = 856) who attended RE, as well as the mediating effects of social support on family functioning outcomes. Analyses included three separate dyadic models that examined associations among constructs at baseline and immediately following the RE intervention. Results demonstrated relationships between participants' reported social support and family functioning such that (a) social support was associated with baseline family functioning for both men and women; (b) men's baseline social support was influenced by women's baseline family functioning; and (c) men's and women's social support change score had a positive influence on their own family functioning change score. However, social support was not a significant mediator of change in family functioning. Implications for RE practice and research are also discussed.

Couple relationship education program "Living as Partners": evaluation of effects on marital quality and conflict

Relationship education programs are strategies that can favor better marital quality and conflict management between spouses. The relationship education program “Living as Partners: Turning Challenges into Opportunities” seeks to promote the couples’ learning of conflict resolution strategies and better quality levels in the relationship. This study evaluates the capacity of this program to produce results regarding marital quality and three dimensions of the couple’s conflict: frequency, intensity, and resolution strategies. Data from 41 couples were analyzed before and after the program, and a follow-up after 5 months (n = 33 couples) were conducted as well (single group, pre-test, post-test, and follow-up quasi-experimental design). Results show that the program produced immediate effects in all the outcome variables, which remained significant after 5 months, except for marital quality and for the strategy of compliance. These outcomes showed effect sizes ranging from low to high levels. The study presents evidence about the ability of the “Living as Partners” program to produce improvements in couple’s conflict indicators, addressing an unexplored field of research and intervention focused on Brazilian cultural specificities.