UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Bonding behaviour in newly married couples Delisle, Mary Ann 1979

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A5 D44.pdf [ 5.56MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094591.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094591-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094591-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094591-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094591-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094591-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094591-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094591-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094591.ris

Full Text

BONDING BEHAVIOUR IN NEWLY MARRIED COUPLES by Mary Ann D e l i s l e B.A., U n i v e r s i t y of Windsor, 1976 B.S.W., U n i v e r s i t y of Windsor, 1977 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June, 1979 ^ c T ) Mary Ann D e l i s l e , 1979 In presenting t h i s thesis in p a r t i a l fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 2075 Westbrook Place, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 1W5, Canada ABSTRACT The purpose of the study was to conceptualize the construct, "bonding behaviour", and to develop a preliminary inventory to measure the concept in newly married couples. The study was conducted with t h i r t y couples, married less' than one year. The subjects were tested once, with a questionnaire completed in the presence of the researcher. A standardized marital s a t i s f a c t i o n inventory I.M.S.: (Hudson/ Glisson 1976) was completed immediately after the questionnaire. The study involved four variables - care, intimacy, t r u s t , and communication - each of which was inter-correlated, and correlated with the I.M.S. The study included demographic items which were correlated with the study variables and with the I.M.S. The findings indicate that the four variables exist separately to some extent, but c l e a r l y tend to overlap. The majority of the items correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with a clu s t e r of the four variables, and suggests that they may measure one construct which could be r e l a b e l l e d bonding. The four variables are highly s i g n i f i c a n t in t h e i r correlations with the I.M.S., and show that the variables are an indication of marital s a t i s f a c t i o n . Generally, the findings supported the research premise that bonding i s affected by family relationships and attachments, that i t involves personal competence, and that i t i s present in the f i r s t year of marriage. The study suggests implications for further research, including a follow-up study. Since this research used a convenience sample, of utmost concern i s a r e p l i c a t i o n o f the s t u d y , on a random sample. The s t u d y c i t e d r e l e v a n c e f o r p r a c t i c e i n s i n g l e case e x p l o r a t i o n , and f o r s o c i a l p o l i c y i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r m a r r i a g e programs. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE . .' i ABSTRACT i i TABLE OF CONTENTS . i v LIST OF TABLES. v i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i i i Chapter I THE FORMATION OF THE PROBLEM 1 A Purpose of the Study... 1 B Hypotheses and Assumptions of the Study..... 3 C Theoretical Rationale for the Study 9 D Persons Concerned With the Research Problem. 11 Chapter II SELECTED FORMULATIONS ON BONDING THEORY 15 A The Selected Variables.as Developmental Processes . 17 B The Relationship of Early Parent-Child Bonding to Future Attachments 20 C The Development of a Capacity for Care, Trust, Intimacy, and Communication in Adult Relationships 22 D The Development of a Sense of Personal Competence 27 E Interpersonal Competence. 29 F Bonding Behaviour in Newly Mar-ried Couples. 31 G Summary 33 Page Chapter III STUDY DESIGN 34 A Level of Research Design 34 B Sampling Procedures 40 C Methods of Gathering Data.... 41 D Program of Data Analysis 43 Chapter IV STUDY FINDINGS 44 A Implementation of the Research Design: Problems i n Sampling, Data Collection, and/or Analysis 44 B Descriptive Data on Study Sample 47 C Findings on Study Questions 49 D Refinement of Measurement Instrument 58 E The Relationship of Demographic Data to the Four Variables and the I.M.S 74 F Conclusion 77 Chapter V SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY 84 A Summary 84 B Implications of the Study 92 FOOTNOTES 99 REFERENCES 102 APPENDIX A 108 APPENDIX B 110 v i LIST OF TABLES Table I MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 1-40 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. Table II MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 41-80 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. Table III MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 81-120 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. Table IV MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 121-160 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. Table V CORRELATIONS OF THE TOTAL SCORES ON EACH OF THE FOUR VARIABLES WITH THE TOTAL SCORES ON THE OTHER THREE VARIABLES AND THE I.M.S. Table VI CORRELATION CO-EFFICIENTS OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 1-40 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH COMMUNICATION ONLY Table VII CORRELATION CO-EFFICIENTS OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 1-40 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH COMMUNICATION AND OTHER VARIABLES Table VIII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 1-40 ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLES Table IX CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 41-80 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH INTIMACY ONLY Table X CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES ITEMS 41-80 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH INTIMACY AND OTHER VARIABLES Table XI CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 41-80 ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLES Table XII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 81-120 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH TRUST ONLY v i i Table XIII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 81-120 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH TRUST AND OTHER VARIABLES Table XIV CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 81-120 ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLES Table XV CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 121-160 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH CARE ONLY Table XVI CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 121-160 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNFICANTLY WITH CARE AND OTHER VARIABLES Table XVII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 121-160 ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLES Table XVIII MEAN RANKS OF EDUCATION AND AGE WITH THE FOUR VARIABLES AND WITH THE I.M.S. Table XIX MEAN RANKS ON THE TOTAL SCORE ON THE VARIABLES AND THE I.M.S. WITH SEX OF THE RESPONDENT v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to thank Dr. John Crane, Mrs. Elaine Stolar, and Mr. Hal Goodwin, at the School of Social Work, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, for t h e i r help and encouragement. 1 Chapter 1 THE FORMATION OF THE PROBLEM A PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This study, through the use of a questionnaire, w i l l seek to determine i f four variables provide a useful conceptu-a l i z a t i o n and measure of the construct "bonding behaviour", in newly married couples. This conceptualization i s c r i t i c a l l y assessed in the study by examining patterns of correlations of items representing each of the four variables, and a pre-di c t i o n that each of the variables w i l l be correlated with marital s a t i s f a c t i o n . The correlations between these four variables w i l l be compared with the results of a measure of marital s a t i s f a c t i o n , (The Index of Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n , I.M.S., W.W. Hudson/D.H. Glisson, 1976) administered immediately after completion of the questionnaire. The hope of thi s researcher i s that t h i s study w i l l provide a beginning step, leading to further research in thi s area, eventually leading to a highly v a l i d measure of bonding behaviour. Bonding w i l l be defined as a process in the development of relationship, very s i m i l a r to the bonding that occurs between parent and c h i l d at b i r t h . It i s a form of attachment behaviour which w i l l be examined under the four major areas mentioned above Many questions exist on the periphery of thi s study -providing i n t e r e s t i n g as well as challenging goals for further research - i s bonding behaviour a po s i t i v e process?; i s there a 2 c r i t i c a l or s e n s i t i v e p e r i o d ? ; the e f f e c t s o f mate c h o i c e ? ; the e f f e c t s of a second m a r r i a g e ? ; does bond i n g o c c u r i n common-law r e l a t i o n s h i p s ? ; the e f f e c t s o f e a r l y p a r e n t - c h i l d bonding?; the e f f e c t s of p s y c h o s o c i a l development; - and o f utmost i m p o r t a n c e t o the c l i n i c i a n , can i t become a t h e r a p e u t i c t o o l ? R e s e a r c h e r s and c l i n i c i a n s are b e g i n n i n g t o g a t h e r a g r e a t d e a l o f i n f o r m a t i o n i n t h e areas o f c a r e , t r u s t , communi-c a t i o n , and i n t i m a c y . We are s t a r t i n g t o u n d e r s t a n d the d e v e l o p -ment and importance of each to the i n d i v i d u a l . The purpose o f t h i s s t u d y i s , t o p u l l t o g e t h e r t h i s group o f v a r i a b l e s , t o b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d t h e complex n a t u r e o f the e a r l y development of r e l a t i o n s h i p between newly m a r r i e d c o u p l e s - by exa m i n i n g the c o n s t e l l a t i o n of f a c t o r s i n v o l v e d . These are i n t e r - r e l a t i n g systems, t h a t do n o t , and cannot, o p e r a t e i n i s o l a t i o n of one ano t h e r . I t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e s e v a r i a b l e s , t o g e t h e r , may w e l l become more than the sum o f the p a r t s - and t h i s t oo w i l l be a v a l u a b l e b e g i n n i n g s t e p i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h i s i n t r i c a t e p r o c e s s . 3 B HYPOTHESES AND ASSUMPTIONS OF THE STUDY There appears t o be a consensus among a l a r g e number of c l i n i c i a n s and r e s e a r c h e r s , t h a t l i n k s t o g e t h e r the f o u r v a r i a b l e s t o be s t u d i e d - and t h i s i s , t h a t t h e i n i t i a t i o n and development o f c a r e , t r u s t , communication, and i n t i m a c y , i n the e a r l i e s t and most s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t h e growth o f t h i s throughout the l i f e c y c l e , appears t o be a n e c e s s a r y antecedent f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a " c a p a c i t y " f o r t h e s e f o u r v a r i a b l e s as a d u l t s , i n a l o v i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . The c l u s t e r o f assumptions t h a t t h i s r e s e a r c h e r b r i n g s t o the s t u d y , are i n congruence w i t h t h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s from th e development and i n t e r a c t i o n i s t f i e l d s . One of the main purposes o f t h i s s t u d y , i s t o e x p l o r e t h i s e a r l y d e v e l o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . I do not know, nor am I w i l l i n g t o guess at t h i s s t a g e , j u s t how t h e s e v a r i a b l e s c o n s i t u t e b o n d i n g b e h a v i o u r , - r a t h e r I am s e a r c h i n g f o r d a t a t h a t w i l l p r o v i d e me w i t h the i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d t o p u l l t h e s e assumptions i n t o a r e s e a r c h a b l e h y p o t h e s i s . T h i s s t u d y i n v o l v e s t h e c r e a t i o n , and p r e l i m i n a r y t e s t i n g o f an i n v e n t o r y d e s i g n e d t o measure bonding s e n t i m e n t s i n newly m a r r i e d c o u p l e s . The hypotheses t h a t guide t h i s s t u d y o f b o n d i n g a r e : 1. In each of the f o u r v a r i a b l e s , a l l i t e m s w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e w i t h the t o t a l s c o r e . 2. These c o r r e l a t i o n s w i l l be l a r g e r than c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s on each of the o t h e r t h r e e v a r i a b l e s . 4 3. T h e s e c o r r e l a t i o n s w i l l be l a r g e r t h a n c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e t o t a l s c o r e on t h e I . M . S . 4. The t o t a l s c o r e on t h e I . M . S . w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s on e a c h o f t h e f o u r v a r i a b l e s . I t e m s w h i c h f a i l t o s a t i s f y (1) a n d / o r (2) w i l l be d r o p p e d , moved t o a n o t h e r c a t e g o r y , o r r e w o r d e d . The f i n d i n g s w i l l b e u s e d t o e v a l u a t e t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e s c a l e , a n d t o do t h e f o l l o w i n g , i f n e c e s s a r y - m o d i f y t h e d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e c o n c e p t s , d r o p one o r more o f t h e f o u r v a r i a b l e s , p r o d u c e an i m p r o v e d v e r s i o n o f t h e s c a l e f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g , o r i f t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e i t e m s p r o v e u n s a t i s f a c t o r y , t o d e s i g n a n o t h e r s c a l e . I f t h e s c a l e p r o v e s s a t i s f a c t o r y , c l u s t e r a n a l y s i s c a n b e p e r f o r m e d on p e r s o n s w i t h t h e same t o t a l s c o r e on one o r more o f t h e s u b s c a l e s . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s w o u l d b e t o i d e n t i f y p a t t e r n s o f b o n d i n g s e n t i m e n t s i n n e w l y m a r r i e d c o u p l e s . The f o u r v a r i a b l e s o f c a r e , t r u s t , i n t i m a c y , and c o m m u n i c a t i o n , w e r e s e l e c t e d f o r s t u d y b e c a u s e t h e y a p p e a r t o t h i s r e s e a r c h e r ( t h r o u g h my r e v i e w o f l i t e r a t u r e , a n d c l i n i c a l p r a c t i c e ) t o be a f f e c t i o n a l p r o c e s s e s p r e s e n t i n t h e m a r r i a g e r e l a t i o n s h i p , t o b e d e f i n e a b l e , a n d t o l e n d t h e m s e l v e s t o a " s e l f - r e p o r t " q u e s t i o n n a i r e . I t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e r e a r e o t h e r c o m p o n e n t s o f what t h i s r e s e a r c h e r r e f e r s t o as t h e b o n d i n g p r o c e s s - h o w e v e r , i t i s n o t t h e i n t e n t o f t h i s r e s e a r c h e r t o i n c l u d e t h e m i n t h i s s t u d y . 5 a) CARE Care w i l l be examined as a product of the parent -c h i l d attachment, (having been nurtured and eared for) which i s assumed to be a function of the individual's a b i l i t y now, to care in his/her own marriage. It w i l l also be seen as a concern for the other's growth and development. The questions w i l l draw out facts, feelings, and opinions about the respondent's mother, father, peers - and the spouse and the present marriage. b) TRUST Trust i s defined as a mutuality, stemming from the a b i l i t y to rely on the spouse, and a trust of one's own s e l f and one's own capacity. Inherent in the observation of the variable, i s the respondent's memory, attitudes, and feelings about the development of a sense of trust with the mother, father, and family, degree of trust in the spouse, and his/her own sense of trust in s e l f . c) COMMUNICATION Communication i s a function of the a b i l i t y to send and to receive information. We are not as concerned here with the non-verbal communication, and incongruent messages, as with the a b i l i t y to send and receive that message. This variable w i l l be examined by an analysis of the l e v e l of communication -from unwilling to communicate, communicating negatively, (seeking control, competing, persuasion), to p o s i t i v e communication, ( l i s t e n i n g , understanding, p o s i t i v e feedback, s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e ) , 6 and t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a " m e t a - c o m m u n i c a t i o n " , a u n i q u e s y s t e m o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , i d i o s y n c r a t i c t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o u p l e . H e r e t o o , t h e r e s p o n d e n t w i l l be a s k e d t o r e s p o n d t o q u e s t i o n s s e e k i n g f a c t s , f e e l i n g s , a n d a t t i t u d e s , a b o u t t h e n a t u r e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n t h e m a r r i a g e , and i n t h e f a m i l y o f o r i g i n . d ) INTIMACY I n t i m a c y i n t h e m a r r i a g e w i l l be e x a m i n e d on a c o n t i n u u m , f r o m p h y s i c a l i n t i m a c y t o e m o t i o n a l i n t i m a c y , ( a m u t u a l a c c e s s i b i l i t y a n d n o n - p o s s e s s i v e n e s s ) , c o m p a r i n g t h e m a r i t a l b o n d , t o memory o f f a c t s , a t t i t u d e s , o p i n i o n s , a n d f e e l i n g s a b o u t t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s a t t a c h m e n t t o f a m i l y . T h e s e v a r i a b l e s - c a r e , t r u s t , i n t i m a c y , a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n , may b e c o r r e l a t e d w i t h e a c h o t h e r , and as w e l l may b e p l a c e d on a c o n t i n u u m t o s i g n i f y a p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e d e g r e e o f b o n d e d n e s s i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p . T h e y a r e i n d e e d c o m p l e x , a n d c a n n o t be c o v e r e d i n a l l a s p e c t s . A s e r i e s o f q u e s t i o n s i n a q u e s t i o n n a i r e , s e e k i n g b o t h f a c t s , e v e n t s , c o n d i t i o n s , a n d b e h a v i o u r a l d a t a , as w e l l as o p i n i o n s , f e e l i n g s , a n d b e l i e f s , s h o u l d p r o v i d e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e , c o m p a r a t i v e p i c t u r e o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s as t h e y a p p l y t o t h e r e s p o n d e n t a n d h i s / h e r m a r i t a l b o n d , a n d t h e r e p o r t e d d e g r e e o f m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . The p r i m a r y l i m i t a t i o n i s t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e as a " s e l f - r e p o r t " , a p p r o p r i a t e a t t h i s l e v e l o f s t u d y when we a r e 7 e x p l o r i n g the p a r a m e t e r s , but n e c e s s i t a t i n g d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n , and b r o a d e r r e l i a b i l i t y checks at a l a t e r s t a g e . The r e a l m of assumptions u n d e r l y i n g t h i s s t u d y i n v o l v e a s p e c t s of the r e s p o n d e n t ' s e a r l y attachment and d e v e l o p m e n t a l l e a r n i n g and e x p e r i e n c e , as w e l l as t h o s e f a c t o r s w hich are deemed unique t o the m a r i t a l bond. T h i s r e s e a r c h e r assumes t h a t the f o u r v a r i a b l e s b e i n g s t u d i e d are f a c e t s o f what t h i s s t u d y r e f e r s t o as "bonding b e h a v i o u r " , and t h a t they are r e s e a r c h a b l e . That t h r o u g h a s e l f - i n v e n t o r y ( q u e s t i o n n a i r e ) i t i s f e a s i b l e t o examine and measure t h e presence o r absence of t h e s e v a r i a b l e s i n the r e s p o n d e n t , and t o p l a c e them on a continuum, t h e r e b y measuring the degree o f t h e v a r i a b l e , and thus the degree o f b o n d i n g b e h a v i o u r . Bonding i s assumed t o be a p r o c e s s i n t h e development of r e l a t i o n s h i p , s i m i l a r t o , and i n f l u e n c e d by t h e b o n d i n g t h a t o c c u r s between p a r e n t and c h i l d at b i r t h . I t i s assumed t h a t e a r l y p a r e n t - c h i l d a ttachment, and the development and e x p e r i e n c e of o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s , w i l l a f f e c t attachment w i t h t h e m a r i t a l p a r t n e r . I t i s seen as a form o f attachment b e h a v i o u r , i n v o l v i n g c a r e , t r u s t , i n t i m a c y , and communication. I t i s assumed t h a t newly m a r r i e d c o u p l e s t e n d t o develop some form o f attachment b e h a v i o u r , t h a t they t e n d t o seek t h i s attachment, and t h a t attachment i s a p o s i t i v e p r o c e s s . F u r t h e r m o r e , i t i s assumed t h a t m a r r i a g e p r o v i d e s an o p p o r t u n i t y 8 f o r t h e development of a c l o s e and mutual bond, and t h a t human b e i n g s have t h e c a p a c i t y t o form t h a t bond. There are a host o f assumptions, at the l e v e l o f hunches and i n s i g h t s , and y e t unproven, t h a t t h i s r e s e a r c h e r b r i n g s t o the s t u d y . These are - t h a t t h e r e i s a c r i t i c a l o r s e n s i t i v e p e r i o d f o r t h e development o f b o n d i n g , t h a t i t i n v o l v e s and n e c e s s i t a t e s p e r s o n a l competence, t h a t i t i s more d i f f i c u l t i n subsequent m a r r i a g e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t h a t i t i s c r u c i a l t o the m a r r i a g e . T h i s r e s e a r c h e r sees the s t u d y o f b o n d i n g as r e s e a r c h i n p u r s u i t o f human development and mental h e a l t h - as an e f f o r t t o o b t a i n and develop p r e v e n t a t i v e r a t h e r than r e m e d i a l programs and t h e r a p e u t i c methods. 9 C THEORETICAL RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY A North American t r a d i t i o n that many of us are taught from childhood, i s that the healthy functioning of families, and of society as a whole, i s deeply rooted in the continuance and success of marriage. As i n d i v i d u a l s , we often place our greatest hopes for f u l f i l l m e n t and happiness in the marriage relationship - and yet these are expectations which for some of us, w i l l remain unrealized. As helping professionals in a romantic culture, we have much to learn about the process of the marriage r e l a t i o n s h i It i s t h i s researcher's assumption that the f i r s t year of marriage i s the time of the greatest hope for the marriage, the time when both partners w i l l usually invest the greatest amount of time and energy into the relationship - a unique time in the relationship that i s unlikely to be repeated with the same innocence, genuineness, honesty, r e c i p r o c i t y , and intensity - at any other time or sequence in the marriage. "Bonding" has become a fa m i l i a r term in the s o c i a l sciences, not because i t explains the maternal/infant relationsh to which i t i s most often referred, but because i t s i g n i f i e s a "uniqueness" about that relationship - that something about i t i s s p e c i a l , important, and most of us would agree - necessary. For t h i s reason, t h i s writer too uses the term bonding - to examine the f i r s t year of marriage, and i t s import on the marriage relationship. 10 Just how t h i s bond occurs, i s instigated, or how well i t i s formed, i s believed to be, by this researcher, the cumulative ef f e c t of each partner's e a r l i e s t attachments -with parents, s i b l i n g s , peers, and friends, throughout his/her developmental process. Much has been said about the concept of " c r i t i c a l periods". Theorists have argued that the maternal/infant bond i s es s e n t i a l to the parent/child relationship, and that i t must occur within a certain span of time; that unless our e a r l i e s t needs are g r a t i f i e d , we w i l l not as adults possess a s u f f i c i e n t a b i l i t y or capacity to meet these needs i n our own relationships or with our own children; that there are unique and e s s e n t i a l tasks i n a series of developmental stages, each of which must be learned, before one can move on to the next. Whether the developmental stages and our e a r l i e s t learning are as important as some s c i e n t i s t s believe, or whether there are or are not c r i t i c a l periods in the learning process, i s not the major issue here. Salient to t h i s study, i s this researcher's underlying assumption that there are indeed tasks in the developmental process, and that they are learned or accomplished with more ease at some times rather than at others. The f i r s t year of marriage then, being the period when bonding can occur with the most ease and f a c i l i t y -perhaps naturally - although that i s not to say i t cannot occur at l a t e r stages in the marriage. The assumption i s , that as time passes i t becomes more d i f f i c u l t , and unlikely. 11 D PERSONS CONCERNED WITH THE RESEARCH PROBLEM The research problem i s of concern to a wide range of persons, from s o c i a l work researchers, c l i n i c i a n s , and policy makers, to c l i e n t groups and lay persons. This study concerns the selection of four variables which t h i s researcher proposes are present in the f i r s t year of marriage. The relevance for research i s in the i s o l a t i o n of the f i r s t year, in the study of the newly married couple, and in the development of the concept of bonding. This researcher has chosen four variables - care, tr u s t , intimacy, and communication, to determine i f together they form the construct known as bonding. If t h i s i s so, each variable w i l l require further development and refinement, u n t i l questions r e l a t i n g to each, c l e a r l y measure that variable, and not one or more of the variables. If the variables p a r t i a l l y define bonding, then i t w i l l be necessary to single out those items which are a s i g n i f i c a n t measure of the construct, and as well to research other variables which may also be components of bonding. If the variables have no relationship to bonding, i t w i l l be necessary to test out .other variables before the notion of bonding i s dropped. Further research should develop this concept of bonding in the f i r s t year of marriage, gradually c l a r i f y i n g and broadening the theory - by gathering data from the couple, and from the couple's parents and family, in order to provide facts, information about observed behaviour, as well as 12 feelings, b e l i e f s , and sentiments. This information would encourage clear and concise statements about the f i r s t year, before the research i s extrapolated to other times in the marriage, to determine i f there i s in fact anything unique about the f i r s t year. If t h i s study contributes to the c l a r i f i c a t i o n of bonding, i t w i l l provide for researchers a preliminary instrument to measure bonding in newly married couples. It i s a questionnaire that w i l l require refinement, as the concept of bonding i s further developed, and more c l e a r l y understood. The c l i n i c a l gains from t h i s study seem obvious, the e a r l i e s t notion and assumption being instigated by t h i s researcher's own practice."*" If the concept, of bonding i s relevant and important to the marriage re l a t i o n s h i p , and i f i t i s most ea s i l y developed in the f i r s t year - the p r a c t i t i o n e r working with married couples must know and understand the process of bonding, and i t s components, and must be able to f a c i l i t a t e couples in t h e i r development of bonding, p a r t i c u l a r l y in that e s s e n t i a l f i r s t year. C l i n i c i a n s as well, should be prepared to examine th e i r own practice for evidence of bonding, and to share with the researcher in the development and understanding of t h i s process. This researcher has a basic underlying relevance for s o c i a l p o l i c y and s o c i a l planners. A l f r e d Kahn has argued for "universal" s o c i a l services, available to a l l persons, on the basis of need. He f e l t that the " i n s t i t u t i o n a l view of s o c i a l 13 welfare holds that out of i t s normal functioning the society constantly develops pressures for new provisions for meeting 2 emerging needs." In a progressive society we must be prepared to o f f e r services for the family on a universal basis. In developing humane s o c i a l p o l i c i e s for families, we must necessarily address marriage, and preparation for marriage. Without research knowledge about what factors contribute to the development of a secure and happy marriage, p a r t i c u l a r l y in the f i r s t year of the relationship, we could face blanket programs, enforced by law, on society at large, without clear conceptions about what i s being done or why. Advancing knowledge in t h i s area of the newly married relationship, may encourage a s e n s i t i v i t y towards teenage marriage, and the p o s s i b i l i t y that they are a population at r i s k . This would suggest for s o c i a l p o l i c y makers, the need for unique or special services designed for t h i s population. Research on the process of the marriage relationship could lend much to professionals and lay persons al i k e , in the development of marriage prepatory courses. It could provide curriculum for programs set t i n g out to t r a i n clergy and para-professionals for leadership in preparation for marriage course, would suggest the issues that couples should be encouraged to discuss together, and examine more closely, as they prepare for marriage. It i s this researcher's hope that t h i s beginning research can be a part of an ongoing process of research on 14 bonding i n the marriage, that w i l l e v e n t u a l l y o v e r l a p i n t o many areas of l i f e , encompassing e a r l y l e a r n i n g i n elementary s c h o o l , as a p a r t of f a m i l y l i f e e d ucation i n high s c h o o l , and as a commitment by community and s o c i e t y to the importance of l e a r n i n g about and becoming a c t i v e l y i n v o l v e d i n marriage and the f a m i l y . 15 Chapter I I SELECTED FORMULATIONS ON BONDING THEORY I t i s customary at t h i s s t a g e t o i n c l u d e a s y s t e m a t i c r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e , r e l e v a n t t o t h e t o p i c under s t u d y . T h i s r e s e a r c h e r has chosen t o ve e r from t h a t t r a d i t i o n , p a r t l y because o f the i m p o s s i b l e t a s k i t would be t o p r e s e n t t o the r e a d e r , a c l e a r and c o n c i s e d e s c r i p t i o n o f the bounteous l i t e r a t u r e t h a t e x i s t s on attachment and development of r e l a t i o n s h i p , and a l s o because o f t h i s r e s e a r c h e r ' s p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e , t o t a k e the r e a d e r through a h i s t o r i c a l s e l e c t i o n o f l i t e r a t u r e , t h a t w i l l a l l o w the r e a d e r the much needed l o o k a t the r o o t s o f the stu d y t o p i c f o r the r e s e a r c h e r , i n o r d e r t o c l e a r l y u n d e r s t a n d where the t o p i c has come from, and how i t was f o r m u l a t e d . T h i s s h o u l d a s s i s t t he r e a d e r t h e n , i n b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g the t o p i c , and perhaps as w e l l , d e v e l o p i n g q u e s t i o n s f o r f u t u r e d i r e c t i o n and s t u d y . Those r e a d e r s who would p r e f e r a b r o a d e r background of l i t e r a t u r e may r e f e r t o - Mea s u r i n g S e c u r i t y i n P e r s o n a l  Adjustment ( A i n s w o r t h : 1958); M a r r i a g e and P e r s o n a l Development ( B l a n c k and B l a n c k : 1968); Attachment and Loss (Bowlby: 1969); E a r l y E x p e r i e n c e : Myth and E v i d e n c e ( C l a r k e and C l a r k e : 1976); C h i l d h o o d and S o c i e t y ( E r i k s o n : 1963); M a t e r n a l I n f a n t Bonding ( K l a u s and K e n n e l l : 1976); Communication, C o n f l i c t , and M a r r i a g e (Rauch,Barry, H e r t e l , and Swain: 1974); Becoming P a r t n e r s (Rodgers: 1972); The I n t e r p e r s o n a l Theory o f P s y c h i a t r y 16 ( S u l l i v a n : 1953); I d e n t i t y and P e r s o n a l Competence ( F o o t e and C o t t r e l l J r . : 1955) The f o l l o w i n g s e l e c t i o n s o f t h e o r e t i c a l v i e w p o i n t s and p r o p o s i t i o n s were s e l e c t e d by t h i s r e s e a r c h e r . They r e p r e s e n t t h e major s o u r c e s of s t i m u l a t i o n t h a t have brought t h i s r e s e a r c h e r t o the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t attachment i n m a r r i a g e may i n v o l v e a v e r y i m p o r t a n t and e s s e n t i a l t a s k i n the e a r l i e s t s t a g e of t h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p - namely an i n i t i a l a ttachment, a l o n g the major a f f e c t i o n a l systems o f - c a r e , t r u s t , i n t i m a c y , and communication, i n t h e f i r s t y e a r of m a r r i a g e - t h a t i s r e f e r r e d t o as "bonding". The r e a d e r t h e n , w i l l be t a k e n through a h i s t o r i c a l s e l e c t i o n o f c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s , t h a t are r e a l l y the background i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h i s s t u d y . 17 A THE S E L E C T E D V A R I A B L E S AS D E V E L O P M E N T A L P R O C E S S E S C o m m u n i c a t i o n , t r u s t , c a r e , a n d i n t i m a c y , t o g e t h e r m a k e - u p a c o m p l e x s y s t e m o f a f f e c t i v e p r o c e s s , d e v e l o p i n g b e t w e e n t h e n e w l y m a r r i e d c o u p l e . T h e y a r e f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h e r t h e e x p e r i e n c e s a t t h e c o r e o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l p r o c e s s , w h i c h c o n t i n u e t o grow a n d c h a n g e t h r o u g h o u t t h e l i f e - c y c l e . R o b e r t a M a t t e s o n ( 1 9 7 4 ) p o i n t e d t o an i n c r e a s i n g a w a r e n e s s o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n human r e l a t i o n s a n d g r o w i n g e v i d e n c e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n f a i l u r e s i n t r o u b l e d f a m i l i e s a n d m a r r i a g e s . She s t r e s s e d t h a t " d y s f u n c t i o n a l m a r i t a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n may v e r y w e l l r e f l e c t , a n d a l s o c o n t r i b u t e 3 t o an u n h a p p y , d i s a t i s f y i n g m a r r i a g e . " S a t i r ( 1 9 7 4 ) p r o p o s e d t h a t " t h e r e i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n d i s t u r b e d f a m i l i e s , d y s f u n c t i o n a l m a r r i a g e s , a n d low 4 s e l f - e s t e e m . " The n e g a t i v e e f f e c t o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s i s c l e a r , b u t much r e m a i n s t o be l e a r n e d a b o u t h i g h l y d e v e l o p e d c o m m u n i c a t i v e s k i l l s , and t h e e f f e c t s o n , o r f u n c t i o n t h e y p r o v i d e f o r human r e l a t i o n s h i p s . P a u l W a t z l a w i c k ( 1 9 6 7 ) i n h i s p i o n e e r i n g w o r k , r e p o r t e d on ways i n w h i c h t o i n c r e a s e a w a r e n e s s s k i l l s i n c o u p l e s , s k i l l s t o e n a b l e them t o c h a n g e t h e i r r u l e s a n d i n t e r a c t i o n p a t t e r n s . " P e o p l e c a n be t a u g h t how t o m e t a - c o m m u n i c a t e - t h a t i s , t o c o m m u n i c a t e a b o u t t h e i r c o m m u n i c a t i o n . " E r i k E r i k s o n ( 1 9 6 3 ) s a i d t h a t he u s e d t h e w o r d " t r u s t " t o r e f e r t o t h a t p r o c e s s o f human a t t a c h m e n t a n d d e v e l o p m e n t , b e c a u s e i t i m p l i e s n a i v e t e a n d m u t u a l i t y . F o r h i m , t r u s t 18 i m p l i e d , "having l e a r n e d to r e l y on sameness and c o n t i n u i t y from outer p r o v i d e r s , - but a l s o that you t r u s t y o u r s e l f and your own c a p a c i t y . " ^ E r i k s o n t h e o r i z e d that the development of a sense of t r u s t as a baby, forms the b a s i s i n the c h i l d f o r a sense of i d e n t i t y , which l a t e r combines wi t h a sense of being " a l l r i g h t " , of b e i n g o n e s e l f , and of "becoming what oth e r 7 people t r u s t one w i l l become." Out of the development of a sense of t r u s t , comes the c a p a c i t y to care. Harry Stack S u l l i v a n (1953) used the word "tenderness" to d e s c r i b e the complex nature of c a r i n g contact. He r e c o g n i z e d the importance of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and emotional l e a r n i n g beyond the f i r s t few years. " . . . c h i l d r e n r a i s e d i n i n s t i t u t i o n s and d e p r i v e d of s o c i a l c o n t a c t , have the g r e a t e s t d e f i c i e n c i e s i n the c a p a c i t i e s f o r l o v i n g , g i v i n g , a l t r u i s t i c behaviour, conscience, and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . " 8 S u l l i v a n suggests that intimacy f o l l o w s the development of these o t h e r a f f e c t i o n a l p r o c e s s e s , and that i t appears with m a t u r i t y . "The l a s t of these great developments i s the appearance and growth of the need f o r intimacy - marked by a s e n s i t i v i t y to the needs of o t h e r s , and the i n t e r p e r s o n a l 9 s e c u r i t y . " Alan Dahms (1974) d i v i d e d the development of intimacy i n t o three main c a t e g o r i e s - i n t e l l e c t u a l , p h y s i c a l , and emotional. I n t e l l e c t u a l intimacy i s shaped by s o c i e t y ' s concept of " r i g h t " , and i s the s a y i n g and doing of s o c i a l l y accepted t h i n g s . P h y s i c a l intimacy i s l e a r n e d through oughts, shoulds, taboos, and g u i l t f e e l i n g s , and i s s e t by s o c i e t a l 19 l i m i t s and g u i d e l i n e s . E m o t i o n a l i n t i m a c y i s a h i g h l y d e v e l o p e d and mature sense o f i n t i m a c y , and i n v o l v e s mutual a c c e s s i b i l i t y and n o n p o s s e s s i v e n e s s . Dahms f e l t t h a t , " I t may be u s e f u l t o adopt the premise t h a t at b i r t h the human b e i n g i s m a x i m a l l y a b l e t o e x p e r i e n c e i n t i m a c y a t a l l l e v e l s -e m o t i o n a l , p h y s i c a l , i n t e l l e c t u a l . . . as human development p r o g r e s s e s , a pers o n may l o s e t h e c a p a c i t y t o e x p e r i e n c e h i g h e r l e v e l s o f i n t i m a c y , " 1 0 Dahms, r e c o g n i z i n g the i n t e n s e importance and impact of a l l of the s e e m o t i o n a l p r o c e s s e s t o g e t h e r s t a t e s t h a t , "the m a t t e r o f human bondi n g i s a s e r i o u s b u s i n e s s , f o r once the bond i s e s t a b l i s h e d , e m o t i o n a l disengagement from the bond may be d i f f i c u l t . P e o p l e who have e x p e r i e n c e d an u n f o r t u n a t e bond may be haunted by r e g r e t , o r may be unable t o s t o p c a r i n g . 20 B THE RELATIONSHIP OF EARLY PARENT-CHILD BONDING TO FUTURE ATTACHMENTS  A wide number of theorists stress that these major concepts of - communication, t r u s t , care, and intimacy, are developmental in nature, and are greatly affected by our e a r l i e s t attachments. Klaus and Kennell (1976) in t h e i r work on maternal-infant bonding, stressed that, "The o r i g i n a l mother-infant bond i s the wellspring for a l l the infant's subsequent attachments, and i s the formative r e l a t i o n -ship in the course of which the c h i l d develops a sense of himself. Throughout his l i f e t i m e , the strength and character of t h i s attachment w i l l influence the quality of a l l future bonds to other individuals."-'- 2 They have referred to attachment as a relationship between two people, that endures through time. S u l l i v a n would agree, sta t i n g that once an attachment has been established, the bond has a strength that i s remarkably resistent to disruption. Robert Sears spoke of the suddenness, intensity, and prolonged i r r e v e r s i b i l i t y of attachment. Harry Harlow, in his famous study of mothering in primates, said that, "the infant-mother a f f e c t i o n a l system i s enormously powerful, and probably less variable than any other of the 13 functional systems." Although the nature of attachment eludes us, and does not seem to follow t r a d i t i o n a l learning theory - one thing remains clear - that this early attachment w i l l become the basis of a l l l a t e r attachments and loving relationships. 21 Sullivan urged that, "These gross patterns of learned attachment become the u t t e r l y varied but quite firm foundations 14 on which a great deal more i s superimposed or b u i l t . " The course that the attachment process takes in adulthood, p a r t i c u l a r l y in marriage, i s not as clear as that between mother and infant - but that i t i s affected, and influenced by that early attachment, i s surely undisputable. Mary Ainsworth (1958) during her work on security and personal adjustment, concluded that, "There i s considerable disagreement about the origins of need for interpersonal re l a t i o n s . Some believe that i t i s innate in man. Others believe that i t i s a secondary or derived need...But despite disagreement on origins, there i s a consensus that the need for interpersonal relations i s strong and important in the human species, and that i t i s f i r s t manifested in relations with the parents, especially the mother."-^ Although the path of attachment behaviour in subsequent years and after infancy i s not well chronicled, John Bowlby (1969) also has suggested that i t i s very d i r e c t l y related to t h i s early attachment. "That attachment behaviour in adult l i f e i s a straightforward continuation of attachment behaviour in childhood i s shown by the circumstances that lead an adult's attachment behaviour to become more readily e l i c i t e d . . . in conditions of sudden danger or disaster a person w i l l almost cer t a i n l y seek proximity to another known or trusted person...To dub attachment behaviour in adult l i f e regressive, i s indeed to overlook the v i t a l role that i t plays in the l i f e of man from the cradle to the grave."I 6 22 C THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CAPACITY FOR CARE, TRUST, INTIMACY, AND COMMUNICATION IN ADULT RELATIONSHIPS Sullivan spoke of man's basic needs during his development, - of care, t r u s t , intimacy, - and the s a t i s f a c t i o n of these needs by our e a r l i e s t care givers, our family, and our peers. He f e l t that out of the s a t i s f a c t i o n of need, arose "experience", or what he refers to as an anticipation of and a "capacity" for these affections in our own l i v e s and relationships. "I have f i n a l l y come to the decision that the only approach i s the developmental route. In other words, i f we go with almost microscopic care over how everybody comes to be what he i s at adulthood, then perhaps we can learn a good deal of what i s highly probably about l i v i n g and d i f f i c u l t i e s in l i v i n g . " I 7 Erik Erikson (1963) and Rubin Blanck (1967) would agree that the early learned trust or lack of trust has an intense impact on our "capacity" for trust as adults, p a r t i c u l a r l y in the intimate relationship of marriage. Erikson expressed that, "Through t h i s early bond, which i s l i t e r a l l y v i t a l , the mother f i r s t helps her infant develop a basic trust in her, and then gradually prepares him to enter into human a c t i v i t i e s and human society. It i s t h i s relationship with his mother which may determine his emotional future, p a r t i c u l a r l y the emotional health and richness of his interpersonal r e l a t i o n s . " 1 ^ Blanck f e l t that when an i n d i v i d u a l had not successfully passed through the psychosocial stage of "trust vs mistrust", the most frequent expression of t h i s in marriage was a readiness to divorce the partner, and the turning to other objects, as in numerous extra-marital a f f a i r s . 23 He f e l t t h a t , "The nature of the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p a person w i l l e s t a b l i s h , depends on h i s c a p a c i t y to i n t e r n a l i z e the o b j e c t s a v a i l a b l e d u r i n g the e a r l i e r years, and the k i n d of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n he has made. A l l human behaviour i s based on models."I® W i l l a r d G a y l i n (1976) i n h i s r e s e a r c h on c a r i n g , comes to very s i m i l a r c o n c l u s i o n s - t h a t the e a r l i e s t attachments are v i t a l to f u t u r e attachments and r e l a t i o n s h i p s . " C a r i n g of course i s not j u s t a f u n c t i o n of the m o t h e r - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p . C a r i n g , -that i s the p r o t e c t i v e , p a r e n t a l , tender aspects of l o v i n g - i s a p a r t of r e l a t i o n s h i p among peers, c h i l d to parent, f r i e n d to f r i e n d , l o v e r to l o v e r , person to animal, and m u l t i p l e p a t t e r n s . The f a c t t h a t . . . I a t t e n d almost e x c l u s i v e l y to the p a r e n t -c h i l d aspect of c a r i n g i s because i t i s the e s s e n t i a l paradigm whose presence i s necessary f o r the d i f f u s i o n of t h i s q u a l i t y i n t o the other aspects of r e l a t i o n s h i p s of l i f e . " 2 0 G a y l i n would agree with E r i c h Fromm (1956), that to be cared f o r i s e s s e n t i a l f o r the c a p a c i t y to be c a r i n g , and that " i t i s b e i n g loved i n t h i s way that i n i t i a t e s the c a p a c i t y 21 i n the c h i l d , to give love to o t h e r s . " Norman Cameron (1963) s t a t e s that the attachment process throughout l i f e , p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l a t i n g back to the i n f a n t - p a r e n t attachment, a f f e c t s , i n a very major way, our c a p a c i t y f o r intimacy as a d u l t s . "There i s i n most persons another d e r i v i t i v e of the sy m b i o t i c (mother-child) r e l a t i o n s h i p , but experienced on an a d u l t , h e t e r o s e x u a l l e v e l - the need f o r a dependable, i n t i m a t e c o n t a c t with a l o v e d and l o v i n g person, such ^ as s l e e p i n g w i t h a m a r i t a l p a r t n e r provides.'. 1 24 S a t i r f e e l s s t r o n g l y , t h a t even p a t t e r n s of communication are i n f l u e n c e d and a f f e c t e d by e a r l y experience, "that c h i l d r e n l e a r n inadequate communication p a t t e r n s from t h e i r parents, which c o n t r i b u t e s to low s e l f - e s t e e m and i s a s s o c i a t e d with submissiveness, l o n l i n e s s , and anxiety."23 L i l y Pincus (1971) p o i n t e d to problems i n the marriage i f there were c o n f l i c t s i n the e a r l i e s t attachments, "at both conscious and unconscious l e v e l s , husbands and wives t r a n s f e r unto each other, f e e l i n g s f o r the important people of the past, and u n r e s o l v e d c o n f l i c t s from these e a r l i e r phases of development are l i k e l y to be s t i r r e d t o l i f e again."24 F r e d e r i c F l a c k (1978) spoke of the e a r l y attachments and l e a r n i n g as "unconscious blue p r i n t s " that can f o l l o w us through l i f e - u r g i n g that the task of adolescence and e a r l y adulthood was to shake o f f some of these assumptions and p a t t e r n s , i n an attempt to become f r e e r to determine one's own f u t u r e . " S i g n i f i c a n t t r a c e s of an u p b r i n g i n g r e s i d e w i t h i n our p e r s o n a l i t i e s ( l a r g e l y unconscious) . . . t h i s i m p r i n t c o n t a i n s our e a r l i e s t impressions of what the r e l a t i o n s h i p of marriage i s a b o u t . " 2 ^ Most t h e o r i s t s would agree, that the g r e a t e s t chance f o r success i n marriage, comes from e i t h e r the experience of i n t i m a t e c a r i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s , from having been loved, or by a shrugging o f f of the past, and e x p e r i e n c i n g new l e a r n i n g i n i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . T h i s l a t t e r , i s most d e f i n i t e l y , the more d i f f i c u l t task. The development of a s u c c e s s f u l marriage r e l a t i o n s h i p , n e c e s s i t a t e s a s e p a r a t i o n from the e a r l i e s t attachments, and 25 f o r some, a t r a n s f e r e n c e o f the l e a r n e d e x p e r i e n c e s o f c a r e , t r u s t , i n t i m a c y , and communication. Margaret Mahler (1961) has d e v e l o p e d a concept of " s e p a r a t i o n - i n d i v i d u a t i o n " , which o c c u r s as a r e s u l t o f the s u c c e s s f u l t e r m i n a t i o n o f a s y m b i o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p . " T h i s phase o f development of c o u r s e , p r e c e d e s the o e d i p a l phase, and i t i n v o l v e s the c a p a c i t y t o s e p a r a t e from the p r i m a r y l o v e o b j e c t , the mother...In the i d e a l s i t u a t i o n , each m a r i t a l p a r t n e r w i l l have had a s a t i s f a c t o r y s y m b i o t i c e x p e r i e n c e w i t h h i s mother d u r i n g i n f a n c y , but he a l s o w i l l have had the e x p e r i e n c e o f f i n d i n g t h a t he has d r i v e s not f u l l y g r a t i f i e d i n the p r i m a r y dyad."26 W a l t e r Towman (1969), agrees w i t h Mahler and p l a c e s t h i s concept i n t o h i s framework of complementariness o f e x p e r i e n c e , when he s a y s , "...new s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s are more e n d u r i n g and s u c c e s s f u l , the more they resemble the e a r l i e r , and e a r l i e s t ( i n t r a f a m i l i a l ) s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s 27 of the pers o n i n v o l v e d . " The p o i n t i s c l e a r , t h a t d e v e l o p m e n t a l l y , a l l o f our attachments and r e l a t i o n s h i p s , c u m u l a t i v e l y a f f e c t what we are at a d u l t h o o d , and t h u s our r e l a t i o n s h i p i n t h e i m p o r t a n t and h i g h l y e m o t i o n a l bond o f m a r r i a g e . T h i s does not mean t o say t h a t the e f f e c t s of s e p a r a t i o n o r i n c o n s i s t e n t attachment and p a r e n t i n g has l a s t i n g e f f e c t s , t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s cannot e v e r a c h i e v e happy and s a t i s f y i n g m a r r i a g e s , o r t h a t t h e r e i s not w i t h i n a l l p e r s o n s the c a p a c i t y t o grow, t o change, and t o l e a r n . R a t h e r t h i s s e r v e s the purpose o f s h e d d i n g l i g h t on those p r o c e s s e s t h a t e f f e c t m a r r i a g e , p o s i t i v e l y 26 and negatively, and thus may encourage an awareness at a l l l e v e l s , and avenues for change. Blanck made thi s clear, so that the reader would never lose sight of i t - that, "When one comes to an appreciation of the multiple determining forces that can come to focus in marriage, one i s compelled to abjure the myth that marriage i s either healthy or neurotic. It i s a relationship of such complexity, i t i s inconceivable that two partners who f a l l in love and marry have both reached the ultimate l e v e l of development in a l l areas described, and that they f u l l y complement each other."28 L i l y Pincus (1971) stressed as well, that a l l marriages have fr u s t r a t i o n s and anxieties, and that what we should aim for, i s ways in which to b u i l d up the capacity for mutually s a t i s f y i n g relationships in adulthood. Heinz Hartmann (1958) proposed his concept of the autonomous ego, and the process of adaptation, when he said, "....an individual's capacity to sustain a good marital relationship depends, among other things on the capacity of his ego to deal with the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e . The capacity in turn depends on the extent to which ego development and adaptation, have taken place."29 1 27 D THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SENSE OF PERSONAL COMPETENCE Out of the development of capacities for care, trust, intimacy, and communication in our adult relationships, of being able to successfully separate, of meeting one's own needs, may come a sense of personal competence or mastery. Su l l i v a n speaks of a sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n , of experience that r i s e s out of knowing what one needs and l i k e s , and being able to f i t i t into the rest of l i f e . Pincus said of thi s experience that, "Marriage affords at one and the same time, an opportunity for growth and maturation, and for a return to and a re p e t i t i o n of the central aspects of past experiences. To most people, for the f i r s t time since early childhood, marriage offers the opportunity for an exclusive two-person relationship, for close physical intimacy, and the experience of giving and receiving direct bodily satisfaction."30 Klaus and Kennell said of the attaching process, that i t can cause increased self-esteem, " e l a t i o n " , and "engrossment". Sullivan f e l t that the capacity for intimate relationships had, coupled with i t , a great deal of po s i t i v e p o t e n t i a l . That "one i s able at adulthood to establish relationships of love for some other person, i n which relationship the other person i s as s i g n i f i c a n t , or nearly 31 as s i g n i f i c a n t as one's s e l f . " 28 R.W. White has c a l l e d t h i s sense o f s e l f a f e e l i n g o f " e f f i c a c y " , and d e s c r i b e d i t i n t h i s way, "Competence, i n o t h e r words, i s the c u m u l a t i v e r e s u l t o f the whole h i s t o r y o f one's t r a n s a c t i o n s w i t h the environment. I t i s b u i l t upon our e x p e r i e n c e s of o u r s e l v e s as a doer we can t r u s t and r e l y upon."32 29 E INTERPERSONAL COMPETENCE R.W. White f e l t then t h a t "competence" comes from s u c c e s s f u l t r a n s a c t i o n s w i t h t h e environment, S u l l i v a n saw i t as a t r u s t i n g o f y o u r s e l f and your own c a p a c i t y , stemming from c o n t i n u i t y from our o u t e r p r o v i d e r s . Some t h e o r i s t s have proposed t h a t t h i s sense o f competence i s a n e c e s s a r y o r at l e a s t an i m p o r t a n t antecedent t o the development o f a h i g h l e v e l of f u n c t i o n i n g i n human r e l a t i o n s h i p s . That t h e r e c o u l d be something known as an " i n t e r p e r s o n a l competence", a r e l a t i o n s h i p between two mature p e r s o n s which p o s s e s s e d a m u t u a l i t y , a c c e s s i b i l i t y , and n o n - p o s s e s s i v e n e s s . I t i s t h i s e x p e r i e n c e i n m a r r i a g e t h a t t h i s r e s e a r c h e r f e e l s i s an e s s e n t i a l component o f b o n d i n g , o r s u c c e s s f u l and p o s i t i v e b o n d i n g f o r the c o u p l e . Mary A i n s w o r t h (1958) i n s t u d y i n g s e c u r i t y and p e r s o n a l adjustment s a i d t h a t , "a mature b a s i s o f dependent s e c u r i t y i m p l i e s something beyond a p u r e l y r e c i p i e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p ; i t i n v o l v e s a mutual dependence of two p e o p l e , b o t h o f them c o n t r i b u t i n g , and b o t h r e c e i v i n g . " 3 3 T h i s i s not a c h i e v e d by a l l p e r s o n s , and f o r some i s a c h i e v e d t o a g r e a t e r e x t e n t than i t w i l l be f o r o t h e r s . S u l l i v a n f e l t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s were p r o h i b i t e d from t h i s f u l l development i n human r e l a t i o n s because o f a n x i e t y , because o f problems w i t h the " s e l f - s y s t e m " f u n c t i o n i n g - an in a d e q u a t e o r i n a p p r o p r i a t e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s e l f . H i s premise was t h a t some p e o p l e can s t a n d a n x i e t y , and can l e a r n and grow by i t , w h i l e o t h e r s a re p l a g u e d by i t , f e a r i t , and cannot help themselves. Nelson Foote and Leonard C o t t r e l l J r . , in 1955, further developed Sullivan's theory, and elaborated the concept of "interpersonal competence". They refer to i t as "the development of extraordinary competence in interpersonal r e l a t i o n s . 31 F BONDING BEHAVIOUR IN NEWLY MARRIED COUPLES Sherod M i l l e r (et al) (1976) applied Foote and C o t t r e l l ' s work to t h e i r work with newly married and engaged couples. They spoke of the marital relationship as an "engaging" process - a " f l u i d process of intimate relationship 35 formation". It i s here that the theorists arrive at the concept t h i s researcher refers to as "bonding", - the process of attachment, essential to the marriage, p a r t i c u l a r l y as this researcher has proposed, to the f i r s t year of marriage. Foote and C o t t r e l l emphasize the importance of, "developing the interpersonal competence to accommodate and create change, in order to keep the marital relationship 36 viable over time." The encouragement of bonding in the marital relationship means r e f i n i n g each partner's self-awareness, "heightening each partner's awareness of his own contribution to interaction and helping couples explore t h e i r own rules 37 of r e l a t i o n s h i p . " Competence denotes the ca p a b i l i t y to meet and deal with a changing world, to formulate ends and to implement them. Foote and C o t t r e l l conclude that, "from the standpoint of interpersonal behaviour, personality development i s a continuous process. Not only must there be intermittent adaptation to those conditions, beyond the control of the person, but a person must constantly set himself a fringe of new objectives."38 32 O'Neill and O'Neill (1973) would agree with Foote and C o t t r e l l , and adapt the theory to t h e i r concept of "open marriage". Open marriage i s a relationship in which the partners are committed to t h e i r own and each other's growth, and thrives on trust, care, intimacy, respect, and open and honest communication. "The system operates on the p r i n c i p l e of synergy, which means that two partners in a marriage, or in any relationship can accomplish more personal and interpersonal growth together while s t i l l r etaining t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l i d e n t i t i e s , than they could separately."39 Graham B. Spanier (1976) views t h i s process of development and adjustment in the marriage, much l i k e t h i s researcher does - as a continuum, from p o s i t i v e to negative, a developing process, which c l i n i c i a n s may, with more knowledge, be able to stimulate and encourage. He states that, "marital or dyadic adjustment may be viewed in two d i s t i n c t ways - as a process or a qu a l i t a t i v e state...the process consists of those events, circumstances, and interactions, which move a couple back and forth along t h i s continuum...dyadic adjustment i s a process of movement along a continuum which can be evaluated in terms of proximity to good or poor adjustment."40 33 G SUMMARY Bonding i s viewed as a l i f e long process, that stems out of interpersonal competence. It involves care, respect, trust, open communication, mutual a c c e s s i b i l i t y , non-possessiveness, intimacy, and a concern for the other's growth and development. This research proposes that i t occurs in the f i r s t year of marriage, with the underlying hypothesis that the f i r s t year may be a c r i t i c a l or sensitive time for i t s development. variables, to determine i f they are measures of bonding, and i f they are, as well, an indication of m a r i t a l - s a t i s f a c t i o n . By helping to c l a r i f y the concept of bonding, the researcher, in this respect, has l a i d groundwork for future research in the study of bonding, and in the process of i t s development in the marriage. le v e l of research design for the study, and w i l l outline the measurement instrument to be used, the selection of a study sample, and the planned program of data analysis. The study i s narrowed down, by s e l e c t i n g four Chapter three concerns the selection of an approp r i a t e 34 Chapter III STUDY DESIGN A LEVEL OF RESEARCH DESIGN This study i s exploratory, with the major emphasis on the discovery of insights. The purpose of the study i s to develop a hypothesis, and to define the variables that constitute "bonding behaviour". The rationale for undertaking an exploratory study, i s that the components and nature of the development of relationship between newly married couples i s yet unclear. Research in t h i s area must begin at the l e v e l of gathering information, and c l a r i f y i n g concepts. It i s the i n i t i a l step in what can, and should, become a continuous research process. Data w i l l be collected through the use of a questionnaire, administered in group sessions, ensuring that both partners complete the questionnaire simultaneously, to prevent contamination. A questionnaire was chosen because i t i s more impersonal than an interview, allowing the respondent greater anonymity, which i s important in a study involving personal and emotionally charged data. The questionnaire i s inexpensive, i s not time consuming, allows for r e l a t i v e ease in coding and analysis, and can be administered to a group at one time. An interview might well have been a valuable to o l , p a r t i c u l a r l y at the exploratory l e v e l , but i t was thought that with only t h i r t y subjects, one might gather too much data and show nothing - as well as the ease of contamination by 35 i n t e r v i e w e r ' s b i a s i n questioning, l e a d i n g , i n f l u e n c i n g of responses, and i n a n a l y s i s . A questionnaire allows f o r the r e p o r t i n g of: i ) f a c t s (personal h i s t o r y data, behaviour data, personal h i s t o r y and behaviour data about persons known to the respondent, data about events and c o n d i t i o n s ) ; and i i ) opinions, f e e l i n g s , and b e l i e f s (reasons f o r the s p e c i f i e d behaviour and a t t i t u d e s , o b j e c t i v e and s u b j e c t i v e f a c t o r s ) . ( S e l l t i z et a l ) There w i l l be a p r e - t e s t q u e s t i o n n a i r e given to s i x couples p r i o r to the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The s i x couples w i l l be interviewed a f t e r completing the questionnaire to determine i f the questions were understood as intended, i f the respondents i n t e r p r e t e d the questions i n a s i m i l a r way, i f the questions appeared biased or l e a d i n g , and i f they f e l t the responses given c l e a r l y covered t h e i r f e e l i n g s , thoughts, and a t t i t u d e s , or i f there were gaps, or items they f e l t had been l e f t out. Data obtained from the p r e - t e s t and i n t e r v i e w s w i l l be used to make any necessary changes i n the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 36 The purpose of an exploratory study i s the c l a r i f i c a t i o n of concepts and the development of an instrument to measure those constructs to enable us to better understand and make researchable statements about the nature of the constructs. In such a study, the plan of data analysis turns to "construct v a l i d i t y " . J. Nunally refers to a construct as "put together from the experimentor's imagination...it does 41 not exist as an observable measure of behaviour." It i s the process by which we establish functional relationships among abstract variables - in thi s instance - care, trust, intimacy, and communication. The construct, in thi s study, represents the beginning formation of a hypothesis that the four variables w i l l correlate with one another. Bonding cannot be studied at t h i s l e v e l without constructs. The purpose then, i s to develop measures of the constructs, and to f i n d r elations between the measures of the d i f f e r e n t constructs. "Constructs vary in the extent to which observable variables are: 1) large or small, 2) t i g h t l y or loosely 42 defined." This researcher, and others, have b e l i e f s about what of bonding behaviour i s observable, but beyond that we have only hunches and guess work. Nunally speaks of the "domain" of the variable -that being the range of factors making up the variable - but adds that the boundaries w i l l not be clear. It i s t h i s process of specifying the domain of the variables, determining to what extent they correlate with each other, and determining whether 37 a l l , or some of the measures of the variables appear to measure the construct being studied - that i s the d i f f i c u l t but necessary task or research in new areas of s o c i a l science. In defining what i s meant by bonding, i t becomes necessary to develop a theory about how the variables under study w i l l relate to one another. In the analysis, correlations are made between variables. When the correlations are high, the variables appear to be measuring the same thing. If they s p l i t into clusters, a number of d i f f e r e n t things are being measured. When a l l correlate near zero, they are measuring di f f e r e n t things. Evidence of high construct c o r r e l a t i o n should be a p o s i t i v e indicator, and an encouragement to further research. Constructs in t h i s study w i l l be analyzed through a proposed use of "cluster analysis". It w i l l a s s i s t in p u l l i n g together groups of related variables: It i s used to determine i f a l l responses measuring a variable correlate, and in fact measure that variable, and also i f there i s a relationship c r o s s - s t r u c t u r a l l y between variables, measuring the same construct. R e l i a b i l i t y becomes important to a study t e s t i n g out a measurement instrument. To insure i n t e r n a l consistency, there w i l l be forty test items, i n the measure of each variable.' This w i l l allow for a r e l i a b i l i t y c o - e f f i c i e n t , based on the correlations among items, to test i f the items are related. Important other considerations in assuring r e l i a b i l i t y are - that test items are written c l e a r l y , and e a s i l y understood, that rules for scoring are e x p l i c i t , and that there be minimal s u b j e c t i v i t y in scoring. Test length i s also..atfunction of 38 r e l i a b i l i t y . . The questionnaire was constructed with no formal hypothesis in mind. Rather the emphasis was on the development of forty homegeneous items that appeared to measure each ind i v i d u a l variable. This study i s not without some esse n t i a l concerns on the part of this researcher. J. Nunally suggests that there should be ten times as many subjects as items. In a study of this scale, this i s neither p r a c t i c a l or feasib l e . As well, the study i s entered into with the knowledge that correlations among items are not always high in the case of "attitude, personality, and inter e s t s " . The questionnaire to be used i s designed as a "self - r e p o r t " . The respondent i s asked to describe his own t r a i t s , feelings, b e l i e f s , and perceptions of facts. One of the few means of comparison with his/her responses i s to ask what an "average" person would do oo? f e e l in the same s i t u a t i o n . This self-repo.rt w i l l use a six step ordinal scale. This w i l l not indicate "how much" of the attribute i s present, but w i l l designate the r e l a t i v e p osition of the person, in re l a t i o n to the attributes; and allows for a comparison of respondents with each other. The scale chosen does not u t i l i z e a neutral position -primarily to force a choice, and to eliminate the over-use of the neutral position. It i s f e l t that respondents w i l l have an opinion, p o s i t i v e l y or negatively on each question item. 39 a •03 O <. >H HH EH H O o PH PH 03 O <C >H EH GO o PH PH 03 O < >H EH PH O HH HH CO PH 03 o CO >H HH EH o HH HH CO HH HH 03 O <3 CO >H HH1 EH CO O w HH 03 o co HH HH EH HH HH PH o This s c a l e allows the respondent to f e e l the response i s on a r a t i n g continuum, rather than a simple yes or no. V a l i d i t y of a s e l f - r e p o r t i s l i m i t e d by what the i n d i v i d u a l knows about h i m s e l f , and i s w i l l i n g to r e l a t e . The assurance of anonymity i s expected to increase frankness. Understanding v e r b a l a t t i t u d e s do not always c o r r e l a t e h i g h l y w i t h the behaviour p e r t a i n i n g to the a t t i t u d e , but i n many cases, "what people say, i s more p r e d i c t i v e than what they may 43 f e e l i n any deeper sense." 40 B SAMPLING PROCEDURES The population for thi s study i s a l l heterosexual couples, married between February 1st, 1978 and February 1st, 1979 (one year); both partners married for the f i r s t time -in the c i t y of Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia. Developing a sample from this population was a d i f f i c u l t task. The only way a representative sample could have been obtained was through the use of church marital records. This was thought to produce bias and a skewed example. It i s not appropriate to refer to the t h i r t y couples responding in thi s study, as a sample, as they were not in any way "chosen" by t h i s researcher. Rather the respondents w i l l be the couples who answer the advertisements in the university and c i t y newspapers, as well as couples known to be newlyweds, and sought out by t h i s researcher through newspaper announcements and friends. Respondents w i l l be asked i f they would be interested in completing a questionnaire on "the development of relationship in newly married couples". It was presumed that a sample of t h i r t y couples would be feasible to find, as well as appropriate for an exploratory study. If the assumptions of thi s study hold true, i t could lead to a study on a much larger scale. 41 C METHODS OF GATHERING DATA Source of data i s the respondent - his/her memory of facts, incidents, behaviours, feelings, and attitudes. No agency records or previously c o l l e c t e d data w i l l be used. Each respondent w i l l be asked to complete a questionnaire of 160 questions, designed to measure the degree of "bonding.behaviour" of the respondent. The s i x couples who complete a pre-test questionnaire, w i l l be interviewed following the pre-test, as a r e l i a b i l i t y check to determine i f the questions were understood as intended, i f respondents f e l t t h e i r answers represented t h e i r true opinions and feelings, and to look for gaps that might have been missed in the questionnaire. Following completion of the questionnaire by the t h i r t y test couples, each w i l l be asked to complete the I.M.S. (Index of Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n ; W.W. Hudson/D.H. Glisson;. 1976). The I.M.S. i s a series of twenty-five questions, both po s i t i v e and negative, that was designed to measure the degree of marital discord. It i s eas i l y self-administered, contains minimal instructions, and "can be completed in three to fi v e 44 minutes." The I.M.S. was .tested for r e l i a b i l i t y using two dif f e r e n t methods - s p l i t half and test re-test. The s p l i t half r e l i a b i l i t y was .955 and . 956, c.and on test re-test .966. The v a l i d i t y c o - e f f i c i e n t s (when compared with the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Test), range from -.741 to 42 -.806 with a mean of -.779.* 11 ...concurrently v a l i d i t y c o - e f f i c i e n t s tend to range from about .40 to . 60 with a median of .50, and every one of the concurrent v a l i d i t y c o - e f f i c i e n t s from the I.M.S. exceeds those figures. 11 45 Hudson and Glisson have developed the I.M.S. as a c l i n i c a l t o ol. Thirty was chosen as the cutting point score, those who appeared to have a stable and s a t i s f y i n g marital r e l a t i o n -ship scoring less than t h i r t y , and those who appeared to have marital problems scoring greater than t h i r t y . monitor and assess the marital discord and d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n of cl i e n t s on a continuous basis over time. to fake i f the respondent so chooses. Hudson and Glisson state that t h i s was deliberate, the respondents being informed that the tool i s only useful for him/her when completed with honesty. * The scores are negative because the Locke-Wallace measures marital adjustment and the I.M.S. measures marital discord. The I.M.S. was developed for use by c l i n i c i a n s , to The scale i t s e l f i s obvious, the questions being easy 43 D PROGRAM OF DATA ANALYSIS The MIDAS (Michigan Interactive Data Analysis 46 System) was used to analyze the data because i t i s terminal oriented and p a r t i c u l a r l y fast. CONTROL OPTIONS = WIDE READ FI = MARYANN C = 1-60 VAR = 1-192 FO = (2(2X, 78F1.01), 2X,33F1.0,1F2.0,5F1.0) L = * WRITE * FO = NONE C = 1 VAR = 1-12, 184-195 TRANS V196 = SUM VAR = 1-40 C = 1-60 L = * TRANS V197 = SUM VAR = 41-80 C = 1-60 L = * TRANS V198 = SUM VAR = 81-120 C = 1-60 L = * TRANS V199 = SUM VAR = 121-160 C = 1-60 L = * TRANS V200 = SUM VAR = 161-185 C = 1-60 L - * WRITE VAR = 196-200 FO = 5F7 .2 C = ALL S = NONE F l + * CORRELATE VAR = 196--200 C = ALL CORRELATE VAR = 196--200 ; 1-40 C = ALL CORRELATE VAR = 196--200 ; 41-80 C = ALL CORRELATE ' VAR - 196--200 ; 8H20 C = ALL CORRELATE VAR = 196--200 ; 121-160 C = ALL DESCRIBE C = ALL VAR = 186-194' CODE RES = 186-200 FUN = * VAR = 186-200 L = * ONEWAY C = ALL VAR =186-194 OP = MARG% CUM% TWOWAY COMPLETE VAR = 196-200 ; 187-188 OP = COLUMN%, ORDINAL KSAMPLE VAR = 196-200 S = V186 FINISH >END OF FILE 44 Chapter IV STUDY FINDINGS A IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESEARCH DESIGN: PROBLEMS IN SAMPLING, DATA COLLECTION, AND/OR ANALYSIS This study involves a sample of t h i r t y heterosexual couples, married less than one year, married for the f i r s t time, and l i v i n g in Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia. There was a pre-test of six couples, who met the same c r i t e r i a as the > sample couples. The sample chosen was a "convenience" sample. The pre-test couples were required to complete a questionnaire, (simultaneously, so as not to confer while responding), at the School of Social Work, during the f i r s t week of February, 1979. After completing the questionnaire, the pre-test couples were asked to respond to the questionnaire - i t s reada b i l i t y ; were questions understood as the researcher had intended them?; did any question probe unnecessarily? A l l of the pre-test respondents stated that the questionnaire was clear, and expressed no problems with comprehension. The respondents agreed that the questions were appropriate, and none f e l t that any one question was too probing, or produced an uncomfortable f e e l i n g or response. There were no changes made in the questionnaire, none were re-written, or rearranged, on the basis of the pre-test questionnaire. The t h i r t y couples, who comprise the sample, 45 completed the questionnaires in three sessions, and the mean completion time was twenty minutes. A l l couples taking part in the study requested results of the research, when the study was completed. No changes were necessary in the sampling procedure from those set forth in the design. The questionnaires were coded on a f i v e point rating continuum, ranging from none of the time, a l i t t l e of  the time, sometime, good part of the time, and most or a l l of the time. The o r i g i n a l ordinal s c a l e 3 s e l e c t e d was a range from completely agree to completely disagree. The scale was changed to the scale used on the I.M.S. (Hudson/Glisson) for ease of scoring and also because the items seemed to sample behaviour that recurred. Each question on the questionnaire was coded, on a scale from one to f i v e , f i v e representing the best possible response to the item. The I.M.S. was re-scored to match the scoring system of the questionnaire, a score of f i v e i n d i c a t i n g a high degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n . The highest attainable score on the questionnaire was 800 points, and on the I.M.S., 125 points. The demographic data was coded in order i t could be correlated with t o t a l scores on each variable, and on the I.M.S. The questionnaire i s made up of 160 questions. Questions 1-40 represent the variable communication. Questions 41-80 represent the variable intimacy. Questions 81-120 represent the variable trust. Questions 121-160 prepresent the variable care. The I.M.S. follows the 160 item "bonding" 4 6 inventory, and nine demographic questions follow the I.M.S. Seven of the nine demographic questions were coded, to include in the analysis of data - sex, age, education, length of time married ( i n months), how long respondent has l i v e d in B r i t i s h Columbia, whether respondent l i v e d in a r u r a l or urban environment most often in the f i r s t eighteen years of his/her l i f e , and whether or not the respondent took a marriage preparation course. The other two questions, ethnic o r i g i n , and length of time l i v e d in Canada, were not coded as there was l i t t l e or no variance between subjects, on these two items. There were remarkably few problems with this study. The data was coded and keypunched, and adapted well to the M.I.D.A.S. program of data analysis. The analysis correlated the t o t a l scores on each variable; correlated each item against the f i v e t o t a l scores, - the four variables and the I.M.S. (using Pearson's r) ; produced descriptive information on the demographic data; cross-correlated demographic data with the f i v e t o t a l scores; and correlated the sex of the respondent with the f i v e t o t a l scores. To insure that adequate care and consideration was taken with the study sample, a proposal of t h i s study was presented to the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Ethics Committee. The study was also appropriate in the use of time and money. 47 B DESCRIPTIVE DATA ON STUDY SAMPLE The study sample was made up of couples married between February 1978 and February 1979, and ranged in age from 20 - 33 years. The coding categories were 18-24 years; 25-30 years; 31-35 years; with 20% f a l l i n g in the f i r s t category, 58% in the second, and 21.7% in the t h i r d category. The majority of the respondents were between 25 - 30 years, which seems appropriate for a population married less than one year, and married for the f i r s t time. The education of respondents was broken down into -high school (8.3%), college (6.7%), university (75.0%), and post-graduate (10.0%). The sample was a highly educated one. This could be partly explained through the advertisement for subjects in the c i t y newspaper and the university newspaper, although the sample i s more highly educated than this researcher had expected. It i s possible that more highly educated people tend to seek out t h i s type of study, and are perhaps more actively involved i n exploring th e i r marriage relationship. Perhaps i t i s that more highly educated persons are less threatened by, or perhaps more accustomed to the exploration of relationship. The length of time married, varied in the study sample from three months to ten months, with the highest concentration of respondents married between six and nine months, a t o t a l of 90%. 48 The majority of the respondents (85%) l i v e d most of the time, up to the age of eighteen, in an urban environment. 43.3% of the sample had l i v e d in B r i t i s h Columbia less than one year and 45% had l i v e d in B r i t i s h Columbia more than ten years. (8.3% l i v e d in B r i t i s h Columbia between one and three years; 1.7% between three and f i v e years; and 1.7% between f i v e and ten years,) A surprising 63.3% of the sample had taken a preparation for marriage course. This finding was much higher than this researcher had expected. It could be that couples who had taken a preparation for marriage course were the type of people who tended to explore and examine t h e i r relationships, and thus the type who would respond to such a study. It could also be, but i t i s less l i k e l y , that couples in t h i s age group tend to take part in preparation for marriage courses, or that preparation for marriage programs are becoming more widespread and popular. In summary, the sample appears to be highly l i t e r a t e , and very s i m i l a r in age, education, and e t h n i c i t y . They are people primarily from urban backgrounds, who appear highly interested in preparation for marriage. 49 C FINDINGS ON STUDY QUESTIONS The raw data in th i s study includes, for each respondent-, a score on variable I, communication, from 1-200; a score on variable II, intimacy, from 1-200; a score on variable III, trust, from 1-200; a score on variable IV, care,• from 1-200; and a score on the I.M.S., from 1-125. The scores are very high, very homogeneous, with very l i t t l e v a r i a t i o n among respondents. The score of husband and wife can be compared, and in every case, when the husband's score i s high, the wife's score i s also high, and when the husband's score i s low, the wife's score i s also low. Scores on the four study variables, and on the I.M.S. were homogeneous for a l l of the respondents. Eg. Variable I 175 Eg. Variable I 144 Variable II 176 Variable II 155 Variable III 170 Variable III 156 Variable IV 176 Variable IV 148 I.M.S. 118 I.M.S. 92 (Complete t o t a l scores for a l l respondents may be found in Appendix A) This researcher expects that the responses were homegeneous due to the homogenuity of the sample - a group of people very s i m i l a r in age, education, and eth n i c i t y . Perhaps also this group i s si m i l a r , i n that they are people who respond to this type of advertisement, who take preparation for marriage courses, and who take an interest in marriage upgrading. The study should be replicated on a less homogeneous group, perhaps a cross-section of a l l newly married couples in Vancouver, in a s i x month period, to determine i f results would be sim i l a r 50 with that group. The scores are extremely high on a l l four variables, as well as on the I.M.S. This i s an indicati o n that a l l four variables are consistent with marital s a t i s f a c t i o n , and also that t h i s i s a sample who are quite content and s a t i s f i e d with the marriage relationship. The research questions of t h i s study are: 1. In each of the four variables, a l l items w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with the t o t a l score. 2. The correlation w i l l be larger than correlations with t o t a l scores on each of the other three variables. 3. These correlations w i l l be larger than correlations with the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. 4. Total score on the I.M.S. w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with t o t a l scores on each of the four variables. 1. In Each of the Four Variables, A l l Items W i l l S i g n i f i c a n t l y  Correlate With the Total Score. Each item, 1-160, was correlated with the f i v e t o t a l scores, on communication, intimacy, tru s t , care, and the I.M.S. This researcher i s concerned with the items for each variable, producing a greater mean correlation with that variable, than with the other three, or the I.M.S., in order to show that the items for each variable were a measure of that variable, and not of another variable, or of a cluster of variables. 51 Table I shows the mean correlations of items 1-40, with the t o t a l scores on the four variables, and on the I.M.S. Items 1-40 in this study measure communication. The mean correlation of the t o t a l score on communication with items 1-40 (.3675) i s higher than the other mean correlations, (0.2719; 0.2521; 0.2579; 0. 2146) although the differences were r e l a t i v e l y small. Table II shows the mean correlations of items 41-80 with the t o t a l scores on the four variables and on the I.M.S. Items 41-80 in th i s study measure intimacy. The mean correlation of the t o t a l score on intimacy with items 41-80 (0.2849) i s higher than the other mean correlations (0.2181; 0.2849; 0.2291; 0.1810) although the difference i s r e l a t i v e l y small.' Table III shows the mean correlations of items 81-120 with the t o t a l scores on the four variables and on the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. Items 81-120 in th i s study measure tru s t . The mean correlation of the t o t a l score on trust with items 81-120 (0.2989) i s higher than the other mean correlations (0.1962; 0.1728; 0.1721; 0.1723) although the difference i s r e l a t i v e l y small. Table IV shows the mean correlations of items 121-160 with the t o t a l scores on the four variables, and the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. Items 121-160 in th i s study measure care. The mean correlation on the t o t a l score on care with items 121-160 52 (0.2738) i s higher than the other mean correlations, (0.1902; 0.2148; 0.1701; 0.1882), although the difference i s r e l a t i v e l y small. 2. These Correlations W i l l Be Larger Than Correlations With  Total Scores on Each of the Other Three Variables Although the t o t a l score on each variable does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with a l l of the items which set out to measure that variable, the correlations, in a l l four cases, are larger than correlations with the t o t a l scores on each of the other three variables. 3. Correlations of the Total Score on Each Variable With  the Items Which Measure The Variable, W i l l be Larger  Than Correlations With the Total Score on the I.M.S. The mean correlation of items 1-40 with the t o t a l score on communication i s 0.3675. This i s larger than the mean correlation of items 1-40 with the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. which i s 0.2146. The mean correlation of items 41-80, with the t o t a l score on intimacy i s 0.2849. This i s larger than the mean correlation of items 41-80 with the t o t a l score on the I.M.S., which i s 0.1810. The mean correlation of items 81-120 with the t o t a l score on trust i s 0.2989. This i s larger than the mean correlation of items 81-120, with the t o t a l score on the I.M.S., which i s 0.1723. 53 The mean correlation of items 121-160, with the t o t a l score on care i s 0.2738. This i s larger than the mean corre l a t i o n of items 121-160, with the t o t a l score on the I.M.S., which i s 0.1882. 4. Total Score on the I.M.S. W i l l S i g n i f i c a n t l y Correlate  With the Total Score on Each of the Four Variables Table V shows that the correlation of the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. with the t o t a l score on variable I, communication, i s 0.5498. The correlation of the t o t a l score on the I.M.S., with the t o t a l score on variable II, intimacy, i s 0.5907. The correlation of the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. with the t o t a l score on variable III, trust, i s 0.5633. The correlation of the t o t a l score of the I.M.S., with the t o t a l score on variable IV, care i s 0.6177. A l l of the t o t a l scores for the four variables, are substantial, are highly s i g n i f i c a n t i n the i r correlation with the t o t a l score on the I.M.S. Conclusion In each of the four variables, not a l l items s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with the t o t a l score. Thirty-one items correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with communication, nineteen items with intimacy, twenty-three items with trust, and sixteen items with care. The mean of these correlations i s however, larger than the mean correlations with the other three variables, or with the I.M.S. 54 This i s evidence that the items do measure the respective variables, although there are l i k e l y to be some items which are not good measures of the variable ^ that measure another variable, or a combination of variables. There i s evidence that these concepts exist separately, although that evidence i s inconclusive. That the correlations are a l l in the right d i r e c t i o n i s encouraging. The assumption of this research, that a l l of the four variables are associated with marital s a t i s f a c t i o n (I,M.S.) i s strongly supported. The t o t a l scores on the I.M.S. correlate very highly with the t o t a l scores for each variable. 55 TABLE I MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 1-40 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. VARIABLES MEAN CORRELATION VAR. I COMMUNICATION VAR. II INTIMACY VAR. I l l TRUST VAR. IV CARE INDEX OF MARITAL SATISFACTION 0.3675 0.2719 0.2521 0.2569 0.2146 TABLE II MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 41-80 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. VARIABLES MEAN CORRELATION VAR. I COMMUNICATION VAR. II INTIMACY ' VAR. I l l TRUST VAR. IV CARE INDEX OF MARITAL SATISFACTION 0.2181 0.2849 0.1868 0.2291 0.1810 56 TABLE III MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 81-120 WITH TOTAL SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. VARIABLE MEAN CORRELATION OF TOTAL SCORE ON TRUST VAR. I COMMUNICATION 0.1962 VAR. II INTIMACY 0.1728 VAR. I l l TRUST 0.2989 VAR. IV CARE 0.1721 INDEX OF MARITAL SATISFACTION 0.1723 TABLE IV MEAN CORRELATIONS OF ITEMS 12-1=160 WITH TOTAL  SCORES ON THE FOUR VARIABLES AND I.M.S. VARIABLE MEAN CORRELATION VAR. I COMMUNICATION 0.1902 VAR. II INTIMACY 0.2148 VAR. I l l TRUST 0.1701 VAR. IV. CARE 0.2738 INDEX OF MARITAL SATISFACTION 0.1882 57 TABLE V CORRELATIONS OF THE TOTAL SCORES ON EACH OF THE FOUR  VARIABLES WITH THE TOTAL SCORES ON THE OTHER THREE VARIABLES AND THE I.M.S. COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE I.M.S COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE I.M.S. 1.0000 0.7330 0.6665 0.6965 0.5498 1.0000 0.5820 0.7492 0.5907 1.0000 0.5662 1.0000 0.5633 0.6177 1.0000 58 D REFINEMENT OF THE MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT . In r e f i n i n g the questionnaire, i t i s necessary to select out the discriminating, and non-discriminating items, for each of the four variables. In the case of this study, any correlation larger than .2564 i s s i g n i f i c a n t . A non-discriminating item i s one which f a i l s to correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the t o t a l score on the variable i t i s designed to measure. Items 1 - 4 0 The following items s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with the variable being measured (communication), and did not correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the ..other three variables. (See Table VI) They are thus good measures of that variable. They are: My mate co-operates with me. I l i k e myself. I f e e l I understand my mate. My mate t e l l s me what he/she expects of me. My mate witholds information from me. These items are powerful measures of communication, and they show that the variable, to some extent, does exist separately from the other three variables. Table VII shows those items which correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with communication, but which also correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with one or more of the other variables. These Item 3 Item 5 Item 6. Item..18 Item 35 59 are twenty-six of the forty items, and they show that the variables c l e a r l y tend to overlap. Table VIII shows those items which do not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with any of the variables, and thus are not good measures. A l l eight of these items should be reworded, or dropped from the questionnaire. One item, number 26, correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with intimacy and care, but did not correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with communication. It should be moved to another place in the questionnaire, when the questionnaire i s revised. TABLE VI CORRELATION CO-EFFICIENTS OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 1-40  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH COMMUNICATION ONLY ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 3 5 6 18 35 . 3679* . 5032* . 2825* . 3077* .2735* . 1672 . 2623 .2050 . 2444 . 1427 .2637 .2508 . 1897 ^0379 .0688 . 1578 . 2487 .2167 . 1859 . 1902 * represents a s i g n i f i c a n t correlation - correlations are Pearson's r TABLE VII CORRELATION CO-EFFICIENTS OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES ITEMS 1-40 ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH COMMUNICATION AND OTHER VARIABLES ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 1 . 3654* .4068* . 0963 .3662* 2 .3423* .2614 .3921* . 1972 9 .5231* .3696* . 1620 .3224* 10 .2934* .0882 . 2694* .2005 11 .4452* . 1966 .2846* .3200* 14 .3506* .3101* .4931* .3977* 15 .4851* .3526* .2917* .3059* 16 .3903* .2593* .4905* .2429 17 .5810* .4534* . 5098* .4593* 19 .5580* .4179* .2531 .4371* 20 .4665* .6285* .3419* .4154* 22 .4208* .2688* . 1566 .2183 24 .3095* .0538 .3549* . 1752 25 .6328* .5715* .4766* .5392* 27 .5029* .4390* .5017* .3202* 28 .4580* .5028* .2889* . 3681* 30 .5887* .3907* .3870* .5230* 31 .7141* .5096* .5142* .5668* 32 .4005* .3109* .5224* . 2222 33 .3313* .3454* . 1394 . 1705 34 .4018* .3210* .36 34* .3083* 36 .3976* .3019* .3584* . 1991 37 .4002* .4759* .2287 .3102* 38 .6153* .2942* . 5395* .4085* 39 .6117* .3252* .6161* .4935* 40 .4790* .4775* . 2912* .3756* note that in most cases the highest correlation i s with communication *represents a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n 62 TABLE VIII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 1-40  ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLE ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 4 . 1522 .0150 . 1830 . 1343 •7 .0394 .0166 .0686 .0133 8 . 1262 .0835 .0132 .0988 12 . 1863 . 1363 . 1653 .1255 13 .1364 - .3108 . 2842 . 3917 21 .0231 . 1598 . 1020 .0574 23 . 1673 . 1315 . 0256 . 1614 29 .2030 .2458 . 0135 . 1418 63 Items 41 - 80 There are only two items which powerfully discriminate intimacy: item 75, "I f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to t e l l my mate I love him/her", and item 77, "I f e e l I can be honest with my mate". Eighteen of the forty items correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with a cl u s t e r of the variables, or a l l four of the variables. This emphasizes again, the tendency of the variables to overlap. Table XI i l l u s t r a t e s f i f t e e n items which do not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with any of the variables, and which should therefore be reworded, or dropped from the questionnaire. There are f i v e items: 43, 60, 62, 57, and 73, which s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with another variable, but not with intimacy. Item 43 correlates s i g n i f i c a n t l y with tru s t , item 60. with ..trust and communication, item 62 with trust, communication, and care, item 57 with care, and item 73 with communication. These f i v e items should be moved in the questionnaire, to measure the variables with which they have a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n . TABLE IX CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 41-80  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH INTIMACY ONLY ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 75 70156 .3352* .0743 . 1492 77 .0065 .2715* . 2166 .2160 TABLE X CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES ITEMS 41-80  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH INTIMACY AND OTHER VARIABLES ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 46 .4335* .3860* . 4973*. .3395* 48 .5040* .6397* .3871* .6258* 49 .3851* .5121* .5377* .3812* 50 .3472* .5027* .4425* .4566* 51 .4708* .3869* .3667* .3598* 52 .4891* .3349* .4090* .4625* 56 .3776* .4730* .4072* .4849* 58 . 3934* .2585 .5069* .3968* 59 . 5771 .5191* .6372* .5797* 66 .3338* .5507* .2360 .4252* 67 .3496* . 2958* .3247* .2292 69 .3392* .3391* .3392* .5222* 70 .3699* .4009* .2453 .3254* 71 .2836* .4768* .1348 > .3668* 72 .4328* .2895* .2707* .2544 74 .4291* .5329* .4365* .5071* 78 . 1500 .3170* .0216 . 2992* 80 .5466* .4818* .5521* .6131* - note that in most cases the highest correlation i s with intimacy * represents a s i g n i f i c a n t correlation 65 TABLE XI CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 41-80 ' ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLES ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 41 .0389 .0881 .2854 . 1161 42 .0832 .2069 . 1102 . 1029 44- .0670 . 1089 .0387 . 0240 45 .0238 .0060 .0655 .2522 47 .2301 .1878 .0286 . 1374 53 .0089 . 0494 . 0899 .0274 54 .0061 .1770 .0624 .0460 55 .0999 . 1867 .0087 . 1689 61 . 0009 .1806 . 1157 .0991 63 .1161 . 1015 .0772 . 1432 64 .2030 .2120 . 0046 .0349 65 71023 . 1839 .2266 . 1150 68 . 1011 .1300 . 1689 . 1386 76 . 1601 . 1980 .2181 . 1842 79 ' .2013 . 1426 . 1089 .0469 66 Items 81 - 120 There are ten items which powerfully, discriminate trust. This i s evidence that trust does exist as a separate variable, and that i t can be measured. They are: ' ' . Item 83 When I r e a l l y need my mate, he/she i s there. Item 87 I can count on my parents. Item 92 Most couples trust each other. Item 95 I trust my parents. Item 98 I• can look after myself, i f I have to. Item 99 When my mate i s with me, I sleep well. Item 104 I wonder at times i f my mate i s u n f a i t h f u l to me. Item 106 I think my spouse l i e s to me. Item 114 I can count on my mate. Item 119 I f e e l cared for. Table XIII shows that there are sixteen items which are not only good measures of trust, but which also s i g n i f i c a n t correlate with one or more of the other three variables. In this case too, the evidence shows that the variables tend to overlap. Table XIV shows eleven items which f a i l e d to s i g n i f i c a n t l y measure any of the four variables, and they should be reworded, or dropped from the questionnaire. There are three items which s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with a variable other than trust. They are: "I take advantage of my mate", with a corr e l a t i o n c o - e f f i c i e n t of..3272 with communication; item 102 "When my mate goes out, I'm unsure 67 about what he/she i s r e a l l y doing", with a correlation c o - e f f i c i e n t of .2615 with communication; and item 116, "I f e e l I'm not in control", with a correlation c o - e f f i c i e n t of .2666 with communication. These three items should be rearranged within the questionnaire, to measure communication, rather than trust. y TABLE XII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 81-120  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH TRUST ONLY ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 83 .0617 . 1355 .3876* .0996 87 . 1695 . 1680 .5289* . 1673 92 . 1984 .1025 .2593* . 1725 95 . 1034 .0049 .3506* .0401 98 .2133 .0589 .3320* .0948 99 .0896 .0071 .3918* .0020 104 .0710 .0687 .3193* .0042 106 .2124 .2202 .3323* .0478 114 .2102 .2611 .5017* .1541 119 . 1420 .2187 .3848* .2432 TABLE XIII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 81-120  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH TRUST AND OTHER VARIABLES ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 81 .4390* .3692* .4230* .3999* 82 .5739* .4582* .4770* .5352* 84 .3021* .2925* .5676* .2397* 86 .2726* .2034 .3129* .2831* 93 . 3934* .4115* .4216* .4293* 94 .2494 .4459* .4373* .3161* 96 .3147* . 1295 .4348* .2504 97 .4273* .1084 . .4043* . 1851 101 .3334* .3304* .4761* .3276* 105 .2976* .2507 .3703* . 1109 107 .4494* . 5269* .4736* .3243* 108 .1129 .3398* .3780* .1698 109 .2733* .2663* .3634* .2727* 110 . 389-1* .2878* .4742* .2945* 112 .2526 .1941 .3997* .2757* 115 .2784* .2514 .3502* .4767* - note that in most cases the highest co r r e l a t i o n i s with trust * represents a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n TABLE XIV CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 81-120  ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLE ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 85 .0194 .0745 . 1574 . 0699 88 . 1156 .0917 . 1068 .0890 89 . 1189 .0673 .0200 . 1595 90 .2243 .1706 .0522 . 1317 91 .1831 .1239 .0772 . 0026 103 . 2262 .0209 .0831 .2008 111 .2221 . 1752 .2364 . 1827 113 . 1447 . 0445 .1033 .0551 117 .1503 .0297 .0177 .0146 118 .0016 . 1243 . 1584 .1274 120 .0366 . 1447 .0883 .0183 V 70 Items 121 - 160 There are only three items which strongly discriminate care. They are: Item 131 My mate i s a happy person. Item 132 I fe e l we've changed since we got married. Item 152 My mate and I often quarrel. This does not indicate that care exists as a separate variable, although t h i s questionnaire has been unable to . provide conclusive evidence of t h i s . Table XVI shows that there are f i f t e e n items which are not only good measures of care, but which also s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with one or more of the other variables. This i s strong evidence that a l l four variables tend to overlap, and thus measure much the same feelings and sentiments. The variables do not c l e a r l y break down, even into two or three recognizable categories. Table XVII shows seventeen items which do not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with any of the variables, and a l l seventeen should be reworded or dropped from the questionnaire. There are f i v e items i n t h i s case, which correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with a variable other than care. They are: item 122 "My parents were opposed to my marriage", with a correlation c o - e f f i c i e n t of .2766 with communication; item 153 "I can't seem to get people to l i k e me", with a correlation c o - e f f i c i e n t of..2783 with communication, and .2947 with trust; item 154 "I'm happy when my mate i s successful", with a 71 correlation c o - e f f i c i e n t of .3842 with communication, .3535 with intimacy; and .3506 with trust; item 158 "I enjoy being married" with a cor r e l a t i o n c o - e f f i c i e n t of .3943 with intimacy, amd .2699 with trust; and item 160 "I'm glad I got married", with a correlation c o - e f f i c i e n t of .2853 with intimacy. These f i v e items should be placed elsewhere i n the questionnaire, and removed from the items measuring care. TABLE XV CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 121-160  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH CARE ONLY ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE .2206 ^2147 .3363* .1407 .0016 .3510* .1428 .1450 .3501* TABLE XVI CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 121-160  ITEMS WHICH CORRELATE SIGNIFICANTLY WITH CARE AND OTHER VARIABLES ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 121 .4689* .3865* .3526* .5723* 125 .4911* .4754* .2123*• .5326* 126 .3539* .4451* .3302* .5728* 127 .4890* .5227* .4124* .5488* 128 .5891* .5566* .4251* .5937* 129 .4666* .5544* .5314* .5736* 130 .6300* . 6296* .3815* .6992* 133 .3548* .4237* .4337* .4354* 137 .4603* .4561* .2529 .5783* 144 .2094* .3067* . 3216* .4685* 145 . 2662* . 1777 .1751 .3958* 148 .4017* .1740 .2481 .3654* 150 .2405 . 3235* . 1805 .4480* 151 .1365 .2335 . 3675* . 2862 159 .2879* .2712* .3529* .4303* 131 .1076 132 .1607 152 .1440 * represents a s i g n i f i c a n t correlation 73 TABLE XVII CORRELATION OF EACH ITEM WITH TOTAL SCORES: ITEMS 121-160  ITEMS WHICH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATE WITH ANY VARIABLE ITEM COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE 123 . 1741 .0182 . 1154 . 1141 124 .2202 . 1384 . 1963 .0016 134 .0337 .0610 . 0736 . 1033 135 .0162 . 1782 .0845 .0649 136 .0987 .0534 . 1104 .0369 138 .0980 .0322 .0215 .2005 139 .0145 .0140 . 1248 . 1008 140 .0570 .0118 .0604 .0530 141 .1411 .1040 .0283 .0370 142 72786 .2178 . 1924 . 1589 143 . 1300 . 0761 .0148 .0685 146 .2068 .1777 . 1504 . 2398 147 . 1591 . 1289 . 2486 .2542 149 .0784 . 1511 . 0116 . 2473 155 .1071 . 0693 .0015 .2092 156 .1200 .2230 .2604 . 1604 157 .0755 .1602 . 1442 .0784 74 E THE RELATIONSHIP OF DEMOGRAPHIC DATA TO THE  FOUR VARIABLES AND THE I.M.S. Table XVIII shows the relationship of the demographic data with the four variables and with the I.M.S. There are three s i g n i f i c a n t correlations - education with communication; education with trust; education with intimacy, with p>.05. The greater the education the greater the score on the three variables. It i s d i f f i c u l t to understand or to explain why education i s s i g n i f i c a n t to the l e v e l of communication, trus t , and intimacy of the respondent. This i s an unexpected and surprising finding of th i s study. It i s thi s researcher's f e e l i n g that education often provides the a b i l i t y to broaden one's scope, to.see more sides or facets of an issue, and tends to discourage us from encompassing any one, or narrow view t o t a l l y . Perhaps i t i s that more educated persons are less r i g i d and c o n t r o l l i n g in t h e i r conceptualizations of and p a r t i c i p a t i o n in communication, trust, and intimacy in the marriage. Certainly i t i s the a b i l i t y . t o allow the partner his/her own sty l e of communication, to l i s t e n to, arid to understand the other as he/she i s , to trust that the other i s a capable person; and the achievement of a non-possessive intimate relationship, that i s what thi s researcher i s studying and measuring as bonding behaviour. But t h i s i s only a guess, and i s an area that would require more data before any meaningful conclusions could be drawn. \ 75 The only other s i g n i f i c a n t relationship i s equally as i n t e r e s t i n g and puzzling to t h i s researcher, - t h i s i s between sex and communication. The average rank score.of males and communication i s 34.8, and of females and communication i s 26.2. The difference i s s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . Why males scored higher than females on t h e i r perception of the communication in the marriage i s unclear. It i s t r a d i t i o n a l l y believed that just the opposite would have been true. The only clue t h i s researcher has that could explain t h i s comes from a single case done on the same topic as this thesis. In t h i s case, the couple indicated to the researcher t h e i r perception of why they had come for counselling. The husband said there were no problems, although he mentioned that his wife often complained that they never r e a l l y talked together. He did not perceive i t as a problem. The wife stated that her primary reason for seeking professional help was that there were problems i n communication in the marriage; It i s possible that the same i s true of t h i s study -that the husband i s less apt to perceive a problem in communication, than the wife i s . However, this too, i s a guess, and the reverse may also be true - that husbands.in thi s study r e a l l y do communicate better than t h e i r wives. Only further research w i l l be able to c l a r i f y t h i s finding more f u l l y . 76 TABLE XVIII MEAN RANKS OF EDUCATION AND AGE  WITH THE FOUR VARIABLES AND WITH THE I.M.S. EDUCATION AGE COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE I.M.S. 3.2916* 2.026* 3.2167* 1.4216 1. 1631 1.4669 -.0337 -.2202 1.0501 -0.2335 TABLE CXIX MEAN RANKS ON THE TOTAL SCORE  ON THE VARIABLES AND THE I.M.S. WITH SEX OF THE RESPONDENT MALE FEMALE TOTAL COMMUNICATION 34.8* 26.2* 60 INTIMACY 32.1 28.8 60 TRUST 34.2 26.7 60 CARE 31.4 29.5 60 I.M.S. 27.7 33.2 60 r e p r e s e n t s a s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s b e i n g c o m p a r e d a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e two 77 F CONCLUSION The measurement instrument designed i n t h i s research, reveals i n t e r e s t i n g and fascinating data about the study variables, and the concept of bonding. For each of the four variables, there are powerful items which correlate only with that variable, and which serve to discriminate i t , as a separate entity, which can be iso l a t e d and measured. The variable of trust , i n p a r t i c u l a r , with ten items that s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with i t alone, i s strong evidence that i t exists as a separate entity, apart from the three other variables. There are twenty such items for the four variables, and ..the mean scores on the items tends to be very high. These twenty items t e l l us something important about the concept of bonding. The items appear to show a certain " s t y l e " of the partners rather than an actual expression of what goes on in the relationship. Rather than stating behaviour or facts, the items indicate an attitude. High scores on these items represent people who f e e l that t h e i r mate co-operates with them, that t h e i r mate understands them, that they t e l l t h e i r partner what they expect of each other and do not withold information. They trust t h e i r mate, t h e i r parents and themselves, - and believe that, in general, people trust each other. They are ..comfort able with th e i r mate, and do not worry that t h e i r mate w i l l l i e or be u n f a i t h f u l to them. They f e e l cared for, f e e l that t h e i r mate i s a happy 78 p e r s o n , and e x p e c t and a l l o w change i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p . These are p e o p l e who e x p r e s s a c o m f o r t a b l e and happy f e e l i n g about the r e l a t i o n s h i p , and who appear t o be c o n f i d e n t i n t h e m s e l v e s , and n o n - p o s s e s s i v e w i t h t h e i r p a r t n e r s . They t r u s t t h e i r p a r e n t s and t h e i r mate as w e l l . These a r e i m p o r t a n t components of b o n d i n g - the achievement o f an i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p i n v o l v i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l competence, i n the f i r s t y e a r o f m a r r i a g e . There are f i f t y - t w o i t e m s i n t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e which dp not s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e w i t h any o f t h e v a r i a b l e s , and which s h o u l d be e i t h e r reworded or dropped from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , There i s no c l e a r e v i d e n c e t o e x p l a i n why t h e s e i t e m s d i d not work. The i t e m s which deserve the most a t t e n t i o n are those t h a t c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h a number o f , or a l l of the v a r i a b l e s . There are s e v e n t y - f i v e such i t e m s , n e a r l y h a l f o f the items o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . These were items w h i c h , a l t h o u g h s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t i n g w i t h more than one v a r i a b l e , i n almost every c a s e , o b t a i n e d a h i g h e r c o r r e l a t i o n c o - e f f i c i e n t on the i t e m which they s e t out t o measure. I t would be e r r o n e o u s t o assume t h a t t h e s e are poor o r n o n - d i s c r i m i n a t i n g . i t e m s . R a t h e r , i t seems t h a t they have produced a p i c t u r e o f how t h e s e f o u r v a r i a b l e s r e l a t e , and may t e l l us something i n t e r e s t i n g and v a l u a b l e about bonding. 79 It seems that although there i s evidence that these four variables can be i s o l a t e d and measured, there i s also strong evidence that the tendency i s for them to s overlap, and to react s i m i l a r l y . The question t h i s brings to mind i s - whether th i s group of items measured much the same thing, or i f the four are indeed separate and unique variables, but that together they measure something that t h i s researcher has referred to as bonding. It could be that bonding i s a process made up of several important, inseparable, and overlapping a f f e c t i o n a l processes - and that care, trust, intimacy, and communication are necessary components. The evidence i s clear that these four variables do relate to each other. A high measure on one i s congruent with a high measure on the other three. This group of items on this questionnaire e l i c i t e d responses which were very high on a cluster of the variables, or on a l l four. It i s important to examine the•relationship these seventy-five items have with the d e f i n i t i o n s of the four variables, provided by t h i s study. High scores on the communication items show a p r o f i l e of a person who i n i t i a t e s conversation with mate, who feels mate i n i t i a t e s conversation as well, who l i s t e n s to mate, and in turn feels l i s t e n e d to, who understands mate, and also feels understood. This person l i k e s and co-operates with his/her mate, and feels that they do not communicate mixed messages. The respondent's parents were important in that the person f e l t his/her parents were supportive to, and 80 j talked to his/her mate. These responses are consistent with the study d e f i n i t i o n s of communication as a willingness to communicate, and a presence of posit i v e communication ( l i s t e n i n g , understanding, p o s i t i v e feedback, and s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e ) . The p o s s i b i l i t y of a "meta-communication" i s supported by the high s i g n i f i c a n t correlation with item 22, "My mate and I communicate in a d i f f e r e n t manner than we communicate to other people." The notion of personal competence playing an important role in the variables i s supported as well by responses that indicate that the respondent feels l i s t e n e d to, does not f e e l threatened by mate, does not f e e l mate c r i t i c i z e s him/her, feels his/her opinions r e a l l y matter to mate, and as well feels that he/she has important things to say. High scores on intimacy items show a p r o f i l e of a person who-feels relaxed with mate, generally agrees with mat feels cared for by mate, respects, enjoys, and admires mate, senses when mate i s upset, and t r i e s to understand how mate feel s . This person feels he/she i s accepted by mate, and can be s e l f with mate. The respondents' parents were important i n that the respondent l i k e s his/her parents, feels parents show him/her affection, and feels that parents accept his/her mate 81 These responses are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the' d e f i n i t i o n of intimacy i n t h i s study, and support the i d e a of p e r s o n a l competence, and the mature l e v e l of intimacy i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s known as "emotional i n t i m a c y " - e x h i b i t e d by empathy, non-possessiveness, and an a b i l i t y to be o n e s e l f with one's mate. High s c o r e s on the t r u s t items show a person who f e e l s able to c o n f i d e i n h i s / h e r mate, f e e l s mate i s reasonably p r e d i c t a b l e , f e e l s secure w i t h mate, has f a i t h i n mate's d e c i s i o n s , t e l l s spouse how he/she f e e l s , f e e l s cared f o r i n ge n e r a l , and b e l i e v e s that most people are to be t r u s t e d . Parents again p l a y an important r o l e , as the respondent f e e l s cared f o r by h i s / h e r p a r e n t s . The concept of p e r s o n a l competence i s s t r o n g l y supported i n that the respondent f e e l s , l i k e d by most people, has c l o s e f r i e n d s , f e e l s g e n e r a l l y supported by o t h e r people, f e e l s he/she handles s i t u a t i o n s w e l l , and l i k e s h i m / h e r s e l f . These responses are c o n s i s t e n t with the study d e f i n i t i o n of t r u s t as a m u t u a l i t y stemming from the a b i l i t y to r e l y on the spouse, a t r u s t of s e l f and one's own c a p a c i t y , and a sense of t r u s t of h i s / h e r own f a m i l y and spouse. High s c o r e s on the care items show a person who f e e l s g l a d he/she got married, who remembers the wedding as a happy occasion.,, who sees the marriage as fun, who i s secure about the marriage, who i s upset when h i s / h e r mate i s upset, who cares f o r and i s d e d i c a t e d to mate. This person gets along with h i s / h e r parents, and f e e l s t h a t h i s / h e r f a m i l y 82 cares for the mate. Personal competence i s evident in this variable as well. The respondent feels that he/she i s cared for in general, feels that people are usually supportive, and wants mate to succeed at whatever he/she does. These items are consistent with the study d e f i n i t i o n of care as an a b i l i t y to care for the partner, and a concern for the partner's growth and development. These items do not however, strongly support the notion that a f e e l i n g of having been cared for by one's own family i s an important antecedent to the development of care in the intimate marriage relationship. This researcher's impression i s that the care variable was not confirmed as well as the other variables, because i t may be a process affected more than the other three, by the respondent's relationship with his parents and s i b l i n g s throughout his l i f e . The inventory used in t h i s study measured perceptions of present family relationships, but did not explore past feelings and events about the parents and s i b l i n g s . The study urges that future research examine the variables, from a developmental viewpoint, to f a c i l i t a t e an understanding of the effects of early family relationships and learning on bonding behaviour. The evidence supports the four variables as important to couples in the f i r s t year of marriage, and as well, .lends c r e d i b i l i t y to the notion that a l l four interact together, to 83 form what t h i s r e s e a r c h e r has r e f e r r e d to as the bonding process. There i s s u p p o r t i v e and i n t e r e s t i n g data here, that should l e a d t o f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h - to determine how these fo u r v a r i a b l e s i n t e r a c t , to study other v a r i a b l e s that may a l s o be components of the bonding process, and to develop an instrument that w i l l a c c u r a t e l y measure t h i s concept, as more i s l e a r n e d and understood about i t . 84 Chapter V SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY A SUMMARY The notion of bonding, and the e f f o r t to conceptualize i t , and to develop an instrument to measure that concept, has been a fascinating and challenging task for th i s researcher. I t i s an idea that has grown out of my own c l i n i c a l practice, and as well from the developmental l i t e r a t u r e on attachment and intimate relationship formation. My premise, p r i o r to defining the parameters of thi s study, was that there was in good marriages, and perhaps should be i n a l l marriages, a unique period, in the beginning phase of the relationship, in which partners tended to invest high levels of energy into the relationship. This was a period when there was a willingness, perhaps e f f o r t l e s s l y , to know the partner better, to learn about and to understand the partner, to spend time with, and to be intimate with that partner. My guess was that t h i s was natural and easy in the beginning - but t h a t i f i t did not take place in the beginning, the relationship was not firmly grounded, and the partners did not share enough of an experience of "uniqueness" about their relationship, as dif f e r e n t from other relationships. My impression was that i t would be more d i f f i c u l t to develop this s p e c i a l attachment, as time passed in the relationship with i t s absence. 85 There are a host of questions that are prompted by a new idea or theory - and for me, t h i s was.- how long was the c r i t i c a l or sensitive period, i f there indeed was one?; that t h i s was not necessarily a process unique to marriage, but that studying married couples was a beginning step; what affected bonding in intimate adult relationships?; was psycho-social development, and parent-child bonding a major influence?; was bonding a process that people s t r i v e for in an intimate relationship?; and would c l i n i c i a n s be able to u t i l i z e the concept, and develop s k i l l s to encourage bonding in couples? The study was necessarily exploratory, and required a narrowing down, in order that i t would provide that d i f f i c u l t beginning step, upon which subsequent research could be based. This researcher chose married couples, married less than one year, guessing that i f the concept of bonding existed, i t would, and should, be evident in the f i r s t year. As well, four variables - care, trust, intimacy, and communication, were selected as the major components of bonding. A sample of t h i r t y couples was advertised for, in a c i t y and in a university newspaper. This drew a very homogeneous sample, who were highly educated. The sample i s also l i k e l y to be couples who are involved in and committed to marriage exploration and upgrading. This i s not seen as a primary weakness of the sample, as i t a s s i s t s in c o n t r o l l i n g for extraneous factors, and encourages that results are apt to be related to the study variables. It does, however, l i m i t the a b i l i t y to 86 generalize the findings, but in an exploratory study, t h i s researcher was prepared to tolerate t h i s . Future studies should choose a sample by a more standardized random means. In developing an instrument to measure bonding behaviour, i t was e s s e n t i a l that t h i s researcher could c l e a r l y define what was intended by bonding, and what i t involved. This necessitated a review of l i t e r a t u r e to determine what aspects of my theory were confirmed, and what issues I had.missed that should be included.' Chapter II takes the reader through a group of these theories, presented by other researchers and writers, that are s a l i e n t to the study, and to my conceptualization of bonding and i t s roots. This i s a progression from - the selection of the variables as developmental processes; the relationship of the early parent-child bond to future attachments; the development of a capacity for care, tru s t , intimacy, and communication in adult relationships; the development of personal competence; interpersonal competence; to bonding between newly married couples. It was my intention that t h i s chapter would give the reader a better f e e l for, and understanding of the study. One hundred and sixty questions were developed for a questionnaire, that would serve as a preliminary inventory of bonding behaviour. Forty items were included for each of the four variables, and set out to measure each variable as 87 d e v e l o p m e n t a l p r o c e s s e s . The q u e s t i o n s were d e s i g n e d t o measure th e respondent's f e e l i n g s and s e n t i m e n t s , about b o n d i n g b e h a v i o u r . Because o f t h i s r e s e a r c h e r ' s assumption t h a t b o n d i n g i s a p o s i t i v e p r o c e s s , and t h a t i t i s i n d i c a t i v e o f m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , the b o n d i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e was f o l l o w e d i m m e d i a t e l y by a s t a n d a r d i z e d i n v e n t o r y of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , the I.M.S. ( H u d s o n / G l i s s o n : 1976) As w e l l , t h i s was done t o i n t r o d u c e some measure of c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y i n t o the s t u d y . A l s o i n c l u d e d were n i n e demographic q u e s t i o n s d e s i g n e d t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e s t u d y sample. A p r e - t e s t was done on s i x c o u p l e s u s i n g the 160 i t e m bonding q u e s t i o n n a i r e , t h e 25 i t e m I.M.S., and the n i n e demographic i t e m s . The i n v e n t o r y p r o v e d t o be u n d e r s t o o d as i n t e n d e d by the r e s e a r c h e r , the r e s p o n d e n t s : f e l t t h e i r answers r e p r e s e n t e d t h e i r t r u e f e e l i n g s , and f e l t as w e l l , t h a t i t d i d not l e a v e s i g n i f i c a n t gaps i n what they had wanted t o say. There were very few problems i n the s a m p l i n g p r o c e d u r e , and none of the items i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were changed as a r e s u l t of the p r e - t e s t . The s i x p r e - t e s t c o u p l e s a l l e x p r e s s e d an i n t e r e s t i n knowing more about the s t u d y . A l l s i x e x p r e s s e d t o the r e s e a r c h e r t h a t they f e l t t h e i r m a r r i a g e r e l a t i o n s h i p was d i f f e r e n t from o t h e r i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s they had had, and t h a t t h a t had been unexpected p r i o r t o b e i n g m a r r i e d . These c o u p l e s r e f e r r e d t o t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s as much more s e c u r e , happy, and c o n t e n t than they had e x p e c t e d they would be. 88 The s t u d y sample was made up of t h i r t y c o u p l e s , m a r r i e d f o r the f i r s t t i m e , w i t h o u t c h i l d r e n , and m a r r i e d l e s s than one y e a r at the time o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The sample was p r i m a r i l y between 25-30 y e a r s of age, h i g h l y educated, ( 7 5 % e i t h e r i n , o r h a v i n g completed u n i v e r s i t y ) , and w i t h an a s t o u n d i n g 63.3% h a v i n g completed a p r e p a r a t i o n f o r m a r r i a g e c o u r s e . T h i s was d e f i n i t e l y a homogeneous group, most l i k e l y unique i n t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n a p o s i t i v e sense, i n t h e i r m a r r i a g e . They seemed h i g h l y l i t e r a t e , and v e r y s i m i l a r e t h n i c a l l y and c u l t u r a l l y . The f i n d i n g s on t h e st u d y were a l s o v e r y homogeneous, ve r y h i g h and ve r y l i t t l e v a r i a t i o n between s c o r e s . R e s u l t s show t h a t a h i g h s c o r e on one v a r i a b l e i n d i c a t e d h i g h s c o r e s on the o t h e r t h r e e v a r i a b l e s , and a h i g h s c o r e on the I.M.S. as w e l l . A low s c o r e on one v a r i a b l e showed c o n s i s t e n t l y low s c o r e s on the o t h e r t h r e e v a r i a b l e s , and on t h e I.M.S. The lowest s c o r e s on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were h i g h e r than 70% o f the t o t a l p o s s i b l e s c o r e . The major r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s t h a t guide t h i s s t u d y were - t h a t i n each of t h e f o u r v a r i a b l e s , a l l items would s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e w i t h the t o t a l s c o r e ; t h a t the c o r r e l a t i o n s would be l a r g e r than c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s on each o f the o t h e r t h r e e v a r i a b l e s ; t h a t t h e s e c o r r e l a t i o n s would be l a r g e r than the t o t a l s c o r e on the I.M.S.: and t h a t the t o t a l s c o r e on the I.M.S. would s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s on each o f t h e f o u r v a r i a b l e s . 89 In each of the four variables, not a l l items s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlate with the t o t a l score. However, the mean of these correlations was larger than the mean correlation with the other three variables, or with the I.M.S. The correlations of t o t a l scores for the four variables with the I.M.S. are substantial and highly s i g n i f i c a n t , and are evidence that the concepts are an indication of marital s a t i s f a c t i o n . The findings showed f i v e items for communication, two items for intimacy, ten items for trust, and three items for care, which correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with that variable alone. These are good, and powerful items, that show that to some degree, the four variables can be i s o l a t e d and measured as separate e n t i t i e s . The twenty items suggest as well, that the respondent's relationship with his parents, and his/her own development of a sense of personal competence are indeed factors influencing the achievement of these variables in an intimate relationship.' There are fifty-two items in the questionnaire which did not correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with any of the variables. These items should be e i t h e r reworded, or dropped from the questionnaire. The bulk of the items ( 7 5 ) , s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with more than one of the variables, a large number of them corre l a t i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y with a l l four. 9Q These seventy-five items, are consistent with this researcher's description of bonding, as an a b i l i t y to l i s t e n to and understand your mate, fe e l i n g l i s t e n e d to and understood; a unique form of communication with your mate, s i m i l a r to a "meta-communication"; an a b i l i t y to confide in and trust your mate, and your own a b i l i t y ; the achievement of an emotional l e v e l of intimacy characterized by empathy, non-possessiveness, and being one's own person; and an a b i l i t y to l i k e oneself, and to care about your partner's development and success. Inherent in the responses also, was the research premise that relationships i n the family of o r i g i n , p a r t i c u l a r l y with the parents, would be relevant to the study variables -although t h i s was not confirmed to the degree that might have been expected. The notion of personal competence being a necessary prerequisite for bonding in the marriage relationship, i s strongly evident in this study. High scores show couples who l i k e themselves, f e e l confident about t h e i r own a b i l i t y , f e e l supported by others, f e e l they can be themselves with t h e i r own mate, f e e l that people l i s t e n to them, and that t h e i r opinions matter. They are empathetic towards t h e i r partner, and want him/her to succeed at whatever he/she chooses. The items provide important evidence for the study, ind i c a t i n g that the variables overlap, and are l i k e l y to be, more accurately, variables that measure a single construct. The evidence seems to point to a s i n g l e measure, or v a r i a b l e , that could be r e l a b e l l e d "bonding". This study, then, r a i s e s many i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r researchers, as w e l l as f o r c l i n i c i a n s , and s o c i a l p o l i c y makers. 92 B IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY The findings of the study have implications for further research, for this researcher's own c l i n i c a l practice, for practice and practice theory, and for s o c i a l welfare policy and programs. Implications for Research The preponderance of evidence in t h i s study seems to point to a single measure of "bonding". The majority of the items correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with two or more variables, and in a large number of cases, with a l l four variables. The four variables c l e a r l y overlap, and appear to measure one variable, that could be r e l a b e l l e d "bonding". This single variable would include items that measure the four variables of care, trust, intimacy, and communication. This study has provided a basis for c l a r i f y i n g and re-conceptualizing bonding. The study i s s i m p l i f i e d by the development of t h i s single variable, and should f a c i l i t a t e the creation of an appropriate measurement instrument. The seventy-five items which correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with a c l u s t e r of the variables of t h i s study, could provide that instrument, or the core of that instrument, to which new items may be added, and tested for s i g n i f i c a n c e . Such a homogeneous scale, would see a l l items c o r r e l a t i n g s i g n i f i c a n t with the t o t a l score, for which the most appropriate measure i s bonding. 93 These seventy^-five items constitute a nucleus of an instrument that can be further tested. A larger scale research project could more appropriately use factor analysis. This study did not have a large enough sample for t h i s . The next research step following t h i s study, should be the administration of the seventy-five items to a larger sample, and the u t i l i z a t i o n of factor analysis on those re s u l t s . It i s this researcher's hope that t h i s study w i l l encourage a further conceptualization and understanding of the bonding construct. It i s a concept, that i s now in the very beginning stages. Valuable research of interest to this researcher i s that the concept of bonding be studied through a combined questionnaire-interview, given to a sample of newly married couples, to determine the parameters of the concept. This researcher recommends as well, a follow-up study, which would include the administration of the bonding inventory and I.M.S. used in this study, to the same t h i r t y sample couples, in f i v e years time. Implications for Practice There are many implications for practice, and for practice theory, although many of them are s t i l l c l e a r l y at the stage of insight, and require further c l a r i f i c a t i o n and development of the concept through research. This writer sees a better understanding by the i c l i n i c i a n , of the concept of bonding, and eventually the development of s k i l l s and techniques to encourage bonding in 94 couples. This necessitates a conceptualization of what constitutes bonding, i t s relationship to marital s a t i s f a c t i o n , i t s importance to the couple, and whether there i s , or i s not, a c r i t i c a l or sensitive period for i t s development. A wide range of influencing factors come to mind, that must be spurred on by both the c l i n i c i a n and the researcher - the f i r s t ideas and insights are most often i n i t i a t e d by our own practice. What are the effects of romantic choice, of common-law relationships, of subsequent marriages, and of children, on bonding? These are important and necessary beginning steps that should, and must, become the task of the c l i n i c i a n . S. Jayaratne and J.V. Thompson, encourage the use of single-study research - by pointing out that, "A dominant question that pervades the c l i n i c a l atmosphere i s why a 47 p r a c t i t i o n e r employs one technique over another?" It i s essential that c l i n i c i a n s assume the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of deciphering from their own practice - s k i l l s and techniques, from th e i r own manners and t r a i t . There i s much to be learned by the profession, from what each of us has developed, and arrived at on our own. Monitoring of one's own c l i n i c a l caseload should be a regular event for s o c i a l workers and i s something that workers within an agency could .do together. The beginning notions of bonding for t h i s researcher, came out of my own c l i n i c a l p ractice. I was beginning to see 95 in couples, this process which I c a l l bonding. Each seemed to be seeking care, trust, intimacy, and communication with the other - and often experiencing a f e e l i n g of f r u s t r a t i o n , f a i l u r e , and anger, when the task was not successfully managed by both partners. Couples seemed to be asking for help with bonding - to be taught how to bond more appropriately, to be able to separate out the influences from the past in th i s learning. It was through a single case exploratory study, "Bonding Behaviour in Newly Married Couples: A Single Case Exploratory Study" ( A p r i l : 1979) that this researcher was able to formulate and test out ideas and notions about bonding that had arisen out of my pratice. Although this present study, does not provide the l e v e l of knowledge necessary for the formulation of practice techniques, i t should encourage the use of the concept of bonding, as a practice t o o l , at the l e v e l of single study research, by the c l i n i c i a n . Implications for Social Policy and Programs Nathan Cohen and Maurice Connery, in t h e i r a r t i c l e , "Government Policy and the Family", are suggesting that the changing role of the family e f f e c t s , and should prompt s o c i a l policy, and urge that, "government policy with respect to the family, must be active, comprehensive, and h a b i l i t a t i v e , rather 4 8 than residual, r e s t r i c t i v e , and r e h a b i l i t a t i v e . " 96 There are important implications for s o c i a l policy and for s o c i a l policy programs, that stem out of t h i s research study. In developing s o c i a l p o l icy and programs for families, we must concern ourselves with marriage and preparation for marriage. In 1975, the Berger Commission on the Preparation for  Marriage, developed guidelines for the preparation for, and the solemnization of marriage. Our experience concerning the merits and success of marriage preparation i s indeed limited - rather, our commitment exists along the l i n e s of our concern for the family and for a p o t e n t i a l population at r i s k . On November 23rd, 1970, the state of C a l i f o r n i a passed a law, C.C. 4101, making pre-marriage counselling for minors mandatory. The program was i n s t i t u t e d because of the high degree of breakdown in teenage marriages, and also from a commitment p u b l i c a l l y by the state, of an interest in the i n s t i t u t i o n of marriage. There was not, however, any previous research, or p i l o t studies to indicate i f such a program would be an asset or a detriment. As well, there was a lack of information about what should be included in the pre-marriage counselling. The Berger Commission, recognizing t h i s lack of knowledge and information in the area of marriage preparation, i s o l a t e d teenage marriage as a population at r i s k , but decided that i t would be pre-mature to l e g i s l a t e , as mandatory, a concept that we know so l i t t l e about. 97 The Commission c a l l e d for further study, and the need to more rigorously research the e f f e c t s of pre-marriage programs. A recent study by Microys and Bader in Toronto, "Do Pre-Marriage Programs Really Work" (1977) has begun to i n i t i a t e the research necessary before such programs can be i n s t i t u t e d . This study on bonding has implications for pre-marriage programs, in that i t i s attempting to conceptualize and measure the process of relationship formation in newly married couples. This i s the necessary information that must be c l e a r l y understood before determining the curriculum for such programs. In better knowing and understanding how successful, intimate relationships are developed - we w i l l be able to develop comprehensive s o c i a l p o l i c i e s for marriage preparation, that w i l l become a way of l i f e - as a part of high school curriculum and community based programs. 98 This study characterized the very d i f f i c u l t beginning step of exploratory research. It i s the narrowing down, and conceptualization of a concept - that stems from the hunches and insights of a c l i n i c i a n . This researcher has a commitment tp c l e a r l y define the implications of the study - for p r a c t i t i o n e r s , researchers, and policy makers, even though there must be extensive preliminary research and study before many of these w i l l be realized. It i s the hope of thi s researcher, that the study w i l l be relevant for the profession, and w i l l spark in a wide range of professionals, an interest that w i l l lead to further study and understanding. 99 1. D e l i s l e , Mary Ann 2. Kahn, Al f r e d 3. Matteson, Roberta 4. S a t i r , V i r g i n i a 5. Watzlawick, Paul Beavin, Janet H. Jackson, Don H. 6. Erikson, Erik 7. Erikson, Erik 8. Sullivan, Harry Stack 9. Sullivan, Harry Stack 10. Dahms, Alan M. 11. Dahms, Alan M. 12. Klaus, Marshall H. Kennell, John 13. Harlow, Harry 14. Sullivan, Harry Stack 15. Ainsworth, Mary D. Ainsworth, Leonard H. 16. Bowlby, John FOOTNOTES "Bonding Behaviour in Newly Married Couples: A Single Case Exploratory Study" Social Policy and Social  Services (p. 77) "Adolscent Self-Esteem, Family Communication, and Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n " (p. 37) Making Contact (p. 36) Pragmatics of Human  Communication (p. 11) Childhood and Society (p. 37) Childhood and Society (p. 39) The Interpersonal Theory of  Psychiatry (p. 61) The Interpersonal Theory of  Psychiatry (p. 310) "The Intimacy Hierarchy" c i t e d in Process in Relationship (p. 75) "The Intimacy Hierarchy" c i t e d in Process in Relationship (p. 84) Maternal Infant Bonding (p. 2) ci t e d in Caring (p. 72) The Interpersonal Theory of  Psychiatry (p. 74) Measuring Security i n Personal Adjustment (p. 24) Attachment and Loss: Volume I  Attachment (p. 208) 100 17. Sullivan, Harry Stack 18. Erikson, Erik 19. Blanck, Rubin 20. Gaylin, Willard 21. Gaylin, Willard 22. Cameron, Norman 23. S a t i r , V i r g i n i a 24. Pincus, L i l y 25. Flack, Frederic F. 26. Mahler, Margaret 27. Towman, Walter 28. Blanck, Rubin 29. Hartmann, Heinz 30. Pincus, L i l y 31. S u l l i v a n , Harry Stack 32. White, R.W. 33. Ainsworth, Mary D. Ainsworth, Leonard H. 34. Foote, Nelson N. C o t t r e l l , Leonard L. Jr. The Interpersonal Theory of  Psychiatry (p. 4) Childhood and Society (p. 56) "Marriage as a Phase of Personality Development" (p. 156) Caring (p. 63) Caring (p. 63) Personality Development and  Psychopathology (p. 117) Making Contact (p. 22) "The Nature of Marital Communication" (p. 22) A New Marriage, A New L i f e (P- 1) ci t e d in "Marriage as a Phase of Personality Development" (p. 155) Family Constellation (p 80) "Marriage as a Phase of Personality Development" (p. 156) ci t e d in "Marriage as a Phase of Personality Development" (p. 155) "The Nature of Marital Communication" (p. 22) The Interpersonal Theory of  Psychiatry (p. 34) ci t e d in Caring (p. 88) Measuring Security in Personal  Adjustment (p. 25) Identity and Interpersonal  Competence (p. 37) 101 35. M i l l e r , Sherod Nunnally, Elam Wackman, Daniel B. 36. Foote, Nelson N. C o t t r e l l , Leonard L. Jr, 37. Foote, Nelson N. C o t t r e l l , Leonard L. Jr. 38. Foote, Nelson N. C o t t r e l l , Leonard L. Jr. 39. O'Neill, Nena . O'Neill, George 40. Spanier, Graham 41. Nunally, Jum 42. Nunally, Jum 43. Nunally, Jum 44. Hudson, Walter W. Glisson, Diane H. 45. Hudson, Walter W. Glisson, Diane H. 46. Gutre, Kenneth E. Fox, Daniel J. 47. Jayaratne, Srinik a Thompson, J. Victor 'A Communication Training Program for Couples" (p. 9) Identity and Interpersonal Competence (p. 10) Identity and Interpersonal Competence (p. 11) Identity and Interpersonal Competence (p. 50) "Open Marriage: Implications for- Human Service Systems" (p. 450) "Marriage and Dyad Adjustment: New Scales for Assessing the Quality of Marriage and Similar Dyads" (p. 77) Psychometric Theory (p. 85) Psychometric Theory (p. 85) Psychometric Theory (p. 518) "Assessment of Marital Discord in Social Work Practice" (p. 300) "Assessment of Marital Discord in Social Work Pr a c t i c e " (p. 300) Documentation for Midas  S t a t i s t i c a l Research Laboratory "The C l i n i c i a n Researcher: The Case for Progress in Social Work" (p. 39) 48. Cohen, Nathan Connery, Maurice "Government Policy and the Family" (p. 6) 102 REFERENCES Ackoff, Russell Ainsworth, Mary D Ainsworth, Leonard H, Design of Social Research (The University of Chicago Press: Chicago; 1961) Measuirng Security in Personal  Adjustment (University of Toronto Press: Toronto: Canada; 1958) Bach, George R. Deutch, Ronald M. Pairing (Peter H. 1971) Wyden Inc.: New York; Bach, George R. Wyden, Peter H. The Intimate Enemy (William Morrow and Co. New York; 1969) Inc. Berger Commission Preparation for Marriage Eighth Report of The Royal Commission on Family and Children's Law (Vancouver, B.C.: Sept. 1975) Berelson, Bernard Steiner, Gary A. Blanck, Rubin Blanck, Rubin Blanck, Gertrude Human Behaviour (Harcourt, Brace and World Inc.: New York; 1964) "Marriage as a Phase of Personality Development" Soc i a l Casework ((48(3): p.p. 154-160; 1967) Marriage and Personal Development (Columbia University Press: New York; 1968) Bla z i e r , Daniel Poor Me, Poor Marriage (Vantage Press, 1975) Inc.: New York Bowlby, John Attachment and Loss: Volume I  Attachment (The Hogarth Press: The Institute of Psycho-Analysis: London; 1969) 103 Cameron, Norman Clarke, Ann M. Clarke, A.D.B. C l i n e b e l l , Howard J. C l i n e b e l l , Charlotte H Cohen, Nathan Connery, Maurice Dahms, Alan M. D e l i s l e , Mary Ann El k i n , Meyer El k i n , Meyer Erikson, Erik Fahs Beck, Dorothy Personality Development and Psychopathology (Houghton M i f f l i n Company: Boston; 1963) Early Experience: Myth and  Evidence (Open Books: London; 1976) The Intimate Marriage (Harper and Row Publishers: New York; 1970) "Government Policy and the Family" Journal of Marriage and the  Family (29; February 196 7; p. 16) "The Intimacy Hierarchy" c i t e d i n Process in Relationship eds. Powers, Edward A. Lees, Mary W. (West Publishing Company: New York; 1974) "Bonding Behaviour in Newly Married Couples: A Single Case Exploratory Study" (The University of B r i t i s h Columbia; A p r i l 1979) "The Essence of Relationship" C o n c i l i a t i o n Courts Review (XIII: December, 1975; p.p. 18-23) "Pre-Marital Counselling for Minors: The Los Angeles Experience" The Family Co-ordinator (October 1977; p.p. 16-30) Childhood and Society (W.W. Norton and Co. Inc.: New York; 1963) Marriage and the Family  Under Challenge (New York Family Services Association of America: New York; 1976 2nd edition) 104 Flack, Frederic F. Foote, Nelson N. C o t t r e l l , Leonard L. Jr. A New Marriage A New L i f e (McGraw-Hill Book Co.; New York; 1978) Identity and Interpersonal  Competence (The University of Chicago Press: Chicago; 1955) Fox, Daniel J. Gutre, Kenneth E. Fromm, Eri c h Documentation for Midas  S t a t i s t i c a l Research Laboratory (The University of Michigan: September; 1976) The Art of Loving (Harper and Row Publishers: New York; 1956) Gaylin, Willard Glasser, Paul H. Glasser, Lois N. Hudson, Walter W. Glisson, Diane H. Jayaratne, S r i n i k a Thompson, J. Victor Kahn, Alfred Karlsson, Georg Klaus, Marshall H. Kennell, John Caring (Alfred A. Knopf: New York; 1976) Families in C r i s i s (Harper and Row Publishers: New York; 1970) "Assessment of Marital Discord in S o c i a l Work Practice" Social Service Review (Volume 50, No. 2; June 1976) "The Clinician-Researcher: The Case for Progress in Social Work" The Social Worker (Volume 45, No. 1 p.p. 39-44) Social Policy and Social  Services (Random House: New York; 1973) A d a p t i b i l i t y and Communication  in Marriage (The Bedminster Press: New Jersey; 1963) Maternal Infant Bonding (McGraw-Hill Book Co.: New York; 1976) 105 Lederer, William Jackson, Don The Mirages of Marriage (W.W. Norton.and Co, Inc. New York; 1968 Lidz, Theodore Matteson, Roberta May, Rollo Meyer, John Pepper, Susan Microys, G. Bader, E. M i l l e r , Sherod Nunnally, Elam W. Wackman, Daniel B. Morris, Desmond Murphy, Donald C. Mendelson, Lloyd A. Nunally, Jum C. The Person (Basic Books: New York; 1968) "Adolescent Self-Esteem, Family Communication, and Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n " The Journal of Psychology (Volume 86: 1974; p.p. 35-47) Love and W i l l (Dell Publishing Company: New York: New York; 1969) "Need Compatibility and Marital Adjustment" Journal of Personality and  Soc i a l Psychology (Volume 35, No. 5, p.p. 331-342; 1977) "Do Pre-Marriage Programs Really Work" (Toronto: University of Toronto; 1977) "A Communication Training Program for Couples" Soc i a l Casework (January 1976) Intimate Behaviour (Random House: New York; 1971) "Communication and Adjustment in Marriage: Investigating the Relationship" Family Process (Volume 12, No. 3; p.p. 317-326; 1973) Psychometric Theory (McGraw-Hill Book Co.: New York; 1967) 106 O'Neill, Nena O'Neill, George O'Neill, Nena O'Neill, George Oppenheim, A.N. Pincus, L i l y Polansky, Norman Ramey, James Raush, Harold L. Barry, William A. Hertel, Richard K. Swain, Mary Ann Reid, William J. Epstein, Laura Rodgers, Carl Ryder, Robert G. Kafka, John S. Olson, David H. S a t i r , V i r g i n i a Open Marriage (M. Evans: New York; 1972) "Open Marriage: Implications for Human Service Systems" The Family Co-ordinator (October 1973; p.p. 449-456) Questionnaire Design and  Attitude Measurement (Basic Books Inc. Publishers: New York; 1966) "The Nature of Marital Communication" The Marital Relationship as a  Focus for Casework (The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations; 1971) Social Work Research (The University of Chicago Press: Chicago; 1975) Intimate Friendships (Prentice H a l l Inc.: New Jersey; 1976) Communication, C o n f l i c t , and  Marriage (Jossey Bass Inc.: San Francisco, C a l i f o r n i a ; 1974) Task Centred Casework (Columbia University Press: New York; 1972) Becoming Partners (Delacourt Press: New York; 1972) "Separating and Joining Influence in Courtship and Early Marriage" American Journal of  Orthopsychiatry (Volume 41-, No. 3; 1971) Making Contact ( C e l e s t i a l Arts: Millbrae, C a l i f o r n i a ; 1976) 107 Sherrod, Kathryn Vietze, Peter Friedman, Steves Spanier, Graham B. Spanier, Graham B. Spanier, Graham B. Lewis, Robert A. Cole, Charles L. Sullivan, Harry Stack Thomas, Edwin J. Towman, Walter Udry, Richard J, Infancy (Brooks-Cole Publishing Company Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a ; 1978) "Marriage and Dyad Adjustment :' New Scales for Assessing the Quality of Marriage and Similar Dyads" Journal of Marriage and  the Family (February 1976) "Romanticism and Marital Adjustment" Journal of Marriage and  the Family (August 1972; p.p. 181-487) "Marital Adjustment Over L i f e -Cycle - Issue of C u r v i l i n e a r i t y " Journal of Marriage and  the Family (May 1975; p.p. 263-275) Personal Psychopathology (W.W. Norton and Company Inc.: New York: New York; 1972) Marital Adjustment and Decision  Making (MacMillan Publishing Company: New York; 1977) Family Constellation-(Springer Publishing Company: New York; 1969) The Social Context of Marriage ( J.B. 1971) Lippincott: Philadelphia; Watzlawick, Paul Beavin, Janet H. Jackson, Don D. Pragmatics of Human  Communication (W.W. Norton and Company Inc. New York; 1967) 108 APPENDIX A TOTAL SCORES OF SUBJECTS ON THE FIVE MAJOR VARIABLES AND THE I .M.S. COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE I .M. S. 175.00 176.00 170.00 176.00 118. 00 177.00 182.00 178.00 183.00 117. 00 172.00 177.00:' 173.00 181.00 112. 00 179.00 184.00 179.00 178.00 115. 00 172.00 177.00 169.00 176.00 109. 00 180.00 177.00 169.00 176.00 113. 00 173.00 182.00 179.00 173.00 112. 00 175.00 186.00 180.00 175.00 113. 00 176.00 178.00 175.00 178.00 120. 00 178.00 183.00 170.00 178.00 117. 00 175.00 181.00 175.00 178.00 113. 00 178.00 180.00 180.00 180.00 113. 00 173.00 172.00 174.00 179.00 116. 00 178.00 177.00 175.00 177.00 112. 00 173.00 182.00 177.00 172.00 115. 00 180.00 188.00 180.00 180.00 116. 00 172.00 174.00 179.00 174.00 117. 00 173.00 181.00 182.00 179.00 110. 00 160.00 166.00 171.00 180.00 116. 00 164.00 179.00 173.00 168. 00 117. 00 144.00 155.00 156.00 148.00 92. 00 161.00 176.00 179.00 173.00 118. 00 170.00 171.00 174.00 173.00 104. 00 173.00 171.00 186.00 180.00 110. 00 162.00 174.00 175.00 171.00 116. 00 142.00 160.00 164.00 150.00 91. 00 173.00 181.00 178.00 180.00 123. 00 183.00 178.00 174.00 170.00 120. 00 162.00 173.00 172.00 171.00 116. 00 179.00 174.00 188.00 171.00 123. 00 171.00 175.00 179.00 162.00 122. 00 163.00 174.00 184.00 173.00 123. 00 167.00 177.00 179.00 175.00 109. 00 178.00 169.00 182.00 165.00 113. 00 183.00 184.00 175.00 181.00 121. 00 179.00 176.00 173.00 167.00 118. 00 174.00 179.00 178.00 181.00 120. 00 174.00 178.00 173.00 175.00 112. 00 173.00 175.00 178.00 173.00 122. 00 170.00 175.00 170.00 174.00 115. 00 172.00 178.00 172.00 171.00 117. 00 109 COMMUNICATION INTIMACY TRUST CARE I.M.S. 172.00 186.00 178. 00 182. 00 119.00 173.00 173.00 169. 00 172. 00 120.00 174.00 179.00 179. 00 170. 00 116.00 171.00 174.00 175. 00 177. 00 120.00 160.00 159.00 160. 00 166. 00 111.00 141.00 149.00 153. 00 143. 00 90.00 148.00 170.00 172. 00 172. 00 119.00 162.00 178.00 177. 00 169. 00 119.00 164.00 178.00 164. 00 162. 00 103.00 153.00 176.00 157. 00 171. 00 121.00 173.00 179.00 175. 00 178. 00 116.00 158.00 183.00 172. 00 171. 00 117.00 141.00 157.00 159. 00 158. 00 107.00 187.00 187.00 180. 00 183. 00 119.00 183.00 182.00 178. 00 178. 00 119.00 168.00 176.00 172. 00 181. 00 118.00 179.00 173.00 187. 00 174. 00 118.00 171.00 172.00 179. 00 163. 00 121.00 171.00 174.00 181. 00 169. 00 120.00 60 CASES WRITTEN FOR 5 VARIABLES 110 APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE 0 a •H 0 a -P a •H •H P 0 +-> X5 0 0 -P a CD •r-i +-> =H -p +-> «H o CD «H O rH 0 rH +-> +-> GS 0 <H rH a rH o tt ti P< O CD •H CD X3 P a rH a O w o o 0 o < CO o 1. I i n i t i a t e conversation with my mate. 2. I l i s t e n when my mate speaks. 3. My mate co-operates with me. 4. I answer my mate, when he/she speaks. 5. I l i k e myself. 6. I f e e l I understand my mate. 7. I t e l l my mate how I f e e l about him/her. 8. My mate t r i e s to control the conversation. 9. My mate gives me mixed messages. 10. My parents c r i t i c i z e me. 11. My parents are supportive of me. 12. My mate and I exchange ideas. 13. I say things that only my mate understands. I l l s 0 0 £ •p S •H •H -P 0 +-> XI 0 -P S 0 XI •rH Xi •P 4H P -P «H o 0 9H O rH Xi 0 rH P -P 0j 0 0 <H rH s ai r< 0 tt ti QH O 0 •H 0 T3 -P d rH a O CO o o O o <! CO o 14. I understand what my mate i s saying. 15. My parents l i s t e n to me. 16. When I speak, I f e e l no one i s l i s t e n i n g . 17. My mate t e l l s me what he/she i s going to do. 18. My mate t e l l s me what he/she expects of me. 19. My mate i n i t i a t e s conversation with me. 20. My parents talk to my mate. 21. I say things that only my mate understands. 22. My mate and I communicate in a di f f e r e n t manner than we communicate to other people. 23. My mate and I have a sp e c i a l language a l l our own. 24. I l i k e my mate. 25. My mate l i s t e n s when I speak. 26. My mate t e l l s me how he/she feels about me. 27. I f e e l threatened by my mate. 28. My mate c r i t i c i z e s me. 29. My mate i s always t e l l i n g me what to do. 30. My opinions r e a l l y matter to my mate. 31. My mate l i s t e n s when I speak. 32. My mate answers me when I speak. 33. I expect my mate to read my mind. 34. My parents l i s t e n to my mate. 35. 'My mate witholds information from me. 36. My mate says he/she loves me, but acts as i f he/she doesnLt. 37. I never seem to have anything important to say. 38. My mate understands me. 39. I co-operate with my mate. 40. My mate feels threatened by me. 41. I touch my spouse in public. 42. It i s d i f f i c u l t for me to show aff e c t i o n to my mate. 43. I f e e l uncomfortable when alone with my mate. 44. I am a f r a i d to t e l l my mate how I f e e l . 45. I f e e l I got married for security. 46. I am able to relax with my mate 47. My mate embarrasses me. 48. My mate and I agree on things. 49. I respect my mate. 50. I f e e l my mate s t i l l cares about me when we are apart. 51. I try to understand how my mate fee l s . 52. My parents show aff e c t i o n to me 53. I f e e l unattractive. 54; I think my mate finds me unattractive. 55. I wonder i f my mate loves me as I r e a l l y am. 56. I l i k e my parents. 57. I l i k e to hold my mate. 58. I enjoy spending time with my mate. 59. With my mate, I can r e a l l y be myself. 60. My mate and I laugh together. 61. My mate and I are l i k e one person. 62. I am interested in my mate's ideas. 63. I r e a l l y need my mate. 64. I enjoy doing things on my own 65. I f e e l my; .mate i s not perfect. 66. I prefer to be around a group, rather than alone with my mate 67. It i s d i f f i c u l t to look my mate in the eye. 68. I know how my mate fee l s . 69. I f e e l my mate r e a l l y accepts me. 70. My parents accept my mate. 71. I have d i f f i c u l t y showing anger. 72. I f e e l alone when I'm with my mate. 73. I t e l l my mate what he/she wants to hear. 74. I can sense when my spouse i s upset. 75. I f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to t e l l my mate I love him/her. 76. I enjoy my mate's company. 77. I f e e l I can be honest with my mate. 78. I'm a f a i r l y adaptable person. 79. I admire my mate. 80. My mate and I usually agree. 81. My mate and I spend time to-gether. 82. I can confide in my mate. 83. When I r e a l l y need my mate, he/she i s there. 84. Other people seem to l i k e me. 85. I think I'm le v e l headed. 86. I have some close friends. 87. I can count on my parents. 88. I f e e l confident. 89. Married couples should do everything together. 90. I f e e l anxious. 91. When I'm not with my mate, I wonder what he/she i s up to. 92. Most couples trust each other 93. I f e e l I've got to do every-thing myself, i f i t ' s going to get done. 94. My mate i s unpredictable. 95. I trust my parents. 96. I f e e l secure with my mate. 97. It's best not to trust anyone 98. I can look after myself, i f I have to. 99. When my mate i s with me, I sleep well. 100. I take advantage of my mate. 101. I think my friends use me. 102. When my mate goes out, I'm unsure of what he/she i s r e a l l y doing. 103. My mate takes advantage of me. 104. I wonder at times i f my mate i s f a i t h f u l to me. 105. I t e l l my spouse how I r e a l l y f e e l . 106. I think my spouse l i e s to me. 107. When I'm upset, someone comforts me. 108. My parents care about me. 109. I have confidence in myself 110. I l i k e myself. 111. I trust my own judgement. 112. I handle situations well. 113. I can confide in my mate. 114. I can count on my mate. 115. I have f a i t h in my mate's decisions. 116. I f e e l I'm not in control. 117. I f e e l my parents love me. 118. I keep many things from my spouse. CD CD s e •H •H P - P CD CD s CD X I • H X I P +-> - p <H CD o X ! o - P • p CD CD iH s o - P •H a - P - p CD •H CD fl rH s O O o O <: CO O 119. I f e e l cared for. 120. I trust my family. 121. To thi s day, my father can s t i l l make\ me angry. 122. My parents were opposed to my marriage. 123. My mate and I engage in a c t i v i t i e s together. 124. I think about my mate when we are apart. 125. I f e e l that I can't imagine . , not having married my mate. 126. It upsets me when my mate i s upset. 127. I f e e l we had a wonderful wedding. 128. My wedding gives me many happy memories. 129. I f e e l cared for. 130. People seem to support me. 131. My mate i s a happy person. 132. I f e e l we've changed since we got married. 133. I want my mate to succeed at whatever he/she wants. 134. We talk about terminating our relationship. 135. My mate leaves the house after a fi g h t . 136. I wonder i f our marriage was a mistake. 137. I get along with my parents. 138. When my mate and I argue, I wonder i f he/she s t i l l cares about me. 139. I'm a f r a i d my mate w i l l change. 140. I wish my parents would leave me alone. 141. When my mate i s i l l , I worry about him/her. 142. My mate and I do everything together. 143. When I was growing up, I f e l t cared for. 144. I think our marriage i s fun. 145. My family l i k e s my mate. 146. I enjoy being with my mate. 147. Things are going well in our marriage. 148. My family doesn't l i k e my mate. 149. I regret that I got married. 150. I care more about my mate every day. 151. I f e e l secure about my marriage 152. My mate and I often quarrel. 153. I can't seem to get people to l i k e me. 154. I'm happy when my mate i s successful. 155. My mate thinks only about his/her job. 156. I leave the house after a fight 157. I f e e l I'm r e a l l y on my own. 158. I enjoy being married. 159. I f e e l dedicated to my mate. 160. I'm glad I got married. INDEX OF MARITAL SATISFACTION (I.M.S.) (HUDSON/GLISSON) This questionnaire i s designed to measure the degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n you have in your present marriage. It i s not a test, so there are no right or wrong answers. Answer each item as c a r e f u l l y and as accurately as you can by placing a number beside each one as follows: 1. None of the time 2. A l i t t l e of the time 3. Sometime 4. Good part of the time 5. Most or a l l of the time Please begin: 1. I f e e l that my spouse i s affectionate enough. 2. I f e e l that my spouse treats me badly. 3. I f e e l that my spouse r e a l l y cares for me. 4. I i i f e e l that ' I had to I would not marry the same person do i t over. 5. I f e e l that I can trust my spouse. 6. I f e e l that our marriage i s breaking up. 7. I f e e l that my spouse doesn't understand me. 8. I f e e l that our marriage i s a good one. 9. I f e e l that ours i s a very happy marriage. 10. I f e e l that our l i f e together i s d u l l . 11. I f e e l that we have a l o t of fun together. 12. I f e e l that my spouse doesn't confide in me. 13. I f e e l that ours i s a very close relationship 14. I f e e l that I cannot re l y on my spouse. I f e e l that we do not have enough interests in common. I f e e l that we manage arguments and disagreements very well. I f e e l that we do a good job of managing our finances. I f e e l that I should never have married my spouse. I f e e l that my spouse and I get along very well together. I f e e l that our marriage i s very stable. I f e e l that my spouse i s pleased with me as a sex partner. I f e e l that we should do more things together I f e e l that the future looks bright for our marriage. I f e e l that our marriage i s empty. I f e e l there i s no excitement in our marriage 12 3 1. Sex: M 2. Age: 18-24 25-30 31-35 36-40 over 40 3. Education: Highschool College University Post Graduate 4. Ethnic Origin: 5. Length of time married ( i n months) 6. How long have you l i v e d in B.C.? 7. In the f i r s t 18 years of your l i f e , did you l i v e most often in a ru r a l or urban environment? Rural Urban 8. How long have you l i v e d in Canada? 9. Did you take a marriage preparation course? Yes_ No 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094591/manifest

Comment

Related Items