Transcript Idealization and Communication in Long-Distance Premarital Relationships Laura Stafford and James R. Reske

Idealization and Communication
in Long-Distance Premarital
Relationships
Laura Stafford and James R. Reske
Ohio State University
Journal of Family Relations 1990
-Hannah Jansen
Idealization and Communication
in Long-Distance Premarital
Relationships
Laura Stafford and James R. Reske
Ohio State University
Journal of Family Relations 1990
-Hannah Jansen
Idealization and Communication
in Long-Distance Premarital
Relationships
Laura Stafford and James R. Reske
Ohio State University
Journal of Family Relations 1990
-Hannah Jansen
Why Study Premarital Relationships?
• Studying premarital
relationships is essential in
order to develop a researchtheory based approach to
marriage counseling.
• “Events that occur and
attitudes that are formed
during the premarital stage of
a relationship, impact
satisfaction and stability in
marriage”. (p247)
So why study Long Distance relationships?
• Long distance relationships are very common in the
college population. approximately 1/3 of college students
consider themselves to be part of a long distance
relationship.
• Face to face communication is limited in a long distance
(LD) relationship which may have an effect on the
longevity of the relationship if it is desired.
SO … what’s the problem with Idealization?
• Idealization:
to regard or represent as perfect.
• The concern is that LD couples experience idealization
for a longer period of time increasing the risk of marital
dissatisfaction and disillusion.
hypothesis
1.
Long distance couples will report being more idealized
therefore report being more in love and satisfied with
the perceived quality of their communication.
2.
LD relationships will report less frequent face to face
interaction and a larger portion of their communication
will be via telephone conversation, or email. (DUH)
Hypothesis cont.
3. The constrained amount of communication will
be directly related to the measure of
idealization, love, satisfaction, and quality of
communication.
Theoretical Construct
Restricted communication and how it relates to
Idealization in Long distance relationships.
Operational definitions (instruments used)
• Questionnaire booklet
•Participants were asked about their
age, length of dating relationship ect.
Operational definitions continued….
• 4 Standardized scales
• 1. Idealized Distortion Scale (IDS)
– Direct measure of idealization
• .92 internal consistency reliability
• .92 test, re-test reliability
• 2. Locke-Wallace Marital adjustment test (MAT)
– Most widely used test for marital satisfaction and has
been modified for premarital relationships.
• .90 reliability
………
• 3. Rubin’s Love Scale
– Measures romantic Love
construct
• .84 internal consistency
• 4. Bienvenu’s Marital
Communication Inventory
(MCI)
– A 19 item scale concerning
the perceived quality of
marital communication.
• .93 split half reliability
Method/participants
• Participants were students in an introductory
communications class from a large university. Students
were allotted extra credit for participating in the study.
• Students were instructed to involve their partner for the
study. None of the couples were engaged or married.
• Total: 34 Geographically close couples
37 Long distance couples
Average age 21.04 yrs
Procedure
• All of the GC couples were seated in a communication laboratory
and then asked to complete a questionnaire. Subjects weren’t
allowed to consults partners during this time.
• LD couples filled out the same survey, with one form mailed to the
other participant; given instructions to fill out and return form
without consulting his/her partner
• The individuals from the communication class were contacted six
months and a year later and asked if they were still in a dating
relationship with their partner (LD or GC)
Analysis
• 2 separate
multivariate analysis
of variance were
conducted:
1.
IV- Geographic separation
DV- Scores from 4
standardized scales
Long distance
average 462 miles
apart
 Geographically
close not specified

2.
IV- Geographical separation
DV-Interaction
(communication methods)
Results…..
Means and
standard
deviations of
dependant var.
by geographic
location
Results cont…
correlations
between interaction
variables and
relational variables
Results .. Again!!!
• When couples were
asked if they were
likely to marry:
• 80.3% LD couples said
YES!
• 62.3% GC couples said
YEA!!
• 6 months after the study,
one member of each LD
and GC dyad was
contacted and asked if
they were still together as
a couple:
• 24 out of the 34 GC
contacted were still
together
• All 25 of the LD
contacted were still
together
Discussion
• The findings support the idea that long distance couples
are more idealized, more satisfied with their relationship
and with their communication and more in love than the
geographically close couples
• Possibility exists that these individuals actually have
“better” relationships than the GC relationships so the
positive bias found is a result of higher quality
relationships.
• The findings also seem to assume long distance
communication was restricted.
What I would change????
• Increase sample size, include older
couples.
• Continue study through marriage
The End!!!