Factors Predicting Marital Success or Failure

¶ … Predicting Marital Success or Failure

Climbing divorce rates and the redefining of traditional relationships in the latter half of the twentieth century have put a spotlight on the ideal of marriage. Adjusting gender roles, greater disposable income, globalization, and the acceleration of technology and social change have contributed to the way individuals engage in relationships, and consequently marriage. The increase in divorce rates has provoked researchers and marriage counselors to investigate and consider factors predicting marital success or failure. As the context and roles within relationships continue to evolve, the determination of contributing factors to the success or failure of marriage will continue to become more complex.

In the present, one key predictive factor for a successful marriage is based on premarital relationship quality. One study, conducted by Fowers and Olson, observed 393 couples over a 3-year period and found vitalized couples had the highest level of satisfaction and success (Fowers et al., 1996). There are three types of courtship that also allude to the success or failure of future marriage: Rocky and turbulent courtships, sweet and undramatic courtships, and passionate courtships. Each courtship is distinguished by different characteristics that will influence their marital outcome (Strong et al., 2011). Marital happiness and satisfaction is an obvious predictor of a successful marriage, and certain background factors are important to predict happiness. Examples of background factors are level of education at the time of marriage, individual traits and behaviors, and couple characteristics (Strong et al., 2011). Another factor indicating the success or failure of a marriage is how one navigates transitions within and between relationships. These transitions allow for individuals to experience personal growth, which will translate into the strength of a marital relationship (Ferguson, 2004). Premarital relationship quality, courtship types, background factors, and relationship transitions play contributing roles to the overall success or failure of a marriage.

While committing to marriage is associated with an array of positive benefits, the dissolving of a marriage harbors negative connotations. The concept of marriage, and its dissolution, finds its way into economical, political, psychological, and religious arenas as a source of debate, intrigue, and speculation. In recent decades, the definition of marriage, its image, and meaning have all come into question by sociologists, human rights activists, and psychologists. The traditional sense of marriage, in which two people commit to an unbreakable lifetime bond, is being challenged by instances of impulse marriages, high profile matrimonies lasting only a matter of hours, and a steep divorce rate. Social context has changed -- marriage is no longer a necessity or a matter of livelihood. In heterosexual marriages, the conventional gender roles have been blurred. Two income households and greater financial independence regardless of gender have created an opportunity for people to pursue, and abandon, relationships as they choose (Charny, 2006, p. 21-36). Factors predicting marital success or failure have emerged as a consequence to changing social roles and expectations.

In countries like the United States and Australia, the divorce rate is almost 50% - one out of every two marriages will end in divorce. The National Survey of Family Growth conducted a survey in the United States to examine the developing trends in marital breakup, divorce, and remarriage, to study if the trends differ by race or ethnicity, to consider the existence of unmarried cohabitation, and to inspect demographic, economic, and social factors that affect the chances that a marriage will succeed or fail (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995). At the time of the study, the survey showed there is an increased chance for a first marriage that began in the 1950s-1970s to end in separation or divorce. The characteristics of one's community also shared a relationship with the success of a marriage, indicating community prosperity had greater incidence of successful marriages and cohabitations (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995). The study noted that marriages existing in areas of poverty have greater likelihood to experience marital failure. According to the survey, demographic, economic, and social factors are closely associated with chances that a marriage will succeed or fail. Considering the wife alone, a first marriage is most likely to succeed if she "grew up in a two-parent home, is Asian, was 20 years of age or over at marriage, did not have any children when she got married, is college-educated, has more income, or has any religious affiliation" (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995).

The National Survey of Family Growth also examined the rate of first marriages considering race, age, religion, and socioeconomic status, the probability than an intact first premarital cohabitation will become a marriage, and the probability of remarriage. The probability of a first marriage is lowest for non-Hispanic black women than for other women, and the likelihood of getting married by one's eighteenth birthday is greatest for Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women, and the least likely for non-Hispanic black and Asian women (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995). Women who report their religion as not important are less likely to engage in a first marriage, and early marriage is more likely for women in communities with higher male unemployment, higher poverty, more welfare recipients, and lower median family income (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995). Indicators an intact first premarital cohabitation will become a marriage are: higher among white women and lower among black women, more likely for couples with higher incomes, higher for cohabiting women with any religious affiliation than those with no affiliation, and more likely in communities with lower male unemployment and poverty (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995). The probability for remarriage is highest among white divorced women and lowest among black divorced women, and is more likely among women who were under age 25 at the time of their divorce (Bramlett, & Mosher, 1995). The survey adequately specified racial, age, socioeconomic, and community trends in probability of first marriages, cohabitations resulting in marriage, incidence of divorce, and likelihood of remarriage.

Increasing divorce rates have encouraged researchers to study elements of marital stability, and recent studies indicate premarital relationship quality is a significant factor used to predict the success or failure of a marriage. Marital and family counselors encounter a gamut of relationship types, and interact with clients struggling with relationships, marital dissatisfaction, and divorce. This has triggered a number of premarital counseling and education programs to address factors that can cause marital failure. The identification of predictive factors for marital failure, stability, and satisfaction, has led professional responders to develop relationship models that explain different types of relationships which can reflect marital health. Researchers Fowers and Olsen examined a sample of 393 couples to observe premarital relationship quality. The team gauged couples on the premarital inventory PREPARE, which has 11 scales to assess the quality of a premarital relationship. From their findings, Fowers et al. responded with the realization of four types of premarital couples: vitalized, harmonious, traditional, and conflicted (1996, p. 3).

As described by Fowers et al., vitalized couples experience a high extent of overall relationship satisfaction, and expressed comfort in their ability to discuss problems and resolve conflict (1996, p. 3). These couples also indicated satisfaction in their affectionate and sexual qualities, agreed on financial and parenting matters, and enjoyed how they spend free time together (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 3). Harmonious couples shared a moderate level of overall relationship quality, advising they felt understood by their partner, satisfied with each other's personality, could share feelings, and were comfortable around one another's friends and family (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 4). Fowers et al. distinguished harmonious couples from vitalized couples as they tended to be unrealistic, to a degree, about their view of marriage and had not reached agreement on child-related issues (1996, p. 4). The study also noted harmonious couples indicated religion did not play an integral role in a couple's relationship.

Fowers et al. described traditional couples as those experiencing moderate dissatisfaction with interaction areas of their relationship, their partner's personal habits, and difficulty or discomfort discussing feelings and achieving conflict resolution (1996, p. 4). These couples exuded strength in decision making, future planning, and have a realistic view of marriage. Traditional couples viewed religion as a vital component of their marriage, and were least likely to have cohabitated prior to marriage or be pregnant at the time of marriage (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 4). Couples categorized by Fowers et al. As conflicted showed the greatest relationship concern. These couples expressed dissatisfaction with their partner's personality, habits, and struggled to effectively communicate and discuss problems within the relationship. Conflicted couples reported a lack of ability to communicate regarding leisure activities, their sexual relationship, and interaction between each other's friends and family (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 4).

Three years later, Fowers et al. followed up with the couples that participated in the study. The results showed the highest percentage of divorced couples, as predicted, were conflicted couples. Conflicted couples accounted for 40% of divorced couples from the sample group, and were three times more likely to divorce than vitalized couples (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 11). Harmonious couples were twice as likely to have separated or divorced as traditional couples; the justification of which appeared to be traditional couples tended to place greater importance on more formal aspects of marriage, while harmonious couples seemed to focus on interpersonal processes and relationship satisfaction (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 12). Vitalized couples had the highest levels of satisfaction. Fowers et al. note that satisfaction is not synonymous with stability, as many dissatisfied couples stay married (1996, p. 2). Dissatisfaction alone is not enough to predict marital success or failure. Defining relationships as virtualized, harmonious, traditional, and conflicted better allows for the development of premarital intervention programs. Couples who were administered PREPARE and canceled their wedding plans advised they did so due to overall relationship problems (Fowers et al., 1996, p. 7). This suggests PREPARE could assist couples in identifying relationship difficulties and help those at high-risk of marriage failure to reconsider their options.

Additional researchers also emphasize the period before marriage is a key indicator of marital success. The premarital timeframe allows couples to learn about themselves and each other, and courtship practices initiate a marital tone. During the premarital and courtship period couples are able to evaluate such relationship elements as communication ability, conflict resolution, and personality compatibility (Strong et al., 2011). Couples typically have an indication of these practices within their relationship well before marriage, and have an awareness of their overall happiness. It is not profound to assume unhappy couples prior to marriage are more likely to remain unhappy during their marriage (Strong et al., 2011).

There are three types of prototypical courtship experiences which showcase predictors of marital outcome: rocky and turbulent courtships, sweet and undramatic courtships, and passionate courtships (Strong et al., 2011). The dynamics of the premarital courtship speak to the personality traits of each individual, and their combined compatibility, which are significant determinants of marital quality. An example provided by Strong et al. describes warmhearted and even tempered personality traits to be more conducive to happy and stable marriages (2011, p. 282). Rocky and turbulent courtships are characterized by anger, periods of being upset, distress, and jealousy over potential relationship rivals (Strong et al., 2011, p. 282). Personalities associated with rocky and turbulent courtships are characterized by lack of conscientiousness, high anxiety, being exceedingly independent minded, and having overall "difficult" personalities (Strong et al., 2011, p. 282). If the male is excessively independent minded, marriages tend to be frail as these individuals tend to make poor spouses. If two high anxiety people marry each other, however, marriages appear to be lasting but relatively unhappy (Strong et al., 2011, p. 282).

Sweet and undramatic courtships are characterized by personalities that are considered warmhearted, helpful, sensitive to needs of others, and are empathetic (Strong et al., 2011, p. 282). These couples often find enjoyment in each other's company and this is predictive of a fulfilling and lasting marriage. Passionate courtships are marked by individuals who dive into love, have sex early in the relationship, and commit to marriage within the first few months of the relationship (Strong et al., 2011, p. 282). Couples experiencing passionate courtship engage with blind optimism and high levels of affection and physical intimacy. Passion typically begins to decline for these couples after the first few years of marriage and then become susceptible to divorce (Strong et al., 2011, p. 282). Courtships often reflect the personality traits of the couple, and it is the responsibility of the individuals to use their combined traits to nurture their marriage.

Every individual who enters a relationship subsequently introduces their background, and background factors, into the partnership. Background factors are predictors of marital outcomes due to their associated personality traits, and how these factors can enhance or deter the strength of the relationship. Age at the time of marriage is one of the most considerable factors in affecting marital success or failure. Individuals who marry at a younger age, notably younger than the age of 20, are at greater risk of marriage failure (Strong et al., 2011, p. 283). Failed marriages that were entered upon at a younger age could be explained by lack of maturity and high impulsivity, which would detract from shared emotional depth between partners and overall connectedness (Strong et al., 2011, p. 283). In the United States, individuals are more likely to marry young if they are white, a rural southerner, and from families of low socioeconomic status. People are more likely to marry in their early twenties based on shared religion, education, and socioeconomic background (Strong et al., 2011, p. 283). Length of courtship is another background factor related to marital success. Those who experience longer dating and courtship periods are more inclined to evaluate their levels of compatibility, translating into likelihood of a more successful marriage. Those who are slow to commit, however, and experience "up-and-down" relationships tend to be less satisfied in marriage and more likely to divorce (Strong et al., 2011, p. 283). Education is a noted background factor as it can affect additional resources such as income, insight, and status, which influence how an individual fills a marital role. Parental divorce may influence someone to be hesitant to marry, ultimately affected a relationship, and highly religious individuals have greater probability of experiencing happy and stable marriages (Strong et al., 2011, p. 283). Background factors highlight the foundation of an individual prior to engaging in a relationship, and these factors will eventually contribute to the context of the marriage, couple interaction, and marital stability.

The concept of relationship transitions is a telling factor establishing how one grows within and between relationships, and influences how one behaves, perceives, and contributes to marital outcomes (Ferguson, 2004). Individuals generally begin to engage with ideas of dating and relationships during adolescence, and each "crush," date, and relationship presents an opportunity to learn about oneself and relationship values. To negotiate relationship transitions, individuals must become more sophisticated in relationship knowledge, skills, and attitudes to explore successful relationships (Ferguson, 2004).

One predictor of relationship transition is changes in intimacy. Changes in levels of intimacy have been attributed to transitions within and between relationships. Intimacy shares a relationship with passion, as stronger passion is often a result of increased intimacy and stable intimacy (whether high or low) produces low passion (Ferguson, 2004). Although romantic beliefs are not considered to have an effect on longevity, couples tend to experience declines in their romantic beliefs prior to dissolution (Ferguson, 2004). Decreasing romantic beliefs can be an indicator of marital failure. Significant indicators of relationship transition or failure within the premarital period include: the amount of time the couple spends together, racial differences, lack of support from a partner's social network, and length of the relationship (Ferguson, 2004). Factors predicting marital failure are also attributed to certain individual and personality traits, such as lack of caring, excessive need for control, instability, age discrepancy, lack of commitment, and unequal involvement in the relationship (Ferguson, 2004). There is also a "fatal attraction" element that predicts marital failure which refers to the qualities that are disliked in a partner (to the point of prompting divorce), were once the same qualities that made the individual initially attractive (Ferguson, 2004). This harbors a "doomed from the beginning" phenomenon arising from opposing needs from the relationship, for example, a longing for intimacy coupled with a desire for independence (Ferguson, 2004).