Arrendamientos

This dissertation examined two specific aims resulting in two separate publishable manuscripts. Aim one examined the causal and reciprocal link between attachment security and relationship satisfaction in a sample of United States Marines and their partner. Empirical inquiry has begun to show a significant relationship between the constructs of attachment and relationship satisfaction (e.g. Burgess Moser et al. 2015;

Dalgleish 2015a, 2015b; Wiebe & Johnson, 2016) however the results have been unable to determine a causal relationship. Most recently, Actor-Partner Interdependence

Modeling (Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006) has been used to examine the effects of attachment on relationship satisfaction. This method of analysis allows for a more in-depth of analysis of results which fit more consistently with the foundational systemic conceptualizations of Marriage and Family Therapy (MFT). Studies from Karantzas, Feeney, Goncalves, and McCabe (2014) and Sadikaj, Moskowitz, and Zuroff (2015) used APIM to examine the relationship between attachment and couple satisfaction finding that indeed the two variables are related. While these conclusions provided promising insights, limitations of sample size and study design left gaps in the literature for further studies to explore.

Aim one of this dissertation used APIM to continue to build on previous findings while addressing limitations of past research. Aim one examines 78 Marine couples of 12 months, administering the Experiences in Close Relationships revised scale (ECR-R;

Fraley, Waller, & Brennan, 2000) and the Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale (RDAS;

Spanier & Thompson, 1982; Busby, Christensen, Carne, & Larson, 1995) to both Marine and romantic partner every three months for a total of four time points of measurement.

Results support previous research suggesting there is a significant relationship between relationship satisfaction and attachment. Trends in the data suggest the Military

population may experience differences in how these two constructs relate to one another than in the general population. For example, the length of time of the relationship, deployment or prolonged partnership separation, and the phenomenon of expedited coupling and incentivized marriage in the Military appears to have impacted results.

Results of the study help to outline the need for early relationship education and enrichment in order to prevent premature marriage and subsequently decrease the high divorce rate among young Marine couples.

Limitations

The current study had several limitations that should be considered. Results of the study could not fully address the causal relationship between attachment and relationship satisfaction. First, it is worth noting that our sample is of young couples who have been together between three months and one year. The sample is also from the Military population which faces stressors that often differ from civilian populations. Therefore, results of our study may not be generalizable to other populations. Second, although a strength of our study is the longitudinal cross-lagged design, we may have been limited by having only a one-year term for data collection. Interesting findings emerged at the nine and twelve-month mark and therefore had we collected data for two years or more the data may have produced other results. Third, again on the note of time, effects of

attachment and relationship satisfaction could have been constrained due to the fact that these couples have been together for well under two years. Results may differ in

populations with couples that have been in romantic partnerships for two years or more.

Research from Hazan and Zeifman (1994) demonstrated it takes an average of two years from relationship partners to create a secure attachment bond that is more meaningful to the partners than those bonds shared with their parents or peers. Similar findings

suggesting consolidation of romantic partnerships takes about two years (Fagundes &

Schindler, 2011; Hazan & Zeifman, 1999; Mikulincer, 2006) provide perspective for the findings in the current study. Therefore, the duration of time in the study may not have been long enough to capture the full-scope of interaction between attachment and relationship satisfaction. In addition, our sample size may have constrained our findings with moderate potential for Type II error. Lastly, the effects of deployment were not controlled for and we cannot account for how deployment mid-study affected results.

Implications

Broadly, this research indicates that actor and partner effects are present in the interaction of attachment and relationship satisfaction (e.g. Conradi et al., 2017). This may suggest that in clinical situations, working on individual perceptions of their partner and relationship may hold a substantial degree of importance. In other words, couple therapy that is emphasizes both the within person and between partner dynamics may produce the largest effect on improving relationship satisfaction.

This study also provides support for (Lloyd et al., 2015, 2017) which calls for Marines to attend relationship education and enrichment training in order to make

informed decisions about marriage and decrease the divorce rate within the Military. The limited cross-partner effects in our study would seem to suggest that these partners are relatively unfamiliar with one another and have not created a romantic bond. Therefore, relationship education and enrichment may be a crucial intervention to help young Marine couples get to know each other and outline helpful strategies for navigating romantic partnerships in Military culture.

At a more broadly defined policy level, results of our study could indicate that the incentive to be married in the Military is high and leads to contract marriages that are less defined by love and intimacy and more heavily rooted in financial benefit. This should however be interpreted with caution as there was no way for us to be sure contract partnerships were in fact in our sample.

Drawing from our results, future research can be improved in a few distinct ways:

1) Future longitudinal studies of attachment and relationship satisfaction should consider including couples who have been dating or married for a minimum of two years in order to better capture causation effects of relationship-specific attachment on relationship satisfaction. 2) Studies should attempt to use samples that have a wider range of ages. 3) Future longitudinal studies would do well to include a larger sample size to increase depth and strength of results. 4) We would recommend the design include at least 24 moths of data collection to enhance results.

Relevant Changes

There were only minimal changes to this study following the proposal. First, as is often the case with secondary data, my sample limited more than I had anticipated. My

proposal included a minimum of 80 couples however I was only able to include 78 couples in this study. This was due to various factors including only being able to include heterosexual couples for purposes of distinguishability and due to my inclusion criteria that couples would only be included if they completed four time points of data collection.

Second, per committee suggestion, variance of treatment conditions in the macro-level iRelate study was examined prior to dyadic analysis. Repeated-measures ANOVA were used, determining there were no significant effects of treatment condition and therefore did not need to be controlled for in the analysis. Lastly, the total score of relationship satisfaction was used rather than the subscales of the RDAS. There were two reasons for this decision: One, for parsimony and to ensure the model could convert during analysis.

Two, clinically, the total score of the RDAS is more commonly used than the subscales of the RDAS.