IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/lum/jessjo/v2y2018i1p53-76.html

The Relationship between Ideal Couple Standards and Marital Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Bogdan Sebastian FILIPESCU

    (Clinical psychologist, family systemic therapy psychologist, Ph.D. Neuroscience Ph.D. within the University of Medicine and Pharmacy „Carol Davila” of Bucharest, România)

Abstract

The choice of the partner is made starting from aspects like proximity, resemblance, attraction, compatibility, choice and it ends with the decision of staying in the marital couple. The attraction expresses the desire to interact favourably with another person, a moment overwhelmed by specific emotions generated by proximity. Emphasizing the attraction and anticipating the interaction intervene in the game of relationship, in which emotions have an impact upon perception, cognition and evaluation of the partner. Forming a marital couple involves cohabitation of the two biological and psychical entities, alignment of their own interests with the ones of the partner’s, adjustment of each one’s personality. The relational and value-related side of personality improves the couple relationship by means of improving the interacting abilities. Adaptation to the family environment, to the life and work depends on interior life quality, on the self-knowledge of personality. The purpose of the research: checking the report between the dyadic adaptation level, ideal couple standards level, and the welfare degree of 30 couples, partners with ages between 26 - 47 years old, with a relationship experience of maximum 26 years, unemployed and employees, working in institutions in the city of Iasi. Used methods: evaluation scale for dyadic adaptation, checklist of specific relationship standards, evaluation scale for the welfare in the marital relationship. Expected outcome: the level of marital adaptation is high in the family with adequate relationship standards, the personal limits are positively associated with the level of independence, the balance between control and power is balanced, the expressive and instrumental investments are negatively associated with the self-acceptance level. The ideal standards regarding the personal limits are manifested when there is satisfaction and dyadic cohesion, a high level of dyadic unity and moderate level of affective expression.

Suggested Citation

  • Bogdan Sebastian FILIPESCU, 2018. "The Relationship between Ideal Couple Standards and Marital Satisfaction," Journal for Ethics in Social Studies, Editura Lumen, vol. 2(1), pages 53-76, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:lum:jessjo:v:2:y:2018:i:1:p:53-76
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.18662/jess/09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/jess/article/view/781
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.18662/jess/09?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stutzer, Alois & Frey, Bruno S., 2006. "Does marriage make people happy, or do happy people get married?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 326-347, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haiting Jiang & Bo Burström & Jiaying Chen & Kristina Burström, 2021. "Rural–Urban Inequalities in Poor Self-Rated Health, Self-Reported Functional Disabilities, and Depression among Chinese Older Adults: Evidence from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study 2," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Augusto Mendoza Calderón, 2017. "El Efecto del Empleo sobre la Violencia Doméstica: Evidencia para las Mujeres Peruanas," Working Papers 99, Peruvian Economic Association.
    3. Arnaud Dupuy & Alfred Galichon, 2014. "Personality traits and the marriage market," SciencePo Working papers hal-03470458, HAL.
    4. Xavier Ramos, 2008. "Using Efficiency Analysis to Measure Individual Well-being with an Illustration for Catalonia," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Nanak Kakwani & Jacques Silber (ed.), Quantitative Approaches to Multidimensional Poverty Measurement, chapter 9, pages 155-175, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Tatiana Karabchuk, 2016. "The subjective well-being of women in Europe: children, work and employment protection legislation," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 15(2), pages 219-245, November.
    6. Bruno S. Frey & Anthony Gullo, 2021. "Does Sports Make People Happier, or Do Happy People More Sports?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(4), pages 432-458, May.
    7. Violeta Misheva, 2016. "What Determines Emotional Well-Being? The Role of Adverse Experiences: Evidence Using Twin Data," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 1921-1937, October.
    8. Maite Blázquez Cuesta & Santiago Budría, 2014. "Deprivation and Subjective Well-Being: Evidence from Panel Data," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(4), pages 655-682, December.
    9. David A. Weisbach, 2008. "What Does Happiness Research Tell Us About Taxation?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(S2), pages 293-324, June.
    10. Laura Langner, 2022. "Desperate Housewives and Happy Working Mothers: Are Parent-Couples with Equal Income More Satisfied throughout Parenthood? A Dyadic Longitudinal Study," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 36(1), pages 80-100, February.
    11. Paul Downward & Simona Rasciute, 2011. "An Economic Analysis of the Subjective Health and Well-being of Physical Activity," Chapters, in: Plácido Rodríguez & Stefan Késenne & Brad R. Humphreys (ed.), The Economics of Sport, Health and Happiness, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Averett, Susan L. & Sikora, Asia & Argys, Laura M., 2008. "For better or worse: Relationship status and body mass index," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 330-349, December.
    13. Andrew E. Clark & Hippolyte d’Albis & Angela Greulich, 2021. "The age U-shape in Europe: the protective role of partnership," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 19(1), pages 293-318.
    14. Guzi, Martin & de Pedraza, Pablo, 2013. "A Web Survey Analysis of the Subjective Well-being of Spanish Workers," IZA Discussion Papers 7618, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. David G. Blanchflower & Andrew E. Clark, 2021. "Children, unhappiness and family finances," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 625-653, April.
    16. Sophie Cetre & Andrew E. Clark & Claudia Senik, 2016. "Happy People Have Children: Choice and Self-Selection into Parenthood," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 445-473, August.
    17. Ruut Veenhoven, 2011. "World Database of Happiness Example of a focused ‘Findings Archive’," RatSWD Working Papers 169, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    18. Andrew E. Clark & Ed Diener & Yannis Georgellis & Richard E. Lucas, 2008. "Lags And Leads in Life Satisfaction: a Test of the Baseline Hypothesis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(529), pages 222-243, June.
    19. Andrew J. Oswald & Eugenio Proto & Daniel Sgroi, 2015. "Happiness and Productivity," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(4), pages 789-822.
    20. Ann Evans & Edith Gray & Anna Reimondos, 2023. "Having a Partner or Living with a Partner: Differences in Life Satisfaction and Mental Health," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(5), pages 2295-2313, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lum:jessjo:v:2:y:2018:i:1:p:53-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Antonio Sandu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/jess/index .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.