Applying the developmental model of marital competence to sexual satisfaction: Associations between conflict resolution quality, forgiveness, attachment, and sexual satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual satisfaction is a complex construct that is affected by many diverse factors. Without a comprehensive framework guiding their work, scholars and practitioners who work with married couples may inadvertently focus on a single factor affecting sexual satisfaction and subsequently limit the effectiveness of their research and practice. Through discussion and an empirical example, the current study explores how the developmental model of marital competence—a comprehensive theory for understanding marital processes—can be used by scholars and practitioners to guide their work on sexual satisfaction and broaden their approach. Utilizing U.S. nationally representative data from 2,114 mixed-sex couples and guided by the actor-partner-interdependence-model, cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between wives’ and husbands’ sexual satisfaction and three factors—conflict resolution quality, forgiveness, and anxious and avoidant attachment—that correspond to the three domains of the developmental model of marital competence—marital communication, marital virtues, and marital identities—were tested. Results of the current study provide empirical support for the use of the developmental model of marital competence when approaching work on sexual relationships among married, heterosexual couples. For both partners, variables from each of the three domains of this model were associated with sexual satisfaction cross-sectionally, and variables in one domain—attachment avoidance and anxiety—were associated with changes in sexual satisfaction over time. The merits of researchers and practitioners integrating the developmental model of marital competence into their work are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".