Darling, Come Lay with Me or Talk with Me: Perceived Mattering and the Complementary Association between Sex and Communication within Marital Relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the theories on interpersonal mattering, reciprocal interactions and mutual engagements facilitate the formation of interpersonal mattering within relationships. However, the theoretical framework on mattering has rarely been applied to understand the roles of sexual and verbal exchanges within intimate relationships. To fill this research gap, the authors proposed that heightened perception of mattering captures the common mechanism through which both frequent sex and communication predict greater marital satisfaction. Building on this perspective, the study examined whether frequent sex and communication can compensate for the other in predicting marital satisfaction by sustaining the sense of mattering between spouses. Two survey studies were conducted using cross-cultural online samples (Study 1: Nkorean = 307 and NAmerican = 277) and a community sample of married dyads (Study 2: N = 286). Across these samples, the results demonstrated that the perceived sense of mattering to spouse mediated the effects of both sexual frequency and communication quantity on the couples’ overall satisfaction with their marriage. Moreover, the results of the moderated mediation analyses supported the hypothesis that sexual frequency and communication quantity can moderate the effects of the other on marital satisfaction by providing a buffer on the couples’ perceived sense of mattering to spouse.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".