Toward an Integrative Model of Intimacy, Sexual Satisfaction, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Prospective Study in Long-Term Couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual and relationship well-being are strongly intertwined in couple relationships. However, relationship quality is generally examined through relationship satisfaction only, neglecting the importance of sexual satisfaction as an aspect of relationship quality for many couples. Moreover, considering the role of interpersonal processes, such as intimacy, in relationship quality seems essential to better understand couples' optimal functioning. Although the Vulnerability-Stress-Adaptation Model posits bidirectional associations between interpersonal processes and relationship quality, few studies have tested such models. This dyadic study examined the longitudinal associations between the process of intimacy and sexual and relationship satisfaction in 145 long-term mixed-gender/sex couples. Participants completed online questionnaires three times over 13 months. A cross-lagged panel model revealed bidirectional associations between intimacy behaviors and both sexual and relationship satisfaction. Findings suggest that intimacy behaviors could foster both sexual and relationship satisfaction in couples, and that higher sexual and relationship satisfaction could also promote intimacy behaviors over time. These results highlight that satisfaction may not only be an outcome of positive interpersonal processes, but also a facilitator of these interpersonal processes over time. This study underscores the need to consider the complex interplay of interpersonal processes and satisfaction to foster relationship quality in long-term couples over time.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".