Explainable Artificial Intelligence Models for Forecasting Divorce Risk from Dyadic Communication Patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to develop and interpret explainable artificial intelligence models capable of forecasting divorce risk based on dyadic communication patterns among married couples. This quantitative, observational study was conducted with legally married couples residing in Canada. Couples completed validated self-report measures assessing communication quality, emotional responsiveness, and relational characteristics, and participated in a structured dyadic interaction task designed to elicit naturally occurring conflict-related communication. Interaction transcripts were processed using natural language processing techniques to extract linguistic and interactional features reflecting positivity, negativity, contempt, emotional validation, and conversational balance. A composite divorce risk indicator was constructed from self-reported divorce proneness and separation intentions. Multiple supervised machine learning models, including regularized regression and tree-based ensemble methods, were trained and evaluated using nested cross-validation. Explainable artificial intelligence techniques were applied to identify global and local feature contributions to model predictions. Ensemble-based models demonstrated significantly higher predictive performance than linear models, achieving superior accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Negative communication features, particularly contempt markers and overall communication negativity, were the strongest positive predictors of divorce risk, while emotional validation and balanced turn-taking showed significant protective effects. Demographic variables contributed comparatively less to prediction once dyadic communication patterns were included. Explainability analyses revealed consistent and interpretable pathways through which specific interactional behaviors increased or reduced predicted divorce risk. The findings indicate that explainable artificial intelligence models can accurately and transparently forecast divorce risk using dyadic communication patterns, highlighting communication behaviors as central, modifiable indicators of marital instability.
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 | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".