Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T08:10:59.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does Therapist Guidance Enhance Assessment-Based Feedback as Couple Relationship Education?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 January 2013

W. Kim Halford,
Raylene Chen,
Keithia L. Wilson,
Jeffry Larson,
Dean Busby and
Thomas Holman
W. Kim Halford*
Affiliation:
University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Raylene Chen
Affiliation:
Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Keithia L. Wilson
Affiliation:
Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Jeffry Larson
Affiliation:
Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA
Dean Busby
Affiliation:
Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA
Thomas Holman
Affiliation:
Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Dr W. Kim Halford, School of Psychology, University of Queensland, St Lucia QLD 4072, Australia. Email: k.halford@psy.uq.edu.au
Get access

Abstract

Assessment and feedback of relationship strengths and challenges is a widely used brief approach to couple relationship education (CRE). It can be fully automated through the internet, with couples self-interpreting the feedback. This study assessed whether therapist guidance of couples to interpret the report and develop relationship goals enhanced the benefits of the feedback. Thirty-nine couples seeking CRE were randomly assigned to either self-interpretation of an internet-based relationship assessment report (RELATE), or therapist-guided interpretation of the same report (RELATE+). Participants were assessed on relationship satisfaction and psychological distress pre- and post-CRE, and at 6-month follow-up. RELATE and RELATE+ were not reliably different in outcome. Couples in both conditions sustained high relationship satisfaction and showed an overall decline in psychological distress. However, consumer satisfaction was substantially higher for the RELATE+ condition than the RELATE condition.

Keywords

marriage educationcouple relationship educationrelationship satisfaction

Information

Type
Standard Papers
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , December 2012, pp. 199 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, B., Stanley, S., Rhoades, G., Markman, H.J., & Loew, B.A. (2011). Marriage education in the Army: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy, 10: 4, 309–326. doi: 10.1080/15332691.2011.613309Google Scholar
Antony, M.M., Bieling, P.J., Cox, B.J., Enns, M.W., & Swinson, R.P. (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and the 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10 (2), 176–181. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176Google Scholar
Atkins, D.C. (2005). Using multilevel models to analyze couple and family treatment data: Basic and advanced issues. Journal of Family Psychology, 19 (1), 98–110. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.1.98Google Scholar
Attkisson, C.C., & Greenfield, T.K. (1999). The UCSF client satisfaction scales: I. The client satisfaction questionnaire-8. In Maruish, M.E. (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment (pp. 1222–1346). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Blanchard, V.L., Hawkins, A.J., Baldwin, S.A., & Fawcett, E.B. (2009). Investigating the effects of marriage and relationship education on couples’ communication skills: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Family Psychology, 23 (2), 203–214.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, S.R. & Fincham, F.D. (2009). A randomized clinical trial of a computer based preventive intervention: Replication and extension of ePREP. Journal of Family Psychology, 23 (1), 32–38. doi: 0.1037/a0014061.Google Scholar
Brown, T.A., Chorpita, B.F., Korotitsch, W., & Barlow, D.H. (1997). Psychometric properties of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) in clinical samples. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35, 79–89. doi:10.1016/S0005-7967(96)00068-XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busby, D.M., Holman, T.B., & Taniguchi, N. (2001). RELATE: Relationship evaluation of the individual, family, cultural, and couple contexts. Family Relations, 50, 308–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busby, D.M., Ivey, D.C., Harris, S.M., & Ates, C. (2007). Self-directed, therapist-directed, and assessment-based interventions for premarital couples. Family Relations, 56 (3), 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordova, J.V., Scott, R.L., Dorian, M., Mirgain, S., Yaeger, D., & Groot, A. (2005). The marriage checkup: An indicated preventive intervention for treatment-avoidant couples at risk for marital deterioration. Behavior Therapy, 36, 301–309.Google Scholar
Cordova, J.V., Warren, L.Z., & Gee, C.B. (2001). Motivational interviewing as an intervention for at-risk couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27, 315–326.Google Scholar
Crawford, J., Cayley, C., Lovibond, P.F., Wilson, P.H., & Hartley, C. (2011). Percentile norms and accompanying interval estimates from an Australian general adult population sample for self-report mood scales (BAI, BDI, CRSD, CES-D, DASS, DASS-21, STAI-X, STAI-Y, SRDS, and SRAS). Australian Psychologist, 46 (1), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Futris, T.G., Barton, A.W., Aholou, T.M., & Seponski, D.M. (2011). The impact of PREPARE on engaged couples: Variations by delivery format. Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy, 10 (1), 69–86.Google Scholar
Giblin, P., Sprenkle, D.H., & Sheehan, R. (1985). Enrichment outcome research: A meta-analysis of premarital, marital, and family interventions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halford, W.K., (2011). Marriage and relationship education: what works and how to provide it. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Halford, W.K., & Casey, L. (2010). Taking it to the people: Using technology to enhance the impact of couple relationship education. In Hahlweg, K., Grawe, M., & Baucom, D. (Eds.), Enhancing couples: The shape of couple therapy to come (pp. 111–127). Gottingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Halford, W., Markman, H., & Stanley, S. (2008). Strengthening couples’ relationships with education: social policy and public health perspectives. Journal of Family Psychology, 22 (4), 497–505. doi:10.1037/a0012789CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halford, W.K., Osgarby, S.M., & Kelly, A. (1996). Brief behavioural couples therapy: A preliminary evaluation. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 24, 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halford, W., Sanders, M., & Behrens, B. (2001). Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program. Journal of Family Psychology, 15 (4), 750–768. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.15.4.750Google Scholar
Halford, W.K., & Snyder, D.K. (2012). Universal processes and common factors in couple therapy and relationship education: introduction to the special section. Behavior Therapy, 43 (1), 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2011.01.007Google Scholar
Halford, W.K., Wilson, K., Watson, B., Verner, T., Larson, J., Busby, D., & Holman, T. (2010). Couple relationship education at home: Does skill training enhance relationship assessment and feedback? Journal of Family Psychology, 24 (2), 188–196. doi:10.1037/a0018786Google Scholar
Hawkins, A.J., Blanchard, V.L., Baldwin, S.A., & Fawcett, E.B. (2008). Does marriage and relationship education work? A meta-analytic study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76, 723–734.Google Scholar
Hunsley, J., Best, M., Lefebvre, M., & Vito, D. (2001). The seven-item short form of the dyadic adjustment scale: Further evidence for construct validity. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 29 (4), 325–335. doi:10.1080/01926180152588734Google Scholar
Knutson, L. & Olson, D.H. (2003). Effectiveness of PREPARE Program with premarital couples in a community setting. Marriage & Family, 6 (4), 529–546.Google Scholar
Larson, J.H., Newell, K., Topham, G., & Nichols, S. (2002). A review of three comprehensive premarital assessment questionnaires. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 28 (2), 233–239.Google Scholar
Larson, J.H., Vatter, R.S., Galbraith, R.C., Holman, T.B., & Stahmann, R.F. (2007). The RELATionship evaluation (RELATE) with therapist-assisted interpretation: Short-term effects on premarital relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy, 33 (3), 364–374. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2007.00036.xGoogle Scholar
Lovibond, S.H., & Lovibond, P.F. (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (2nd ed.). Sydney, Australia: Psychology Foundation.Google Scholar
Markey, B., & Micheletto, M. (1997). Instructor manual for FOCCUS. Omaha, NE: Archdiocese of Omaha.Google Scholar
Miller, W.R., & Rose, G. (2009). Toward a theory of motivational interviewing. American Psychologist, 64, 527–537. doi:10.1037/a0016830Google Scholar
Nguyen, T.D., Attkisson, C.C., & Stegner, B.L. (1983). Assessment of patient satisfaction: Development and refinement of a service evaluation questionnaire. Evaluation and Program Planning, 6, 299–314. doi:10.1016/0149-7189(83)90010-1.Google Scholar
Olson, D.H., Fournier, D.G., & Druckman, J.M. (1996). PREPARE. Minneapolis: Life Innovations.Google Scholar
Petch, J.F., Halford, W.K., Creedy, D.K., & Gamble, J. (2012, June 25). A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Couple Relationship and Coparenting Program (Couple CARE for Parents) for High- and Low-Risk New Parents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0028781.Google Scholar
Rasbash, J., Browne, W., Healy, M., Cameron, B., & Charlton, C. (2005). MLwiN Version 2.02 [Computer software]. Bristol, England: Centre for Multilevel Modelling.Google Scholar
Sharpley, C.F., & Rogers, H.J. (1984). Preliminary validation of the abbreviated Spanier dyadic adjustment scale: Some psychometric data regarding a screening test of marital adjustment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44 (4), 1045–1049. doi:10.1177/0013164484444029Google Scholar
Spanier, G.B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: new scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38 (1), 15–38.Google Scholar
Wood, R.G., McConnell, S., Quinn, M., Clarkwest, A., & Hsueh, J. (2010). Strengthening unmarried parents’ relationships: The early impacts of Building Strong Families. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.Google Scholar