THE STUDY OF ADULT ATTACHMENT STYLES, COMMUNICATION

PATTERNS, AND RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION

IN HETEROSEXUAL INDIVIDUALS

by

India L. Cutler

JEFF SHEN, Ph.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair

STEVEN SCHNEIDER, Ph.D., Committee Member

SANDRA HARRIS, Ph.D., Committee Member

Deborah Bushway, Ph.D., Dean, Harold Abel School of Psychology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

January 2009
 3341508

Copyright 2009 by
Cutler, India L.

All rights reserved

3341508
2009
© India Cutler, 2009
 Abstract

Interpersonal behaviors (i.e., communication) and intrapersonal processes (i.e.,

attachment style) have been suggested to play a role in relationships and marital status by

numerous studies. However, the exact interaction between attachment styles and

communication patterns within a relationship is not fully understood. The objective of

this study is to investigate the interaction and correlation between a heterosexual

individual’s attachment styles and communication patterns within the relationship. The

impact of different attachment styles and the relationship between communication and

the relationship satisfaction has been addressed. Specifically, two hundred and forty

individuals in heterosexual relationships (N =240, ages 18 to 25) participated in the study.

They were recruited from a local prominent university in Miami, Florida, as well as from

the university’s campus through advertising in university. The participants were either

dating, engaged, or have been married for at least one month. The study focused on

analyzing different predictors in individuals such as adult attachment style,

communication pattern, and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual relationships.

Furthermore, this study sought out to help acquire further knowledge on how adult

attachment styles interplay with communication patterns and relationship satisfaction in

adults.
 Dedication

I am dedicating my dissertation to Jesus Christ, for I could not have made it without

you, and all the people that played a major role in my life:

To my grandmother, who I forever appreciate, thanks for providing me with a

strong “secure base” from the very beginning. Your essence, wisdom, and lessons of

perseverance and phenomenal faith resonated throughout this dissertation process. Your

devotion and faith are directly correlated with this accomplishment and so many more.

To my mother, your continual love, support and encouragement have given me

the strength to pursue my dreams and to become the woman I am today.

To all my siblings, I love you all for being my limbs on our tree of unconditional

love, we share! Thank you all for believing in me.

To my dad, thank you for allowing me to understand that love is sometimes

expressed in diverse yet different ways. To all my uncles and aunts, thanks for always

believing in me. To all the phenomenal women who have and continue to empower my

life with core values for success--you all have given me wisdom, love, admiration, and

guidance. To my dear friends, your desires for healthy and romantic relationship also

pushed this dissertation to flourish. To everyone else who has made an impact on my life

in some sort of way, what I have learned from you all has helped form the foundation for

this dissertation. Last but certainly not least, to a future significant other whoever that

epitome of a man shall be; in order to love me, you have to respect me, love yourself,

communicate effectively, and, love unconditionally so that relationship satisfaction can

prosper.

iii
 Acknowledgments

Jeff Shen, Ph.D., thank you for your patience and nurturing throughout this project.

The support and nourishment have been extremely helpful. Thanks again for being a

wonderful educator/mentor.

Steven Schneider, Ph.D., thank you for all your help along the way. The

encouragement and motivation over time have been inspirational. Thanks for believing in

me.

Sandra Harris, Ph.D., thank you for all your dedication, inspiration, and words of

wisdom. Thanks for listening to me in the midst of a hard and difficult period during this

journey.

Dawn Bittner, thank you for being such an inspirational critic from the very

beginning to the end of my dissertation process. The support and critiques through this

process has been phenomenal.

To the undergraduate & graduate professors/instructors who believed in me from the

very beginning. Thank you for the firmness and toughness, which kept my attention and

focus throughout these long scholarly years.

To all the teachers who educated me from the very beginning, thank you for being the

root to my scholarly adult journey.

iv
 Table of Contents

Dedication .................................................................................................................................. iii

Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... viii

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

Introduction to the Problem ........................................................................................................ 1

Background of the Study ............................................................................................................ 3

Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................ 6

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................... 7

Rationale ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Research Questions ..................................................................................................................... 9

Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................... 10

Definition of Terms................................................................................................................... 11

Assumptions and Limitations ................................................................................................... 14

Nature of the Study ................................................................................................................... 14

Expected Outcomes .................................................................................................................. 15

Organization of the Remainder of the Study ............................................................................ 16

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................... 17

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 37

CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ........................................................... 55

CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................... 65

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 71

APPENDIX A. INFORMED CONSENT FORM (ICF) .............................................................. 82

v
APPENDIX B. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA SURVEY (DDS) ....................................................... 86

APPENDIX C. ADUILT ATTACHMENT SCALE (AAS) ........................................................ 87

APPENDIX D. RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (RQ) ...................................................... 88

APPENDIX E. COMMUNICATION PATTERN QUESTIONNAIRE (CPQ) ........................... 89

APPENDIX F. RELATIONSHIP ASSESSMENT SCALE (RAS) ............................................. 90

APPENDIX G. PERMISSION REQUEST-USE OF INSTRUMENTS ...................................... 91

APPENDIX H. APPROVAL: ADULT ATTACHMENT SCALE (AAS) .................................. 92

APPENDIX I. APPROVAL: RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (RQ) ................................ 93

APPENDIX J. APPROVAL: COMMUNICATION PATTERN QUESTIONNAIRE

(CPQ) SHORT-FORM ................................................................................................................. 94

APPENDIX K. APPROVAL: RELATIONSHIP ASSESSMENT SCALE (RAS) ..................... 95

APPENDIX L. REQUEST TO CONDUCT INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH ............................... 96

APPENDIX M. UNIVERSITY APPROVAL ............................................................................... 97

APPENDIX. N. INVITATION LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS .................................................... 98

APPENDIX. O. EXIT LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS ................................................................ 100

APPENDIX P. SURVEYMONKEY PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY ............... 102

APPENDIX Q. SURVEYMONKEY ONE PERSON/ONE COMPUTER POLICY ................ 108

APPENDIX R. SURVEYMONKEY TERM OF USE ............................................................... 111

APPENDIX S. TABLE 1. .......................................................................................................... 118

APPENDIX T. TABLE 2. ......................................................................................................... 119

APPENDIX U. TABLE 3. ......................................................................................................... 120

APPENDIX V. TABLE 4. ......................................................................................................... 121

APPENDIX W. TABLE 5. ......................................................................................................... 122

vi
APPENDIX X. TABLE 6 ........................................................................................................... 123

APPENDIX Y. TABLE 7 ........................................................................................................... 124

APPENDIX Z. TABLE 8 ........................................................................................................... 125

vii
 List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of the Participants’ Responses to the Demographic Data ................ 118

Table 2. Correlation of the Adult Attachment Style (AAS) & Communication

Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ) .......................................................................................... 119

Table 3. ANOVA of Adult Attachment Styles (AAS) & Communication

Patterns (CPQ) of heterosexual committed adults. ......................................................... 120

Table 4. Correlations between Adult Attachment Style (AAS) & Relationship

Assessment Scale (RAS)................................................................................................. 121

Table 5. Correlations of Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) & Communication

Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ) .......................................................................................... 122

Table 6. Stepwise multiple regression analysis of AAS, RQ, CPQ,

Length of relationship & RAS Coefficients (a) .............................................................. 123

Table 7. ANOVAf ........................................................................................................... 124

Table 8. Model Summaryf.............................................................................................. 125

viii
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem

According to the U. S. Census, in 1970, 28% of the individuals were single and in

2000, 39% of the individuals were single. Those single individuals in the 1970s

represented the percentage of the population that was not married. This means that within

three decades, single individuals increased by 11%, from 28% to 39%. Interestingly, that

11% increase emerged thirty-one years after Bowlby (1969) originally established the

attachment theory. Although marital and relationship satisfaction has been the topic of

many studies, high divorce rates and single family-broken homes continues while

suggesting that there is still much more to learn about how relationship satisfaction is

initiated, achieved and maintained. Previous studies focusing on the high rate of divorce

and failed relationships have primarily examined distressed individuals and couples, and

negative relational behavior patterns; a new trend in relationship literature has emerged

that delineates the need to identify healthy attachment & relationship styles,

communication patterns and behaviors, and relationship satisfaction (Lopez & Snyder,

2003).

More than two and a half decades ago, the attachment theory was utilized to better

understand the significant foundation of relationships. According to attachment theory,

romantic relationships are essential to adulthood because an individual's personal

attachment is represented by mental characteristics that construct expectations and ideas

from the “cradle to the grave” (Bowlby, 1969/1979). Attachment is recognized as a

1
lifelong stable behavior (Farley & Shaver, 2000) and that once people are predisposed

with attachment styles (e.g., secure, insecure, preoccupied, avoidant-ambivalent, and

dismissive) they begin to experience various thoughts, feelings, and, actions in

relationships (Brennan, Clark & Shaver, 1998). It has been identified that the childhood

to adulthood developments is influential to the psychological and sociological impact of

building and maintaining all relationships.

Attachment is an affection that can be a part of much individual's mental and

emotional growth. It is also a process that can develop from birth to death. Since the

days of Mary Ainsworth (1978) and John Bowlby (1969), attachment theory continues to

expand drastically from many aspects of relationships and romantic relationships and/or

adult attachment (Simpson, Winterheld, & Rholes, 2007). There are two factors of

attachment: interpersonal behaviors (e.g., communication) and intrapersonal process

(e.g., attachment style) (Berman, Marcus, & Berman, 1994). However, the exact

interaction and correlation between attachment style and communication patterns within a

romantic relationship is not fully understood.

Relationships are the connections and bonds between two or more individuals. In

relationships, it is exemplified how individuals share significant connections with one

another through interactive bonding (Domingue, 2006). Romantic relationships in

adulthood consist of romantic involvements that are representatives of romantic

fulfillment. It is, however, in the romantic involvements and interactions of individuals

that ably identified rather or not relationship gratification has been received. According to

Solomon & George (1999), the early relationships between parents and adolescent peers

are related to key adult romantic relationships, which are crucial to fulfillment.

2
Attachment, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction are study topics that

focus on interpersonal behaviors through both psychological and sociological

perspectives. Attachment, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction are a

major issue that starts as early as childhood (Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1997; Besser & Priel,

2005). Since attachment, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction can be

found in general relationship situations, it can affect many individuals. The negative

effect of this problem is that it could ultimately determine the way an individual

develops, from handling childhood occurrences to dealing with experiences as an adult

through day to day interactions and relationships with people (Erwin, Salter, & Purves,

2001). This same negative effect could influence the way one matures and develops adult

romantic relationships. For this reason individuals' basic attachments begins through

social interactions with caregivers. Consequently, adult individuals would need to

experience significant parent-child social developments in order to achieve positive

influences for adult romantic relationships.

Background of the Study

Research into relationships and marital functioning has escalated over the last

decade (Simpson & Rholes, 1998; Simpson, Winterfield, & Rholes, 2007). Relationship

functioning has expanded dramatically over the years, suggesting that a more balanced

view of interpersonal and environmental causes—and solutions—has caused the

emergence over decades. Relationships function to begin from parent-child attachment

development in infancy to adulthood attachment which allows a noteworthy framework

of attachment theory on the insight of relationship functioning (Feeney, 2002; Lemay,

Clark, & Feeney, 2007). Relationships require an analysis of interpersonal exchanges

3
within unions, which can internally and externally interplay between individuals.

Communication patterns are a rising construct that appear to have correlating

characteristics with attachment, and these patterns also influence adult relationship

functioning and marital satisfaction. Communication represented the different ways of

conversing with others and how one interacts in relationships with others (Doohan &

Manusov, 2004). Family psychology and social psychology literature showed two ways

individuals communicate utilizing cognition and emotion (Nayani, 2006). It appeared

that the cognition and emotion of communications can be determined through recurring

thoughts and strong feelings. From adolescence to adulthood, individuals’ social

behaviors transition as the individuals continues to develop. According to this view,

increased communication demands lead to increased attachment avoidance, which in turn

leads to increased demands for engagement, with the result being a decline in relationship

functioning and satisfaction.

As adolescents become young adults, they begin their own personal life journeys

and attachment theory can provide insight into their interpersonal and intrapersonal

developments (Wei, Russell, & Zakalik, 2005). Individual’s interpersonal skills are

behaviors and feelings that influence the interactions with others (Niedenthal, Brauer, &

Robin, 2002). However, Niedenthal, Brauer, and Robin (2002) also indicated that many

young adults endure loneliness, depression, and social anxiety that are displayed through

facial expression. Similarly, students who experienced loneliness and social anxiety

often possess low levels of social skills (Eng, Heimberg, & Hart, 2001) or social

competence needed to develop secondary close and intimate interpersonal relationships

(Mallinckrodt & Wei, 2005). Social competencies are defined as “skills needed to recruit

4
and maintain satisfying and supportive relationships” together with “trait-like

dispositions that govern use of these skills” (Mallinckrodt & Wei, 2005, p. 359). This

means it is believed that attachment could mediate social competencies which could

determine the psychological and interpersonal outcomes in individuals.

Wei, Russell, & Zakalik’s (2005) work exemplified a great impact on research

with college student’s adult attachments, social feelings, and emotions. During

significant life changes and transitions many young adults come across balancing life,

education, and interpersonal relationships as a primary growth pattern (Creasey &

Hessen-McInnius, 2001). The research strongly emphasized the importance of

understanding how college students make conversions in their lives from home to college

which could increase attachment and some insecurity (Wei, Russell, Zakalik, 2005).

Throughout research the theory of attachment discussed the philosophy of affection that

influences the behavior of securely or insecurely attached individuals as they live and

adjust to daily life. The theory of attachment also clarified young adults’ quests to adjust

and survive through developmental growth experiences and relationships (Simpson,

Collins, & Tran, 2007). In other words, the nature of a person’s college experiences along

with daily life experiences in relationships can serve as a exceedingly asset to further

understanding attachment, social competencies, and relationships.

Romantic bonds are partly an attachment phenomenon, which comes from

romantic love (Farley & Shaver, 2000). Additionally, romantic bonds involved a sum of

attachments, care giving experiences, and sex, which developed into adult behaviors in

romantic relationships (Farley & Shaver, 2000). For years, attachment style has been

identified as a predictor of one’s emotional and developmental securities and insecurities

5
in relationships. Overtime, humans across many cultures have had two major

attachments (secure and insecure styles) in bonding. Secure and insecure are two

attachments that illustrated human bonding (Immerman & Mackey, 2003). This

classification can be seen in the fact that insecure attachment styles are often researched

and viewed as “insecurely attached styles” (Weiten, 2007).

Interestingly, parent-child relationships have actually been used for decades to

understand attachment styles. Researchers have used parent-child and adult studies to

exemplify a great variety of things, including avoidant behaviors and anxious

actions/ambivalent behaviors associated with adult attachment styles in romantic

relationships. There is also evidence that therapy can be a psychological aid that boosts

emotional and developmental flow to an individual’s emotional and psychological state

and is useful in helping children and adolescents grow into emotional stable adults

(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bowlby, 1979; Main, 1996; Solomon & George, 1999;

Senchak & Leonard, 1992; Weiten, 2007).

Statement of the Problem

Over the past two decades, the topic of adult attachment has attracted attention

from well-informed authorities and practitioners as well as scholars due to early

relationship experiences that seem to influence adult relationships of a growing interest in

the attachment representations. Bowlby (1979) exemplified how attachment theory being

a life-long theory that attempts to explain the behavior of human behavior from birth to

death. Researchers, practitioners, and scholars are particularly interested in the

understandings of attachment in relation to various factors (Domingue, 2006; Ghering,

2007; Mercer, 2006; Simpson, Collins, & Tran, 2007; Solomon & George, 1999;

6
Treimel, 2006; Vogel, & Wei, 2005; Wei, Mallinckrodt, Larson, & Zakalik, 2005; Wei,

Vogel, Ku, & Zakalik, 2005). As a reflection of this interest in attachment and adult

attachment, the scholarly literature has spanned across two different fields and three sub

fields: psychology (social, marital, family, and cognitive), and sociology (Bartholomew

& Horowitz, 1991; Bretherton, 1991; Bowlby, 1979; Carnelley, Pietromonaco, & Jaffe,

1996; Cassidy, 1999; Collins & Read, 1990; Doob, 2000; Fraley & Shaver, 2000; Galotti,

1999; Hazan & Shaver, 1990; Main, 1996; Senchak & Leonard, 1992; Sullaway &

Christensen, 1983). Attachment was viewed in different ways according to different

social science field perspectives. For example, psychologists have a tendency to view

attachment as a psychological, mental, or emotional aspect or a characteristic that is

worthy of investigating and tend to think that investigating adult attachment can provide

further knowledge on social interconnection and relationship satisfaction (Reis &

Grenyer, 2004). Sociologists have a propensity to perceive attachment as part of an

interactive issue; looking for points of leverage in the society to influence the result of a

cycle of interactions (George & West, 1999).

In the context of social psychologist and sociologists, research on individual

differences expresses how romantic love can be conceptualized as an attachment process

(Doob, 2000; Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Following up on Weiss (1973) idea on chronic

loneliness is associated to insecure attachment; Hazan & Shaver (2000) exemplified that

variation in social experiences produces lasting relatively differences in relationship

styles and that attachment styles manifest in adult relationships. Attachment actively

continues to be a challenging topic of investigation because it can be viewed from so

many different perspectives; from highly complex, to having biological, cognitive,

7
emotional, behavioral, and contextual aspects that have varied over time (Bartholomew &

Horowitz, 1991; Bretherton, 1991; Bowlby, 1979; Cassidy, 1999; Main, 1996). However,

attachment styles and communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction is predictors

of relationship fulfillment, yet all three variables are also related to relationship failure.

There are many reasons why relationships fail. However; failing relationships induce

depression, sadness, and torn emotions in individuals. Attachment and communication

between young adults in relationships need to be better understood for society to have an

opportunity to prevent teenage pregnancy, failed relationships, and single parent homes

(Kirby, 2007). In the essence of society, more and more individuals lose relationships for

reasons ranging from failure to communicate to depreciation of relationship satisfaction

(Gonzaga, Campos, & Bradbury, 2007).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to determine if there were relationships between adult

attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual

individuals. This research also focused on heterosexual individuals in South Florida who

was in a committed relationship.

Rationale

The rationale of this study was to explore and validate the scores between adult

attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual

adults in committed relationships. Additionally, the relationship of adult attachments

styles and relationship styles to positive communication patterns and behaviors, and

relationship satisfaction was explored.

8
 Research Questions

This study focused on the question of whether attachment styles, relationship

styles, and communication patterns predict relationship satisfaction in heterosexual adult

individuals in committed relationships. There are four questions in this study:

ResQ1: What is the relationship between adult attachment styles (AAS) scores

and communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship?

ResQ1A: What is the nature of the correlation between attachment styles (AAS)

scores and communication patterns (CPQ) score?

ResQ1B: What is the difference between attachment styles (AAS) scores and

communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

ResQ2: What is the relationship between attachment styles (AAS) scores and

relationship satisfaction (RAS) scores between individuals in committed heterosexual

relationships?

ResQ3: What is the relationship between adult relationship styles (RQ) scores and

communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

ResQ4: How well do scores of adult attachment styles (AAS), communication

patterns (CPQ), and length of a relationship predict relationship satisfaction (RAS) in

heterosexual relationships?

9
Null Hypotheses: A null hypothesis is a prediction that is invalid, with a naught value or

consequence insignificantly (Howell, 2007, 2006). The null hypothesis is converted from

the hypotheses in order to make it testable (Walonick, 2004). Providing a null

hypothesis is part of research strategy and statistical techniques that enables the

researcher to reject a null hypothesis, but will not provide a way to accept a hypothesis

(Walonick, 2004). The null hypotheses; along with the data analytic procedure for testing

each hypothesis is explained in Chapter 3, the Methodology chapter.

Significance of the Study

While initial research on adult attachment styles was previously promoted (Bowlby,

1979), there was still a need for more research since individuals possess a biological

attachment system that directs at maintaining balance of attachment security and

exploring the world as it continuously evolves. Studies on adult attachment styles,

communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction (Schachner, Shaver, & Mikulincer,

2005; Shaver & Brennan, 1992) illustrated how attachment styles may influence

psychological functioning through the quality of an individual’s affectionate bonds.

Therefore, the more valuable the research literature comprised on attachment styles and

communication is, the more knowledge can be applied and implemented in society to

benefit individuals growing from infancy to adulthood in building and maintaining

relationships. However, the study focused on understanding heterosexual romantic

relationships from an attachment theory perception.

Given the diversity among today’s young adults, many of their relationships begin

and end while allowing relationship experience to occur from adolescence to adulthood.

Therefore, the transitional nature of this period is essential to their well-being and their

10
adaptive behavioral patterns (Patrick, Knee, & Canevello, 2007). The information from

this research study can be used to help understand the transitional social developmental

period of the ages 18 through 25. This phase can be valuable in providing data toward

the formation of attachment styles and communication patterns to relationship

satisfaction. Developments of adolescents over time include an operational thought,

which allows adolescents to focus on themselves and others through elaborating on their

self-identity, morals, interpersonal values, and overall balance between autonomy and

relational intimacy (Allen, Hauser, O’Connor, & Bell, 1994; Collins, 1990; Steinberg,

1990). Early stages of ego development focus on an egocentric view of the environment

(Hauser, 1991) and Later stages expressing subtle differences among people and events,

and strengths involved in forming and in sustaining intimate, collaborative relationships

(Hauser, 1991). Such rapid change in self from adolescence to adulthood can contribute

to massive transitional developments (Roisman, Holland, & Fortuna, 2007) as well as

contribute to challenges faced by college students (Archer & Cooper, 1998).

The accumulated results can be used to improve relationships through

developmental, social, and emotional developments. The information being gathered on

attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction, can be used to

help decrease the number of failed relationships. This research can help improve the

well-being of a young adult’s social experience, or provide knowledge on how to avoid

developing unhealthy adult attachments. For that matter, this research could have positive

long-standing contributions toward shaping young adult’s life and relationships.

In other words, individuals who are either dating, engaged, or married, along with

family therapists, and sociologists can benefit from the information gained from this

11
research study. Similarly, behaviorists, couple therapists and family counseling services

could also benefit from the knowledge this research provides regarding the social

interrelationships of young adults. The current work focused on two constructs, namely,

attachment style and communication patterns as they relate to a young adult’s

relationship satisfaction. The overall hypothesis is that an adult attachment style and

communication pattern does predict relationship satisfaction of young adults.

Definition of Terms

Attachment. Attachment is defined as the “close, emotional bonds of affection

that develop between infants and their caregivers” (Weiten, 2007, p.427). Attachment

was defined in this study as the composite score of the Adult Attachment Style (AAS)

(Collins & Read, 1990).

Adult Attachment. Attachment originated by Bowlby (1979) from an etiological

theory perspective. Bowlby (1979) exemplified how attachment resonates across the

lifespan. Attachments are formed in child-parent relationships and those bonds can be

carried over to affect couples and marriages (Solomon & George, 1999).

Attachment Styles. Attachment Styles were defined as different types of styles of

attachment, which in a global sense can be healthy or unhealthy attachments, i.e., Secure,

Insecure: Ambivalent, Avoidant, Preoccupied, Fearful, and Disorganized (Bartholomew

& Horowitz, 1991; Roisman, Holland, & Fortuna, 2007).

Attachment Theory. Attachment Theory is the theory (or group of theories) about

psychological concepts of attachment: the tendency to seek closeness to another person

and feel secure when that person is present (Bowlby, 1979).

12
 A Committed Relationship. A committed relationship is monogamously formed

relationships between two individuals through emotional and physical togetherness

(Blow & Hartnett, 2005)

Communication Patterns. Communication patterns refer to the patterns of

communication that individuals typically use to deal with problems in relationships

(Christensen & Sullaway, 1984).

Human Bonding. Human bonding was defined as the close personal relationship

formed or processed by a parent and child or two interestingly connected individuals with

frequent or constant association (Bowlby, 1988).

Pair-Bonding. The attachment that two people have with one another when in

romantic relationships, or for the purpose of courtship and mating (Immerman &

Mackey, 2003). Human Bonding and Pair Bonding can be both measured by AAS

(Collins & Read, 1990) and RQ (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991).

Relationship Quality. Relationship quality focused on the strength of a

relationship (Henry, Berg & Smith, 2007). The quality of a relationship, whether

individuals are dating, involved, engaged, or married, (Gonzaga, Campos, & Bradbury,

2007) can identify some form of strengths if the relationship has quality.

Relationship Satisfaction. Relationship satisfaction is viewed from social

exchange theory; a social psychological and sociological perspective that focuses on the

interpersonal relationship satisfaction of two individual’s self-interest (Homan, 1961;

Kelley & Thibaut, 1978; Rusbult, 1983; Thibaut & Kelley, 1959).

13
 Trust. Trust is very vital to any relationship, and it can be defined as the “secure

feelings and beliefs that another person will fulfill certain needs” (Armsden & Greenberg,

1987).

Assumptions and Limitations

Assumptions. This research was based on the assumption that theories need to be

tested utilizing scientific method in order to be reasonable and applicable (Breakwell et

al., 2000). The current research was based on the assumption that all of the heterosexual

adults in the study can achieve relationship satisfaction within their relationships. It was

assumed that participants would respond truthfully to all surveys, but may be nervous or

worry if other individuals would know their true feelings based on the surveys. Next, it

was assumed that the sample was representing the population. Third, it is assumed that

the instruments used to acquire the validity and adequately measure the desired constructs

of interest. Still another assumption was that respondents would answer the survey

independently and participants would have access to a computer.

Limitations. The limitations of this study consist of three sections. The first

limitation exemplified that only a participant of a heterosexual committed relationship

ages 18-25 was selected. Therefore, the results cannot be generalized to all populations.

Second, this is a quantitative study using self-report measures and no participant's

opinion and perspectives would be obtained and/or investigated. Future studies of a

participant's insight and experience, especially for the individual insight of men and

women would be conducted using interviews and other qualitative approaches. Third, the

limitation also imposed by time and budget constraints. These precise limitations of the

14
study described the extent to which the researcher believed the limitations degraded the

researcher.

Nature of the Study

The nature of the study was geared around quantitative research methodology.

The study utilized the correlation research design. This particular design has been chosen

for the study as the relational focuses on the associations and relationships of variables

(Walonick, 2005). The data collection techniques consisted of one source of data: the

primary data collection, which used surveys and questionnaires, which was conducted by

collecting information from a diverse source of documents and/or electronically stored

information. The key data collection techniques in the study included surveys and

questionnaires. The quantitative research method included cross-sectional surveys, while

the overall data collection method integrated documents, surveys, and multi-method

approaches.

Expected Outcomes

If there is a relationship between adult attachment styles and communication

patterns in young adults in relationships, then adult attachment would be related to

relationship satisfaction, if not, then there would be no relationship between adult

attachment styles and communication patterns to young adults relationship satisfaction.

15
 If there is a relationship between a heterosexual adult’s attachment styles and

relationship satisfaction, then heterosexual adult attachment styles are related to

heterosexual adult relationship satisfaction, and if not, then adult attachment styles are

not being related to heterosexual adult relationship satisfaction.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The study contains five chapters. Chapter 1 originates the introduction to the research

development, background of the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the study,

research questions, hypotheses, theoretical framework, rationale, significance of the

study, definition of terms, and assumptions/limitations of the study. Chapter 2 reviews

the supporting psychology literature that focuses on adult attachment styles,

communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction. Chapter 3 identifies the

quantitative methodology, the sample population, instrumentations utilized, research

procedures, data collection, and analysis of the findings. Chapter 4 is display outcome

results, figures illustrating the data, and summary of the statistical analysis of the

findings. Chapter 5 provides supporting key theories, empirical research, interpretation

of the results, conclusions, suggestions for future research, theory development, and

proposed therapeutic interventions for individuals in relationships, individuals engaged,

and married individuals.

16
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction

The scientific study of couples and marriage has expanded tremendously

throughout society for diverse reasons from scholars to practitioners. The information

from couples and marriages is important to providing continual understanding of the

dynamic process of the science of relationships. One of the processes emphasized in this

literature is the search for understanding the fundamental principle of relationship failure

and marriage avoidance. Social scientists indicated committed relationships and

marriages to be at their lowest since 1960 by the census for one to every four households

and are almost a luxury to the well educated and well paid, rather than a social norm

(Harden, 2007). Social scientists and psychologists have come to realize the essential

effects of committed relationships through attachment, communication, and satisfaction,

as adolescents emerge to adulthood for intimacy in close relationships elevates as a vital

topic study (Mayseless & Scharf, 2007). The purpose of this study was to investigate the

correlation between personal attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship

satisfaction. The literature in this chapter is used to highlight theories and research of

attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction.

This chapter includes relationship and marital theories from Post’s (2003),

Hendrix’s (1988) theory, Money’s love map (1988). Sternberg’s (1986) theory,

Gottman’s (1994) theory, and Fromm’s (1959) theory, Attachment theories include

parent-child attachment, infancy to adult developmental attachment, attachment in

17
relationships, attachment in marriages, attachment in gender, attachment issues in

committed relationships, and research studies involving attachment processes. The

categories of communication incorporate theories of communication of Relational

Dialectics Theory, Social Exchange Theory, and Social Penetration Theory. The

communication literature also reviews parent-child communication, communication in

gender, communication issues, and communication in relationship and marriages. Last,

this chapter exemplifies supporting relationship satisfaction theories and research.

Research on Relationship and Marital Theories

Post’s Theory of Love. Post’s (2003) theory developed the need for five elements

to relationships and marriages. These elements are characterized as altruism, compassion

and service, benevolence and generosity in committed relationships. Altruistic love is

unselfish with the belief of being good to others. Altruistic love is generous because it

motivates the act of kindness and nobleness. To have a love that is altruistic and

generous develops through maturity and understanding of love (Post, Underwood,

Schloss, & Hurlbut, 2002). Through research it is expressed how “giving love”

unconditionally with altruism, generosity, and pureness grows through devotion of a self

and others. According to Post, bonding and nurturing is part of human nature in

psychology, sociology, evolutionary biology, and theology (Post, Johnson, McCullough,

& Schloss, 2003). Self-love opens the opportunity for others to be genuinely loved in the

same way. In human nature (Post, 2002) compassionately loving another as one loves

themselves motivates altruism. Thus, altruism, generosity, benevolence, and compassion

are manifest by human development and divine beliefs (Tjeltveit, 2006). Consequently,

18
human nature and divinity strengthen compassionate love which can be expressed in

close and committed relationships.

Compassionate love in a committed relationship can create happier and longer

marriages. It is revealed that giving ourselves unselfishly to another expresses the

psychological well-being within self (Post, 2003). Similar to secure attachment, one has

to be mentally mature to trust and compassionately love loyally. Tjeltveit (2006) states

love is “maturely understood” when individuals acknowledge and affirm ethical ideals of

love to be “balanced with self and others” (p.16). Although love is defined in many ways,

love is ultimately true affection that is meant to be good, right, and virtuous.

Post’s (2003) theory discusses empathy, compassion, and benevolence as the root

elements of love. Empathy is a process of understanding what love is and how to give

and express love. Empathy inspires the development of a universal understanding of

human beings through the science of love (Tjeltveit, 2006). Compassion contains

empathy which provides a vision for the deep companionship of a relationship. Thus, this

love process is represented through the form of both compassion and service (Post,

2003). Love emerges from compassion, service, and companionship but can have

longevity when built through altruism, benevolence, and generosity. The ability to love

someone depends on if individuals are secure, unselfish, and genuinely care for

themselves and others (Post, 2003). Hence, Post provides a theory on love that supports

attachment, communication, and relationship satisfaction.

Hendrix’s Imago Relationship Theory. Imago is an unconscious image of traits

and behaviors of one’s childhood caretaker that leads to one’s selection of an intimate

mate (Hendrix, 2007). Hendrix’s (1988) theory provides a relational view of healing and

19
growth for relationships. The Imago theory is exemplified as a development from the

theory of marital therapy (Beeton, 2006). Imago is formulated through many diverse

approaches to psychology including depth psychology, behavioral sciences, western

spiritual traditions, and elements of Transactional Analysis, Gestalt psychology, systems

theory, and cognitive therapy (Beeton, 2005). Through the integration of many

approaches to psychology, the theory seeks to understand the relationship and the growth

and healing that occurs within the context of a relationship, through observation and

intuition (Guagenti-Tax, 2003). Imago can analyze relationships from many aspects,

which can allow growth and healing for couples to receive the love that is deserved in

relationships. Thus, romantic love is conscious in nature through the healing of one’s self

(Hendrix, 2007).

Conscious love can guide and rejuvenate relationships from wounded to growth

and healing. It is understood that childhood influences play a part in the formation of

one’s personal and professional partnership which can enhance growth and healing in

relationships (Hendrix, 1988, 2007). In the developmental growth of self, individuals’

wounds are created through the stages of parent-child bonding. Through adolescence to

adult relationships, individuals tend to face those same unhealed wounds that influence

the selection and results of all relationships. Committing ourselves to one individual is

the logic of allowing ourselves to mutually grow and heal (Hendrix, 1988).

According to Hendrix’s theory, listening to one another and distinguishing parents

from partners are essential elements of conscious love. Distinguishing parents from

partners allows a process for individuals to understand that childhood expectations of

parents cannot be utilized for expectations of an adult relationship. Thus, conscious love

20
and happiness in relationships and marriages can be fully developed by healing childhood

trauma (Hendrix, 1988). The listening (mirroring) and distinguishing parents from

partners (container) helps to obtain happy relationships and satisfied marriages. The

ability to achieve happy relationships come from maturing and letting go of grief, hurt,

and unmet childhood needs which individuals yearned for. This type of love and

happiness in an individual’s relationships and marriages will emerge once those

individuals are healed from those childhood issues. However, if childhood issues are not

healed they will continue to influence adulthood growth and relationship experiences and

outcomes. Once individuals let go of all unmet childhood needs, it is then when growth

and healing will be brought together through understanding and illuminating the mystery

of love relationships (Hendrix, 1988). Hendrix provides a theory on relationships and

love that is formulated for mutual growth and healing of couples into martial therapy.

Money's Theory of Love Maps. Love map is a scientific term template that

individuals mentally idealize images of mates. According to Money (1986) a functional

relationship with pair bonding through males and females should always be mutual. Pair

bonding is identified as closeness that progresses over time between two individuals.

Pair bonding originates between a parent-child relationship and progresses within dating

and married couples. Pair bonding is correlated to attachments. Through love maps, pair

bonding can be utilized in either two ways ideologically correct or pathological or social

deviant ways (Laws & O'Donahue, 1997). The correct pair bonding is correlated to

attachment. Correct pair bonding is in conjunction to attachment through closeness and

healthy behaviors. Correct love maps equivalent to secure attachment for healthy

relationships. Insecure attachment relates to the pathological unhealthy behaviors. As

21
mentioned, lack of love map in infancy to adulthood may create pathology instead of

healthy heterosexual attractions and relationships (Money, 1986).

Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love. Sternberg’s triangular theory of love

focuses on the understanding of love in close relationships. The theory illustrates love to

be a social learning through both observation and modeling. Sternberg (1986) figured

marriage relationships to be a three sided component of love. The three formed

components include commitment, intimacy, and passion. The love in relationship is

composed from many aspects and elements of love. In relationships, love needs to be

expressed through commitment, intimacy, and passion, if not love will die. Relationships

experience satisfaction when commitment, intimacy, and passion are equally balanced,

rather than one component is missing or imbalanced (Sternberg, 1997, Sternberg &

Hojjat, 1997). Sternberg views the three components as a correlation of one another

rather than an independent association of love. Commitment, intimacy, and passion

when equally strengthened produce high amounts of love for individuals in relationships

(Sternberg, 1986, Sternberg, 1998). The triangular theory of love demonstrated three

components that assist in providing love in relationships. The intimacy component is

displayed to be congruent to secure attachment and positive communication. Intimacy

focuses on individuals’ personal feelings of closeness, connectedness, and bonded ness in

a loving relationship (Sternberg, 1986; Sternberg & Barnes, 1988). It is through

experiences of warmth and consistent connections from individuals’ feelings that raise

loving relationships. Sternberg’s research illustrated how attitudes and behaviors

promote happiness and love that one receives in a relationship. Aloni and Bernieri (2004)

supported Sternberg’s triangular love scale in their research on love and perception of

22
love. Aloni and Bernieri also found that people with a great amount of experience with

romantic love experience bias of their perception of love in others.

The triangular theory of love is demonstrated as an enormous amount of empirical

studies on relationships and marital satisfaction. For example, the triangular theory

explained why people are happier and satisfied when they are involved with someone

similar to themselves. Individuals involved with similar attitudes, backgrounds, and

behaviors about love, ethics, morals, and values tend to have higher relationship and

marital satisfaction. Sternberg illustrated how all components of love are parallel in

character and strength when envisaged as overlapping triangles. In contrast, the more

discrepancy among the triangles, the lower the relationship satisfaction will be for

individuals in a committed relationship (Sternberg, 1986). Consequently, intimacy is an

imperative characteristic of attachment and communication, and is emerging as a need for

considering relationship satisfaction. Thus, Sternberg's triangular theory of love

framework substantiated feasible understanding of intimacy and predicted relationship

satisfaction.

Gottman’s Theory on Marriage. John Gottman’s theory contributed to

advancement of relationships and marriages. It is through Gottman’s observational

research that important discoveries on relationships of married couples provided

constructive knowledge on relations and marital dynamics. Investigations form

Gottman’s theory revealed characteristics for comprehending predictions of relationship

satisfaction and marital longevity. Gottman’s aim for this theory was to “allow couples to

distress through therapy and help marriages survive” (Carrere, Buehlman, Gottman,

Coan, & Ruckstuhl, 2000, p.1). Gottman along with many colleagues continued to

23
explore relationship dynamics of couples in committed relationships by analyzing

attitudes, behaviors, and communication (Gottman, Coan, Carrere, & Swanson, 1998;

Carrere et al, 2000).

According to research, there were three domains of coding systems (perception,

physiology, and behavior) used individually and collectively to measure and observe

interactive thermostats in marriage (Gottman, 1993, 1994; Gottman & Levenson, in

press). Research demonstrated feasible evidence with ninety-three percent accuracy

(Gottman & Levenson, 1992) in contrast to eighty-seven percent accuracy (Carrere et al,

2000) on whether marriages would remain stable or dissolve. It is realized that negative

behaviors, negative emotions, negative attitudes, and negative perceptions are associated

with relationship and marital distress. Dyadic displays of characteristics of early divorce

are due to very negative emotional communication patterns, whereas a deficiency of

positive emotions in their communication results later in divorce (Gottman & Levenson,

in press). The positive, negative, and neutral emotions are categorized through

observational coding assessment with the Specific Affect Coding System (SPAFF)

(Krokoff, Gottman, & Hass, 1989).

Carrere, Buehlman, Gottman, Coan, & Ruckstuhl (2000) found that volatility in

marital relationships has a higher percentage of occurring when negative behaviors are

associated. Behaviors such as positive, negative, and neutral are related to individual

togetherness or separation of couples in a relationship. Functional individuals in a

relationship tend to have more positive behaviors rather than dysfunctional individual in

relationships who possess lower positive and higher negative behaviors. Hence, negative

behaviors between committed individuals result in a higher percentage of unhappy

24
relationships and unsatisfied marriages (Gottman & Levenson, in press). Behaviors are

identified as observational coding data of committed individuals’ reliable discriminant

constructs (Gottman, 1994, 1999). These behaviors are described through discriminant

constructs as marital satisfaction (marital bonding) and social desirability (unrelated to be

marital bonding) that relate to happy and unhappy committed individuals.

According to previous and current research, Gottman’s theory on marital bond is

correlated to marital outcomes (Gottman, 1994; Hawkins & Gottman, 1998). For

example, an individual who desires his/her mate to be trusted, give open communication,

and emotional availability is more likely to handle relationship conflicts (Noller &

Feeney, 1998). Trust, positive communication, and emotional availability are

characteristics of secure attachment. Gottman’s theory discovered how individuals in a

committed relationship can obtain harmful or helpful “behaviors from relationship and

marital interactions” (Gottman, 1994, p. 256). In relationships, there are many qualities

including secure, insecurities, discussion/avoidance, criticism/defensive, and

demand/withdraw that can predict behaviors of individuals in a committed relationship.

Monogamously involved individuals and married couples who exhibit more of the

negative behaviors is more likely to encounter breakups or divorce.

Gottman also examined the necessary knowledge on how to avoid divorce while

strengthening the relationship. Like any relationship, it requires respect, trust, open

communication, compromise, love, time, intimacy, and faithfulness to maintain

committed relationships. Research on relationship and marital satisfaction continues to

emerge and mentally enhance comprehension of relationship longevity once these

behaviors and discriminant constructs are foreseen regularly (Hill & Pargament, 2003;

25
Jacobson, Gottman, Waltz, Rushe, Babcock, & Holtzworth-Munroe, 2000; Seligman,

2002). Thus, Gottman’s dynamic approach to analyzing relationships and marriage has

been scientifically valuable to prevent breakups, separations, and divorces while

maintaining relationship satisfaction and marital longevity for individuals in committed

unions.

Fromm’s Theory of Love. Fromm’s (1956) theory offered a compelling

understanding of the active character of love to be primarily giving, not receiving. The

act of giving identified a person’s strength and mental power through expressions of love.

Fromm (1956) theorized parent-child attachment to be the inspiration in the manifestation

of love. From infancy to adulthood, the development of parent-child attachment and

interaction determined if the ability to express love for others will be encouraged or

ruined. Love is powerful and is believed to be rooted from a love of humankind. When

love of humankind is expressed it delivers a caring role of philanthropy. Care and love

are an active concern for one’s personal life, another’s life, and growth of the self

(Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Fromm’s theory of love is an essential prerequisite of

understanding relationships from infancy to adulthood (Tjeltveit, 2006). This theory of

love is also important to successful marriages. Love can only be given naturally when a

development of love has been instilled and attached securely. To deeply love others, is to

love ourselves the way we would want others to truly love us.

Fromm’s (1959) theory indicated that people’s desire to love and be loved is

based upon wanting to belong to someone. Belonging is associated with Fromm's belief

that mankind could develop social sanity for a psychological balance. Relationships are

most satisfactory when individuals compromise and mutually sacrifice themselves for the

26
sake of the union. By accomplishing satisfaction, we have to give of ourselves for the

importance of the relationship. Fromm (1959) noted love to be realistically possible when

mankind expressed love for others and the self. Love equally given and equally shared

enriches the givers and receivers life for a satisfied connection. Thus, Fromm presented a

theory of love that contains both attachment and communication as a crucial element for

relationship satisfaction (1959).

Attachment Theory and Research

Attachment theory is the originated work of John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth.

This theory for many years has formed a solid theoretical foundation for researchers to

explore the fundamental nature of relationships from infancy to adulthood, such as

attachment styles. Attachment theory is interested in the personal yet emotional

connection, bond, or attachment, which developed between child and parent or caregiver.

However, there are two consequences that could arise from this bond phase: a positive

and a negative outcome. According to Doob (2000) individuals desire to be a part of their

social order, therefore it could be understood why the consequences of a child’s survival

emerge in self-concept and developing view of the social world (Bowlby, 1979).

Although the role of attachment was the main focus of Bowlby (1979), he also

proposed attachment as an emotional tendency for individuals to desire, seek, and express

bonding with a significant individual within a lifespan (Cassidy, 1999; Solomon &

George, 1999). Bowlby (1979) conveyed how the psychoanalytic and object relations

theories from the 1900’s have allowed him to acquire the majority of his theory of

attachment. He even revealed that he conceptualized attachment in human existences

from Darwin’s theory of evolution.

27
 Bowlby (1979) emphasized that humans are born with an intrinsic attachment

behavioral system thought to have stemmed from an ethologic standpoint. Solomon and

George (1999) mentioned that Bowlby’s view on ethological analysis of behavior stems

from control system theory. It is not that Bowlby refers to the attachment system as an

internal goal-correcting system which permits attachment behaviors (Solomon &

George). He is saying that a child would prefer to interact with a familiar figure to seek

the ultimate satisfaction. In view of evidence on attachment relationships, there is a

relation to infants being completely reliant on attachment figures for security, comfort,

and protection; these individuals believe this is the ultimate satisfaction. Ainsworth

(1979) developed a standardized procedure called Strange Situation, which identified

how an infant introduced to a stranger while separated from its caregiver experiences

stressful moments. This revealed that the child is capable of being dissatisfied and

uncomfortable. Whereas, being with someone who nurtures and provides them with that

comfort zone increase ultimate satisfaction.

Optimally, this ultimate satisfaction would provide a secure base from which to

explore and seek one’s satisfied happiness. The key to comprehending the attachment

theory is the idea of the “internal working models,” that are the unconscious acts

developed by infants about attachment figures’ accessibility, responsiveness, and

sensitivity (availability vs. rejection) (Bowlby, 1979). Therefore, children at young ages

seek security from a parent regardless if the is parenting irresponsible, unlikable, and/or

abusive (Mercer, 2006). The child’s security or insecurity becomes the base for his or her

development (Bowlby, 1979; Bretherton & Munholland, 1999) impressively, children

will compromise in regard to not giving up something he or she wants or desires (Mercer,

28
2006). Similarly, attachment runs through childhood to adulthood; through developing

parental bonds to growing with romantic relationships. Childhood to adolescent

development plays a crucial role in adult romantic relationships (Furman, 2002).

Attachment Theory. Bowlby’s theory of attachment is demonstrated in two

attachment categories: Secure and Insecure attachments. Secure outcomes in children

allow for those children to grow as invulnerable individuals with healthy social and

emotional family well being. Outcomes of secure children demonstrate children having

the ability to be strong-minded and capable of making decisions while living life through

a stable and peaceful household. The insecure outcome within child-parent insecurities

reveals distance, unworthiness, defensiveness, and unloving thoughts, which produce

psychological insecurities (Westen, Nakash, & Thomas, 2006) that lead to

psychopathology disorders. Secure adult attachment appears to enhance the relationship

growth and decrease relationship conflict (Gonzaga, Campos, & Bradbury, 2007).

Conversely, insecure adult attachment appears to continuously increase relationship

conflict (Papp, Geokee-Morey, & Cummings, 2007).

On the other hand, those outcomes associated with couple and marital secure

attachment helped establish relational longevity and satisfaction (Simpson, Winterfield,

& Rholes, 2007) throughout relationships of all kinds. Many individuals, couples and

marriages experience high levels of positive and open communication, compromising,

and satisfaction which create secure outcomes. Insecure outcomes are demonstrated

through the relationships and marital conflicts, emotional unavailability, avoidance, and

vulnerable behaviors (Talmacz, Goldzweig, & Guttmann, 2004). An Adult’s attachment

styles (dependent, close, and anxiety); relationship styles (secure, dismissing,

29
preoccupied, and fearful); affect communication patterns (mutual avoidance, mutual

constructive communication, man demand woman withdraws, woman demand man

withdraws, and total demand) and how all attachment styles, relationship styles, and

communication patterns affect relationship satisfaction.

Communication Research and Theories

Communication is usually defined as the reciprocity between two individuals.

Communication is also seen as the mutual communication that occurs in a particular

fashion, which aspects formulate strong bonds between individuals during a lifespan

(Segrin & Flora, 2005). The psychological framework of communication notes

communication as an act of sending a message to a receiver, in which those feelings,

thoughts, and viewpoints of the receiver will be used in interpreting the message (Miller,

2005). Communication patterns form the basis of early parent-child attachments which

can influence infancy to adult relationships. Communication is essential to the social

phenomenon, which is a necessity from birth (Huang, 1999), which helped prepare

interactional skills for adulthood (Dwyer, 2000). However, exhibiting comparable rates

of aggressive behaviors is not healthy for a relationship. In this section, the literature

discusses an overview of parent-child communication; communication in gender;

communication issues; communication in relationship and marriages; and communication

theories.

Parent-Child Communication. Parent-child communication begins at the very

point of childbirth. Park (2006) exemplified how the importance of parent-child

communication with expressive talk affirms and develops positive, healthy and valuable

30
attitudes as children mature into young adults. Like an elevator, parent-child

communication automatically opens the door for communication to take place on all

topics. Research mentioned how positive communication between parents and their

children plays vital role in future social, professional, and valuable decision-making skills

(Barbato, Graham, & Perse, 2003). Basically, it takes the nature of a parent to openly and

honestly converse with their children, which ultimately prepares their children to

communicate accurately.

Communication in Gender. Over time, society has emphasized the idea of how

women and men communicate very differently. Sometimes people in society even joke

about how different men and women communicate, which is due to them both being from

different planets. Although, the communication styles of men and women are sometimes

different, they can also be alike. Tannen (1990) mentioned that both women and men can

be loving, nurturing, aggressive, task-focused, or sentimental. Through the eyes of men

and women, there are differences among the two when it comes to communication styles.

Wood (2001) exemplified how differences between men and women are emphasized on

interpersonal vs. status implications of messages typically lead women to expect

relationships to be based on interdependence (mutual dependence) and cooperation. This

means that women frequently emphasize their similarities between themselves and

others, while trying to take decisions that can make everyone happy (Wood, 2001). In

contrast, men typically expect relationships to be based on independence and

competition. Wood’s research also noted how men more frequently emphasize the

differences between themselves and others, in the way they take decisions based on their

own personal needs and/or desires. Somehow, men and women think to alike yet

31
communicate differently. While men tend to communicate from their minds, women are

likely to converse from their hearts. In order to really understand both men and women,

there is a need to understand the perspective that both communicate differently while

almost meaning the same thing.

Communication Issues. Many issues in communication can arise from the lack of

communication in parent-child relationships, poor communication development, and lack

of self-esteem (Zolten & Long, 2006). A decrease in communication can also be

attributed to some form of depression. Many forms of depression can begin in childhood,

including experiences of loss, and continue into adulthood creating conflicts within an

individual’s personal experiences (Ontai, 2002). Individuals grow and develop while

experiencing many things that can play a role in the rest of their lives. However, not all

individuals face the same experiences in life. It is important to note that many

individuals become adults and create new ways of coping, experiencing relationships of

attachment, individuation, motivation, and self-esteem (Ward Osterhout, 2005).

Communication in Relationships & Marriages. Communication is the foundation

that helps support and promotes relationship satisfaction (Doohan & Manusov, 2004). A

union joined by two individuals in a relationship or marriage requires solid yet unselfish

understanding and compromising for communication to flow. Relationship conflict and

failure are considered a problem in today’s society due to the decrease in relationships

communication and quality which continues to lead to break up and divorce (Bradbury,

Fincham, & Beach, 2000). Nonetheless, conflicts in relationships can be attributed to

many things. Relationship conflict can be affected by attachments styles, which appear

to be determined by communication patterns and relationship satisfaction.

32
 Evidence noted that relationships and marriages are successful when individuals

sustain secure communication and developmental skills from childhood to adulthood

(Sanders, Halford, &, Behrens, 1999). Communication patterns are also another variable

that appeared to increase the likelihood of conflict, which could lead to relationship

failure and low levels of marriage satisfaction (Shapiro & Guttmann, 2004).

Communication Theories

The theories of communication shined a light on the ideas and principles of

conversing. These beliefs expressed the work and practice of helping humans

communicate effectively. Communication explained the phenomena of getting

relationship satisfaction. Communication is the key to any social relationship.

Relational Dialectics Theory. Relational Dialectics suggested that relational life is

always in a process (Baxter, 2004). People in relationships continually feel the pull-push

of conflicting needs and desires. Baxter (2004) pointed out how people wish to have

autonomy and connection, openness and true protective-ness, and novelty and

predictability. Basically, people communicate in relationships, they attempt to reconcile

these conflicting desires, but they never eliminate their need for both opposing pairs.

Social Exchange Theory. Theorists in Social Exchange posited that self-interest is

not necessarily a bad thing, and that it can actually enhance relationships. This theoretical

position argued that the major force in interpersonal relationships is the satisfaction of

both people’s self-interest (Lawler & Thye, 1999). The Social Exchange approach views

interpersonal exchanges as analogous to economic exchanges where people are satisfied

when they receive a fair return on their expenditures (Turner & Stets, 2006).

33
 Social Penetration Theory. Penetration theorists believed that self-disclosure was

the primary way that superficial relationships progressed to intimate relationships

(Altman & Taylor, 1973). This theory maintained that interpersonal relationships evolved

in some gradual and predictable fashion. Although self-disclosure can lead to more

intimate relationships, it can also leave one or more persons vulnerable (Altman &

Taylor, 1987). Social penetration theory mentioned that sometimes the freedom of

openness is not always the best option in a relationship; however, pure interaction can

create relationship quality.

Relationship Satisfaction and Research

According to Sousa and Lyubomirsky (2001) the word satisfaction is derived

from the Latin word Satis, which means “to make and enough” (p. 3). Satisfaction with

life entails that one accepts what is while being fulfilled with wants and needs (Sousa &

Lyubomirsky). Life satisfaction and relationship satisfaction are somewhat conjoined

because both imply receiving contentment under specific circumstances. Sousa and

Lyubomirsky also implied that life-domain satisfaction were to be specific areas of one’s

life, such as “work, marriage, and income” (p. 3).

Relationship Satisfaction. A painted picture of relationship satisfaction is being

satisfied, pleased, and having breathtaking happiness with something or someone you

love. The way a relationship achieves satisfaction is based on how well both parties in the

union are content with one another. Relationship satisfaction and dissatisfaction can be

influenced by several interference or occurrences. Fincham and Beach (2006) affirmed

that both cognitive styles and behavioral levels measure relationship satisfaction.

Cognitive styles such as unrealistic beliefs, attribution patterns, partner and ideal

34
standards discrepancies, and memory can either make or break the relationship

satisfaction. An unrealistic belief in a relationship over time leads to dissatisfaction.

Satisfaction in relationship stretches when individuals have beliefs that are true and

genuine about their mates.

More so, creating attribution patterns can allow relationship satisfaction (Fincham

& Beach). As long as one sees the good of their mate, the light of satisfaction will shine.

Fincham, Bradbury, and Beach (1990) identified that it was essential to work with people

from where they were within a relationship. This indicated that all individuals in

relationships may have issues but working together with one another on those issues can

open an opportunity for relationship satisfaction. In addition, many times individuals are

never satisfied in relationships because, of their expectations in their partner and their

personal ideal standards which creates discrepancies; while causing them to mentally

desire and settle for a particular individual who is not their current mate. Finally, if

nothing within a relationship has changed for the better or perhaps improved in quality

over time, one’s memory reflects the union to predict their satisfaction (Fincham &

Beach).

Behavioral levels are not considered as healthy contributors of relationship

satisfaction. Negative behaviors can also destroy any type of a relationship. Support

behavior, negative loop, and demand-withdraw pattern affect relationship satisfaction

(Fincham & Beach, 2006). Hence, in all relationships individuals are either satisfied or

not because there is never any room for second guessing your relationship satisfaction.

In order to love someone you must love yourself first, which produces adoration above

35
all means to love anyone or possibilities of relationship satisfaction (Neff & Karney,

2005).

Conclusion

In conclusion, adult attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship

satisfaction may add a fraction of information to understand the interaction processes that

lead to relationship success and failure of adult heterosexual committed relationships. It

is also realized that there are theories of love, relationships, and marriages that provided a

great history of the essential elements for a relationship. Attachment theory introduced

the severity of how emotions and affections play a part in relationships. It is illustrated

that no union from parent-child to adult relationships can survive without

communication. Overall, satisfaction research has painted the picture on how individuals

and their mates are in control of their relationship satisfaction.

36
 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
Introduction

This chapter provides the methodology and methods for this research beginning

with revisiting the rationale of the study. This section is followed by a discussion of the

research design, descriptive research methodology and the survey research methods that

was used for the study. Next, the target population, participant selection, methods of

sampling, and sample size and justifications is discussed. Thereafter, the procedures,

variables, instruments, and research questions of the study is discussed. Finally, the data

collection, data analysis, expected findings, and ethical considerations are then discussed.

Rationale of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify the relationship between adult

attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual

individuals. This research focused on heterosexual individuals in South Florida who are

in a committed relationship.

Research Design

The methodological approach for this quantitative study was a correlational

design that uses survey methodology to collect the data. Leedy and Ormrod (2007)

mentioned the correlation as one of the most significantly useful statistics. A correlation

is noted as a single number that describes the degree of relationship between two or more

variables (Leedy & Ormrod, 2007). Correlations involves identifying the relationship of

an observed phenomenon (Leedy & Ormrod, 2007), in this case heterosexual adults who

37
are in a committed relationship. The research described situations as they exist at that

time, as it is. Leedy and Ormrod (2005) “it does not involve changing or modifying the

situation under investigation, nor is it intended to determine cause-and-effect

relationships” (p. 179). This type of research is somewhat aligned with qualitative

methodologies but fully utilize a process that lead to quantifiable data. This description

(of heterosexual committed adult characteristics) was conceptualized with an eye toward

showing and describing any relationship satisfaction has tended to improve the overall

quality of a relationship by diminishing the relationship conflict (Holman & Jarvis,

2003). Attachment, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction have been

studied as a separate construct as well as with similar or somewhat different constructs

(Calabrese, Farber, & Westen, 2005). Numerous studies suggested different

communication behaviors affect adult attachment (Berman, Marcus, & Berman, 1994;

Kobak and Kazan, 1991). While other studies noted how individuals carried childhood

attachment issues into adulthood (Cohn, Silver, Cowan, Cowan, and Pearson, 1992),

romantic experience is believed to play a dominant role to current adult attachment

(Karen, 1994). Further, proposed by Bowlby (1988), an accurate internal model was

suggested to promote communication in relationships (Bretherton, 1991; Kobak and

Kazan, 1991). On the other hand, Berman, Marcus, and Berman also indicated that

individuals in couples with secure attachment style had higher relationship satisfaction

than individuals in couples with insecure attachment styles. This description (of

heterosexual committed adult characteristics) was conceptualized with an eye toward

showing and describing any relationship of elements (heterosexual committed adult

characteristics) that were presented during the study.

38
Correlational Design

The Correlational design of quantitative inquiry allowed the researcher to describe

the relationship among variables in the sample (Leedy & Ormrod, 200). The

Correlational design also allowed the pattern of correlations to be analyzed (Simon &

Francis, 2001). It has been discovered that the concept of Correlational research is

mentioned as the most significant points related to the connecting variable relationships

in research. In most cases Correlational research deals with natural occurring phenomena

that are non-intrusive. It is known for focusing on variable relationships while having the

ability to identify variables in great depth and detail while their exemplified.

Correlational research also allowed large groups of variables to be investigated.

Frequently, large variable groups are pre-existing category of people with a tendency to

produce results to show common or typical behavior for a variable group. Hence,

Correlational research is mentioned as one of the most common survey research methods

for obtaining more advanced relationships in variables (Leedy & Ormrod, 2007). Hence,

this design allowed the researcher to better understand the life experiences (adult

attachment styles and relationship styles) and feelings of these couples (communication

patterns) and overall (relationship satisfaction). In addition, the Pearson Correlation

Analysis has been widely used to study multiple variables. Therefore, this correlation

analysis was used to study varies research questions within the study.

For this study the research methodology suggested there was meaning within

heterosexual committed adult characteristics that was arrived by collecting, analyzing,

and interpreting data utilizing the scientific method of deductive reasoning through

correlational techniques (Leedy & Ormrod, 2007; Creswell, 2006). The Correlational

39
research methodology was believed to fit very well with the necessities of this study,

specifically in answering the research questions that asked about heterosexual committed

adults.

Descriptive Research

The descriptive research was utilized to gather and collect data from participants

through the demographic information form (see Appendix B). Descriptive research was

identified as including many types of research methods and procedures, including

observations, surveys, self-reports, and tests. Henrichsen, Smith, & Baker (2005)

mentioned descriptive research for gathering data without any manipulation of the

research context.

Research Methods

Several research methods were used in this study, the primary was surveying

research and the secondary was data analysis:

Survey Research

The primary research method used in this study was the survey questionnaires

including development, testing, data collection, statistical analysis, and interpretation of

results to answer the research questions and then proposing new ideas based on the

results of the study. Creswell (2005) generally calls this a survey design; a survey

research, descriptive survey, or normative survey. Leedy & Ormrod (2005), a survey

methodology and by Groves (2004), descriptive quantitative survey research is a method

where the principal researcher attempts to obtain quantifiable information and describe

trends in a large population of individuals. This is a procedure in “which investigators

administer a survey to a sample or to the entire population of people in order to describe

40
the attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or characteristics of the population” (Creswell, 2005, p.

354). “Survey researchers often correlate variables, but their focus is directed more

toward learning about a population and less on relating variables or predicting outcomes

as in the focus of correlational research” (Creswell, 2005, p. 354).

Survey research can be moderately easy in a design when compared with other

research methodologies. Leedy & Ormrod, (2005) mentioned “a series of questions to

willing participants; summarizes their responses with percentages, frequency counts, or

more sophisticated statistical indexes; and then draws inferences about a particular

population from the responses of the sample” (p.183). The survey sought to produce the

dependent variable and independent variables as well in the results sections.

Survey Objectives.

In this study there were two broad objectives to pursue from the survey

questionnaires. The first objective was to describe the attachment styles, communication

patterns, and relationship satisfaction scores of heterosexual adults since there is little

information about them as a group in the literature. The second objective was to explore

how these attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction scores

relate to relationship outcomes in heterosexual adult relationships. The goal was to

identify and describe characteristics and relationships and frame future research through

the data analysis and results.

Target Population

The target population was heterosexual adults between 18-25 years of age who

are in a committed relationship. The participants were recruited through a local South

Florida university. The participants consisted of diverse adults who are committed

41
(monogamously dating, or are engaged, or are newly married) for at least one month. The

university and the university’s IRB committee have been provided the researcher written

permission before the potential candidates who participated in the study were recruited.

See Appendix L for the researcher’s request for permission of conducted research, and

see Appendix M for the university’s given permission on the conducted research.

Participant Selection

The participants were recruited from a local university’s social science,

communication courses, and via university campus through the researcher’s invitation

letter (see Appendix N). The participants were identified through the following:

1. The participants had to be in the age range of 18-25 years.

2. Participants had to be in a committed heterosexual adult relationship for at least

one month.

3. Participants had to be living in South Florida, and

4. Particpants had to give constent to participate in the study.

Method of Sampling. The type of sampling that was used in the research was

specified as purposive sampling, because it allowed the researcher to restrict the range of

potential participants. It was through purposive sampling that the purposely targeted

population in this study was 18-25 year olds from a geographic area and from specific

courses. Purposive sampling has a particular purpose for studying variations and/or

distinctive patterns. Leedy & Ormrod (2005) identifies purposive sampling for having a

selecting strategy based on research questions and objectives. Hence, purposive sampling

did not attempt to sample from the entire population however; it did chose units based on

certain characteristics. Although there was other nonprobability samples such as

42
convenience, quota, and snowball-- the three were either an extension to, or filled by

random sampling, or did not represent a whole population (Walonick, 2005). The

purposive (judgment) sample meets the requirement of targeting an adult population with

specific characteristics, such as, age range and relationship involvement.

Sample Size. Sample size can be determined by power analysis. The sample size

in this correlational study was 240 individuals. This allowed the researcher to strive for a

sample size that was representative of a valid or appropriate sample size.

Justification of Sample Size. According to the classical definition (Cohen, 1988),

an effect size of 0.25 is considered small. Considering alpha (< 0.05) for type I error,

power (>= 0.95, beta < 0.05 for Type II error), delta value was 3.60 (Howell, 2007). The

minimum calculated sample size according to the information was determined as 200.

Procedures

The principal investigator provided invitation letters (see Appendix N) to the

social sciences and communication instructors to only announce and dispense the

invitation letters to the candidate participants for the research study:

1. Participants were given the first direct access for the research study by

submitting a name and e-mail address through the Web page message box and/or

personal e-mail of the principal investigator.

2. Once the candidates’ enrollment information was received, the researcher then

e-mails the candidate a Web access link of an Informed Consent Form (ICF; see

Appendix A) through utilization of SurveyMonkey Web site of the researcher’s personal

database account link. The SurveyMonkey Web site was provided by

http://www.SurveyMonkey.com.

43
 3. Through submission to the candidates’ personal e-mail, the participants’ was

then given a secure electronically generated access to the Web link. Candidates then had

to enter their full name and e-mail, and date, in the opened ICF generated through the

SurveyMonkey link.

4. Once the ICF was completed to its entirety, the candidates had then

authenticated, completed and protected their e-mail-signature on the ICF.

5. Then participants’ submitted the ICF electronically which was securely

produced to the researcher’s personal SurveyMonkey personal data account for the

agreement and consent of voluntarily participating in the research study.

6. Thereafter completing the ICF, the participants could instantly print a copy of

the ICF.

7. Upon receiving the ICF, the researcher was verified the participants ICF for

agreement to participate. Importantly, the ICF was securely stored in a locked cabinet

inside the researcher’s home office.

8. Then within 24-hours of verifying the completed ICF, the researcher e-mailed

another Web-link access to participants’ private e-mail to begin the research study’s five-

survey packet (see Appendix B, C, D, E, and F). The survey packet was formulated

through the principal investigator’s personal and private online database account with

SurveyMonkey Web site: http://www.SurveyMonkey.com. Participants were only

allowed to administer the survey packet one time. Each participant was only given one-

week to complete the surveys before the link closed.

9. Once participants completed the five-survey packet, the results were generated

confidentially, privately, and anonymously to the researcher’s private SurveyMonkey

44
account.

10. The participants were then electronically given a Thank You from the

SurveyMonkey Web site and also received an Exit Letter (see Appendix O) via e-mail

from the principal researcher.

11. In closing, the researcher verified, print, and store the completed 5-survey

packet in an additional locked file cabinet inside the home office of the principal

investigator.

In continuance, the participants could contact the researcher by e-mail, phone, or

mail before, during, or after the surveys to address any concerns. However, the

participants could withdraw or discontinue the assessment of the 5-survey packet

(Appendix B, C, D, E, and F) by exiting from the surveys and could have informed the

researcher so that no reminders were submitted to them.

Variables

Variables. The variables in this study were examined by observing the relation

between attachment style and relationship satisfaction; attachment style and

communication patterns; furthermore, the communication patterns and relationship

satisfaction. All variables were identified as connections and associations among all other

variables.

Independent Variables (IVs): Attachment Style. The IVs in the research were

attachment and communication pattern. Attachment styles were measured by two

instruments: a) the Adult Attachment Style (AAS) developed by Collins and Read

(1990), and b) and the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) developed by Bartholomew and

Horowitz (1991). The second IV, communication patterns, was measured by the

45
Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ) developed by Christensen and Sullaway

(1984). The research looked at how attachment styles affected communication patterns,

and how both attachment styles and communication patterns affected relationship

satisfaction.

Dependent Variable (DVs). The dependent variable in this study was relationship

satisfaction as measured by the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) developed by

Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendrick (1998).

Instruments

The instrumentation included a demographic section and four surveys. The four

surveys chosen for this research study were the Adult Attachment Style (AAS) by Collins

and Read (1990), the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) by Bartholomew and Horowitz

(1991), the Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ) by Christensen and Sullaway

(1984), and the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) by Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendrick

(1998) were administered.

Demographic Information Form. The Demographic Information form consisted

of the following eight items consists of age, gender, ethnicity, education level,

relationship status, relationship length, living in Status with Partner, and number of

children. The demographic item was formulated by the principal investigator of this

study.

Adult Attachment Scale (AAS). The Adult Attachment Scale (AAS) measured the

adult attachment styles. AAS is the self-report that consisted of 18 items that were rated

on a 7-point Likert scale. The 18 items of the AAS generate the following three scales: a)

the Dependent Scale measures the extent of individual trust and dependency on others; b)

46
the Close Scale measures feelings of comfort, closeness, and intimacy: Furthermore, c)

the Anxiety Scale measures the levels of anxiety in the relationship.

Shaver, Belsky, and Brennan (2000), mentioned AAS to have internal consistency

reliability alpha) coefficients of .71, .81, and .75, respectively. The AAS “Close and

Depend scales correlated .54 with each other; the Close and Anxiety scales correlated -

.19; the Depend and Anxiety scales correlated -.37.1” Research has revealed a relation

between the Close and Dependent scales (Collins and Reed (1990). Test-retest

correlations between the Dependent, Close, and Anxiety Scales were reported to be 0.71,

0.62, and 0.58 respectively (Collins and Reed, 1990).

Relationship Questionnaire. The Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) provided a

two-part item of four short paragraphs which described four attachment prototypes that

include secure, dismissing, preoccupied, and fearful. The RQ uses a 9-point Likert scale.

The test-retest reliability of the RQ were indicated as 0.69 – 0.75 (Bartholomew and

Horowitz, 1991). Participants were asked to indicate on a 9-point scale how well each

paragraph describes them (1 = It does not describe me at all, 7 = It very much describes

me). Four continuous attachment ratings are used to compute scores for the underlying

model of self and model of others dimensions by following the procedures outlined by

Griffin and Bartholomew (1994a, 1994b). To compute scores for the model of self, the

sum of each individual’s ratings on the preoccupied and fearful items (items 3rd and 4th)

are subtracted from the sum of his or her ratings on the secure and dismissing items

(items 1 and 2). To compute scores of the model of others dimension, the sum of

everyone's ratings on the dismissing and fearful items (items 2 and 4) are subtracted from

the sum of his or her ratings on the secure and preoccupied items (items 1 and 3).

47
Evidence illustrated that both surveys of the North American and the Turkish version of

RQ has satisfactory reliability and constructs validity which is comparable to each other's'

findings (Sumter & Gunger, 1999). To sum up: Model of a self (MS) = (Secure +

Dismissing) - (Preoccupied + Fearful) = (Item 1 + Item 2) - (Item 3 + Item 4). Model of

other (MO) = (Secure + Preoccupied) - (Dismissing + Fearful) = (Item 1 + Item 3) - (Item

2 + Item 4).

Communication Pattern Questionnaire [short-form]. The Communication Pattern

Questionnaire (CPQ) (short-form) (Christensen, 1987, 1988; Christiansen & Sullaway,

1984) is an eight-item self-report measure that assesses the communication patterns that a

couple use during three stages of conflict. CPQ consisted of the sum of three items

assessing constructive communication behaviors minus the sum of four items assessing

destructive communication behaviors (Heavey, Larson, & Zumtobel, 1996). The three

stages of conflict are illustrated as: when a problem arises, discussing a problem, and

after the discussion. Christensen & Sullaway (1984) categorizes communication patterns

through eight (8) sub scales from words such as Discussion / Avoidance, Expression /

Blame, Negotiation, Demand / Withdraw and Criticize / Defend. The CPQ is therefore

assembled from two (2) stages of communication patterns with eight (8) sub scales

relating to those stages of communication patterns (Christensen & Sullaway, 1984).

Christensen and Sullaway’s scale use a nine-point scale ranging from very unlikely (1) to

very likely (9) to rate each item on the instrument. Heavey, Larson, and Zumtobel

(1996), indicated that the reliability for the CPQ is described as alphas, which established

internal consistency of sub scales. The reliability is respectively mentioned for males as

(.84) and for females as (.81). Evidence specifies that the data give a strong support to

48
reliability and validity of a sub scale of the CPQ, which is designed to capture

constructiveness of communication patterns in relationships (Heavey, Larson, &

Zumtobel, 1996, p.799).

Relationship Assessment Scale. The Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS)

developed by Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendrick (1998), measures basic satisfaction with

how well one's needs are met, how relationship is compared with others, and if

relationships are regretted. The RAS provides six descriptions (e.g., viability, intimacy,

passion, care, general relationship satisfaction, and conflict ambivalence) based on

relationship satisfaction. RAS was developed with intervals of one through nine.

The complete RAS focuses on relationship satisfaction on a scale ranging from

one to five (with five indicating the most satisfaction). Items 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 of the RAS

are scored the same, while items 4 and 7 are scored alike which were determined a

statistical score. The RAS scale was found to be reliable with a Cronbach alpha of .86

(Hendrick, Dicke & Hendick, 1998) and a test-retest reliability of .85. This scale has

adequate validity for assessing relationships between romantically involved individuals

and couples.

Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendrick (1998) mentioned the RAS scale were indeed a

good option for assessing marital and relationship satisfaction. The information on the

RAS scale also exemplified how it used to measure “general satisfaction, how well the

partners meet one’s needs, how well the relationship compares to others, regrets about the

relationship, how well one’s expectations have been met, love for partner and problems

in the relationship” (Hendrick, Dicke, & Hendrick, 1998, p. 138). The RAS were

previously reported to measure relationship satisfaction with mean inter-item correlation

49
of .49 and an alpha of .86. Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendick (1998) illustrated how the RAS

correlates with many other measures and reported such as a correlation of .80 of the full

Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS: Spanier, 1976). On the other hand, RAS also

demonstrates high test-retest (r=.85) and internal consistency (α = .86) (Burn & Ward,

2005).

Research Questions

ResQ1: What is the relationship between adult attachment styles (AAS) scores

and communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship?

ResQ1A: What is the nature of the correlation between attachment styles (AAS)

scores and communication patterns (CPQ) score?

Null Hypothesis 1A: There is no statistically significant correlation between

attachment styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship.

ResQ1B: What is the difference between attachment styles (AAS) scores and

communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

Null Hypothesis 1B: There are no statistically significant differences between

attachment styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship.

50
 ResQ2: What is the relationship between attachment styles (AAS) scores and

relationship satisfaction (RAS) scores between individuals in committed heterosexual

relationships?

Null Hypothesis 2: There is no statistically significant relationship between

attachment styles and relationship satisfaction of individuals in committed heterosexual

relationships.

ResQ3: What is the relationship between relationship styles (RQ) scores on the

communication pattern (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

Null Hypothesis 3: There are no statistically significant relationships between

relationship styles (RQ) scores and communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual

adults who are in a committed relationship?

ResQ4: How well do scores of adult attachment styles (AAS), communication

patterns (CPQ), and length of a relationship predict relationship satisfaction (RAS) in

heterosexual relationships?

Null Hypothesis 4: Adult attachment styles, communication patterns, and length

of a relationship are not statistically significant predictors of relationship satisfaction in

heterosexual couples.

Data Collection

The data collection in this study was automatically entered into the researcher’s

personal account with surveymonkey.com database as each participant-respondent

51
completed the survey. The data were also frequently evaluated to ensure that research

study collected data and achieved progression as expected. This study also utilizes test

runs of statistical procedures for the duration of the “draft” database in order to confirm

the overall procedures and database for reliability and validity.

Data Analysis

1. Descriptive statistics. In this study, the descriptive procedures were used to describe

the participants according to the demographic data (See Appendix B) which was

collected from the instruments.

2. Reliability analysis. This study also conducted a reliability analysis of each survey to

determine the reliability of the instruments with this sample of participants.

3. Pearson Correlation analysis. In addition, this study even utilized the correlation

analysis in the association or correlations among the variables. The Correlation analysis

was described as the degree of the connection between two variables (X and Y) between -

1 and +1 (Howell, 2007). The correlation analysis was used to test the null hypotheses for

Research Questions 1A and Research Question 3.

4. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). In the present study, ANOVA was used to

investigate the differences in communication pattern scores or relationship satisfaction

scores for different attachment style for the participants. ANOVA was used to test the

null hypotheses for Research Question 2. ANOVA has been used in psychology studies

to assess differences between scores of the response variable and the predictor variables

in an experiment (Guber, 1999; Howell, 2007). Therefore, ANOVA was conducted to

assess differences between scores of attachment style (AAS) and relationship (RQ)

scores, communication pattern (CPQ) scores, and relationship satisfaction (RAS) scores

52
addressed by research questions. The use of ANOVA is very common in a psychology

study to assess differences between scores among the parameter of the model equation in

an experiment (Adams, Wright, and Lohr, 1996; Howell, 2007; Howell, 2008).

5. Multiple Regressions. Multiple regressions were used to test the null hypotheses for

Research Question 4. Multiple regressions are a method utilized to examine the

relationship between dependent variables and independent variables (Howell, 2007).

Expected Findings

Individuals who score were positive on communication patterns (Discussion,

Expression, and Negotiation), Close, and are securely attached were expected to exhibit

higher scores in relationship satisfaction than individuals who could report Dependent,

Anxiety, and insecure attachment (Preoccupied, Dismissing, and Fearful). In addition,

participants in committed relationship for more than six months were expected to exhibit

higher on securely attached and close. Participants who are in a committed relationship

less than six months were expected to report negative communication patterns

(Avoidance, Demand, Criticize, Blame, Withdraw, etc.) and insecure attachment

(Preoccupied, Dismissing, and Fearful). The results were described in Chapter 4 and

interpreted in Chapter 5.

In context of the current findings, the study provided evidence that represented

the importance of developing and maintaining secure attachments, positive

communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction to help benefit heterosexual

committed relationships and marriages. Through placing needed concerns on relationship

priorities, relationship education and couples counseling would help improve

relationships to achieve relationship satisfaction. By working towards improving

53
individual’s attachment styles from insecure to secure and from negative to positive

communication patterns, this study may provide important intervention strategies for

couple therapists and marital and family practitioners.

Ethical Considerations

This study was reviewed and approved by the Capella University Institutional

Review Board before participants is contacted. Once an approval was given by the IRB,

each participant was given an informed consent form. Central to that approval, the

participants were informed in detail the purpose of the consent form. All participants had

the right to withdraw from the research project at any time if they felt that the questions

were too invasive and intruding. Participants were told beforehand that no names, e-mail

addresses, or phone numbers would be indicated on the surveys or utilized for the surveys

or research study. Participants were informed that their responses on the surveys are

confidential.

54
 CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Introduction

The current study sought to analyze the relationship between attachment style,

communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual relationships. This

chapter reports results of analyses designed to test the hypotheses and answer the

research questions presented in chapter 1. This chapter was therefore, divided into two

sections to focus on the data analysis interpretation. The first section is the descriptive

statistics on the demographics for the human participant population studied. The second

section explains the data analysis for the study, including the analysis of the four primary

questions.

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16 was utilized for

the analysis of the research data. The principal investigator collected the data for this

research study by administering the Attachment Style (AAS; Collins & Read, 1990), the

Relationship Questionnaire (RQ; Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991), the Communication

Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ; Christensen & Sullaway, 1984), and the Relationship

Assessment Scale (RAS; Hendrick, Dicke, & Hendrick, 1998) to heterosexual adults

(18-25 years of age) in committed relationships at a university located in Miami, Florida.

Descriptive statistics in the form of means and standard deviations were

calculated from the data obtained from the demographics data questionnaire. The

demographic information obtained from the participants for this study was age, gender,

and relationship length. Additional demographic information collected included

55
relationship status, ethnicity, education level, and living in status with partner, and

number of children.

The specific research questions addressed in the study were as follows:

ResQ1: What is the relationship between adult attachment styles (AAS) and

communication patterns (CPQ) of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

ResQ1A: What is the nature of the correlation between attachment styles (AAS) scores

and communication patterns (CPQ) score? (Statistics: Correlation & Descriptive)

ResQ1B: What is the difference between attachment styles (AAS) scores and

communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship? (Statistics: One-Way ANOVA)

ResQ2: What is the relationship between attachment styles (AAS) scores and relationship

satisfaction (RAS) scores between individuals in committed heterosexual relationships?

(Statistics: Correlation)

ResQ3: What is the relationship between adult relationship styles (RQ) scores and

communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship? (Statistics: Correlations)

ResQ4: How well do scores of adult attachment styles (AAS), communication patterns

(CPQ), and length of a relationship predict relationship satisfaction (RAS) in

heterosexual relationships? (Statistics: Stepwise Multiple Regression).

In examination of these research questions, it was critical to address the

formulated hypotheses. The hypotheses were stated as follows:

56
 Null hypothesis: 1A: There is no statistically significant correlation between

attachment styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship.

Null hypothesis 1B: There are no statistically significant differences between

attachment styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship.

Null hypothesis 2: There is no statistically significant relationship between

attachment styles and relationship satisfaction of individuals in committed

heterosexual relationships.

Null hypothesis 3: There is no statistically significant correlation between

relationship styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in

a committed relationship?

Null hypothesis 4: Adult attachment styles, communication patterns, and length of

a relationship are not statistically significant predictors of relationship satisfaction

in heterosexual couples.

Description of the Sample

Procedures. After receiving authorization from participant’s Institutional Review

Board (IRB) to contact professors within the social science and communication

departments to conduct appropriate human participation recruitment through in-class

information memos distributed by the course professors and campus postings, the

interested students were invited to participate via invitation letter from the principal

investigator to e-mail their personal e-mail address indicating their interest in

participating to the researcher’s personal e-mail. Thereafter, the prospective student

57
volunteers were provided with an electronic Informed Consent Form (ICF) formulated

through SurveyMonkey.com requesting their participation in the research study on Adult

Attachment Styles, Communication Patterns, and Relationship Satisfaction in

Heterosexual Individuals. All volunteers who chose to participate received a Web link to

access and complete the informed consent form, which was then electronically submitted

to the researcher’s personal SurveyMonkey account. Next, after receiving everyone's

ICF, the researcher e-mailed another Web link containing the demographic questionnaire,

Adult Attachment Scale, Relationship Questionnaire, Communication Pattern

Questionnaire, and Relationship Satisfaction Scale to those individuals to administer,

complete, and electronically submit to the researcher at the conclusion of their personal

and private survey session.

Sample Size and Power. Sample size can be determined by power analysis. The

sample size in this relational study will be 240 individuals. This will allow the researcher

to strive for a sample size that is representative of a valid or appropriate sample size.

According to the classical definition (Cohen, 1988), an effective size of 0.2 is considered

small. Considering alpha = 0.05 for type I error, actual power is 0.88, delta value is 3.16.

Demographic Description. The demographic data were completed by male and

female human participants in a heterosexual committed relationship. The demographic

helped collected information about participants for the research study. The demographic

data consist of eight questions that were not invasive to the participants. The

demographic data analysis is explained in full details in Table 1 (see Appendix S).

58
 Demographics Analysis

A total of 240 heterosexual committed individuals were evaluated. The

participants ranged in age from 18 to 25 years [mean (M= 21.5), standard deviation

(SD=2.449 years)]. The participant’s genders were reported as 50% males and 50%

females or 240 males and females. Of the 240 heterosexual committed individuals, 94%

reported being monogamously involved (dating one partner), 3.5% reported being

married, and 3.0% reported being engaged. Of the 240 participants, 14% lived with their

partner/spouse and 86% lived alone. Participants had reported being together between

one month and one year or more (M=12.5, SD=7.071 months). One hundred percent of

the participants reported being college students, 46% reported being freshmen, 36%

reported being sophomores, 10% reported being juniors, and 8% reported being seniors.

Of the 100% reporting participants, 85% reported not having children, 12.5% reported

having one child, 2.0% reported having two children, 0.5% reported as having three

children, and 0% was reported for four or more children. The racial (ethnicity) overview

is as follows: 32.5% of the participants classified themselves as Caucasian, 1.5% Native

American, 38.5% Black/African Descent, 0.5% Asian/Pacific Islander, 27% Hispanic-

Latino, 0% Arabic/Middle-Eastern, and 0% Other. In all, in this study, two hundred and

forty research packets containing the Adult Attachment Scale (AAS), Relationship

Questionnaire (RQ), Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ) (short-form),

Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS), and demographics questionnaire were surveyed.

This study’s participants returned a 100% rate of (N = 240). The demographic data of

the heterosexual committed adult participant’s age, gender, ethnic background,

59
educational level, relationship status, relationship length, and living with partner (N =

240) were utilized for research.

Details of Analysis and Results

Research questions related to the surveys and demographics questionnaire were

analyzed using SPSS version 16.0. Pearson Correlation examined sub scales between the

Adult Attachment Scale (AAS) and Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ).

Another correlation was analyzed between Relationship (RQ) styles and Communication

Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ).

Research Question 1

ResQ1: What is the relationship between adult attachment styles (AAS) and

communication patterns (CPQ) of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

ResQ1A: What is the nature of the correlation between attachment styles of Adult

Attachment Scale (AAS) scores and communication patterns of Communication Pattern

Questionnaire (CPQ) score?

Null hypothesis 1A: There is no statistically significant correlation between

attachment styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship.

A Pearson correlation analysis between Adult Attachment Styles (AAS) mean

scores and Communication Pattern (CPQ) mean scores produced statistically significant

correlations between the following subcategories (see Table 2, Appendix T):

60
1. Dependent Model of Attachment and all Communication patterns in heterosexual

adults in committed relationships.

2. Anxiety Model of Attachment and Mutual Avoidance Communication patterns in

heterosexual adults in committed relationships.

3. Close Model of Attachment and Mutual Avoidance, Mutual Constructive, and Women

Demand Man Withdraws Communication patterns in heterosexual adults in committed

relationships.

Research Question 1B

ResQ1B: What is the difference between attachment styles (AAS) scores and

communication patterns (CPQ) scores of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship?

Null hypothesis 1B: There are no statistically significant differences between

attachment styles (AAS) scores and communication patterns (CPQ) scores of

heterosexual adults who are in a committed relationship.

The one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) analysis failed to produce any

statistically significant differences between the of adult Attachment styles (AAS) and

Communication Patterns (CPQ) of heterosexual adults who are in a committed

relationship. The results of the data analysis are indicated in Table 3 (see Appendix U).

Research Question 2

ResQ2: What is the relationship between attachment styles (AAS) scores and relationship

satisfaction (RAS) scores between individuals in committed heterosexual relationships?

61
 Null hypothesis 2: There are no statistically significant correlations between

attachment styles (AAS) scores and relationship satisfaction (RAS) scores between

individuals in committed heterosexual relationships?

The Pearson Correlation analysis of Adult Attachment Styles (AAS)

subcategories and Relationship satisfaction (RAS) of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship is indicated below in Table 4 (see Appendix V). The comparison

of mean scores produced no statistically significant results. It is concluded that adult

attachment styles of dependent, anxiety, and close are unrelated to relationship

satisfaction. Therefore, the null hypothesis is retained.

Research Question 3

ResQ3: What is the relationship between adult relationship styles and communication

patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a committed relationship?

Null hypothesis 3: There is no statistically significant correlation between

relationship styles and communication patterns of heterosexual adults who are in a

committed relationship.

The correlation of adult relationship styles and communication patterns utilizing

the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) with Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ)

of heterosexual adults who are in a committed relationship is indicated in Table 5 (see

Appendix W):

A Pearson correlation analysis between Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) mean

scores and Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ) mean scores produced

statistically significant correlations between the following subcategories:

62
1. Secure Model of Relationship Questionnaire and Mutual Avoidance and Mutual

Constructive Communication patterns of Communication Pattern Questionnaire in

heterosexual adults in committed relationships.

2. Dismissing Model of Relationship Questionnaire and Mutual Avoidance, Woman

Demand Man Withdraws, and Total Demand Withdraws patterns of Communication

Pattern Questionnaire in heterosexual adults in committed relationships.

2. Preoccupied Model of Relationship Questionnaire and Mutual Avoidance, Woman

Demand Man Withdraws, Man Demand Woman Withdraws, and Total Demand

Withdraws patterns of Communication Pattern Questionnaire in heterosexual adults in

committed relationships.

3. Fearful Model of Relationship Questionnaire and Man Demand Woman Withdraw

patterns of Communication Pattern Questionnaire in heterosexual adults committed

relationships.

Research Question 4

ResQ4: How well does Adult Attachment Styles (AAS), Relationship styles (RQ),

Communication patterns (CPQ), and Length of a relationship predicts Relationship

satisfaction (RAS) in heterosexual relationships?

Null hypothesis 4: Adult attachment styles, communication patterns, and length of

a relationship are not statistically significant predictors of relationship satisfaction in

heterosexual couples.

63
 The result of the stepwise multiple regression analysis indicates that the overall

regression is significant (F (5, 234) = 36.81, R2 = 0.44, p = 0.00). Five variables are

statistically significant predictors of relationship satisfaction:

(Relationship Questionnaire_ Secure), Relationship Questionnaire _Dismissing),

(Relationship Questionnaire _ Preoccupied), (Adult Attachment Scale_ Anxiety),

(Communication Pattern Questionnaire_ Mutual Constructive Communication).

Specifically, (Relationship Questionnaire_ Secure) [b = 0.112, t = 4.67, p = 0.00],

(Relationship Questionnaire_ Dismissing) [ b = 0.101, t = -4.68, p = 0.00], (Relationship

Questionnaire_ Preoccupied) [ b = -0.092, t = -4.25, p = 0.00], (Communication Pattern

Questionnaire_ Mutual Constructive Communication) [ b = 0.052, t = 5.61, p = 0.00],

(Adult Attachment Scale_ Anxiety) [ b = 0.023, t = 2.39, p = 0.018] are significant

predictors of relationship satisfaction. When all predictors are scored zero, relationship

satisfaction can be scored 2.61. The results of the data analysis are indicated in Table 6,

Table 7, and Table 8 (see Appendix X, Y, and Z)

64
 CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction

All psychological theories and practice are developed from observation and of a

divine interest in something. All reviewed theories provided a conceptual and

philosophical understanding of relationships, attachment, communication, and

satisfaction implying that individual growth processes and healing take place in the

context of a relationship. The practices of all theories evolved from the history of

individual counseling and workshops for individuals and couples to gain understanding

of how to love, communicate, attain and maintain all relationships.

Using a correlational research design, this study examined the perceived need for

understanding attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction in

heterosexual individuals in the committed relationships of college students ages 18-25.

In this study, 240 research packets containing the Adult Attachment Styles (AAS),

Relationship Questionnaire (RQ), Communication Pattern Questionnaire (short-form;

CPQ), Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS), demographics questionnaire, and informed

consent form were distributed. Forty packets were disqualified for the following reasons:

twenty-three of the forty were incomplete packets of the AAS, CPQ (short-form), and

demographics questionnaire and seventeen of the forty did not complete the packet

leaving out some RQ and RAS for attachment styles and relationship satisfaction surveys.

The participant group utilized in this study consisted of 240 heterosexual individuals in

committed relationships that returned qualified questionnaires. This chapter will provide

65
a discussion of the analysis and review the findings and limitations of this study as well

as propose recommendations for future research.

Summary of Results

Four primary research questions were analyzed in this study using Pearson

Correlation, ANOVA, and Multiple Regression:

The first question examined the three levels of the Adult Attachment Scale (AAS)

and the diverse styles of Communication Patterns Questionnaire (CPQ) of heterosexual

adult scores who were in a committed relationship with the Relationship Assessment

Scale (RAS) coordinated to relationship satisfaction. The three different levels of

attachment styles were dependent, close, and anxiety in the AAS and different

communication patterns in CPQ were used to measure the perception scores of

heterosexual adults in committed relationships regarding the need to identify self-

emotions and communication elements from the heterosexual adult scores in a committed

relationship’s way of life (Collins & Read, 1990). The RAS’s measurement category,

coordinated relationship satisfaction, examines the involvement of basic needs within a

committed relationship for identifying satisfaction or dissatisfaction of relationships

(Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendrick, 1998).

The second question also examined the three levels of scores from the Adult

Attachment Scale (AAS) and Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) scores of the

involvement of the basic needs within a committed relationship for identifying

satisfaction or dissatisfaction of relationships. Again, the three diverse levels of

attachment styles; dependent, close, and anxiety in the AAS and general satisfaction in a

relationship (RAS) score were used to measure the relationship of (AAS & RAS)

66
regarding the self emotions and satisfaction of heterosexual adults in committed

relationships (Collins & Read, 1990; Hendrick, Dicke, and Hendrick, 1998).

The third question examined the scores from the four levels of relationship styles

from the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ), diverse styles of communication patterns from

the Communication Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ), and relationship satisfaction from the

Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) of heterosexual adults who were in a committed

relationship. Yet, the four different sub scales of relationship styles (secure, dismissing,

preoccupied, and fearful) in the RQ; different communication patterns in CPQ;

Furthermore, general satisfaction needs in RAS measured all three variables among

heterosexual adults in committed relationships to identify whether or not there were any

effects.

The fourth question scrutinized the three sub scales of the Adult Attachment Scale

(AAS), various subcategories of communication patterns from the Communication

Pattern Questionnaire (CPQ), the length of a relationship, and relationship satisfaction

from the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) of heterosexual adults in committed

relationships. By utilizing the stepwise Multiple Regression, the three attachment styles

of AAS; different styles of communication patterns in CPQ; Furthermore, diverse length

of relationships of heterosexual adults in committed relationships was combined to

identify how well the three predict relationship satisfaction.

These results have implications for counseling heterosexual adults who are in

committed relationships, whether or not they are monogamously involved, dating,

cohabiting or married seeking relationship satisfaction and relationship longevity. While

many individuals in relationships reported that their unions are satisfying (Henry, Berg,

67
& Timothy, 2007), not all individuals are satisfied within their relationships. Those who

have dependent, anxiety, and close attachment styles may have been secure, dismissing,

preoccupied, and/or fearful relationship styles which may differ from their mate’s

attachment and/or relationship styles. Those differences of attachment and/or

relationship styles of individuals in relationships may be a particularly vulnerable factor

that does not allow them to communicate effectively in their committed relationship with

their mate. Hence, individuals who may have a different attachment and relationship

style that differs from their companion may not achieve fulfillment for their relationship

satisfaction needs. Marital and Family Therapist, Couples Therapist, and Counselors

should prepare individuals who are in romantic and committed relationships for possible

relationship outcomes, while concurrently helping them work through understanding

attachment styles, relationship styles, communication patterns, and relationship

satisfaction as a personal concern for their relationships. It may also be useful for the

individuals in committed and romantic relationships to consider any possible issues if

any, that he or she may be facing with regards to their conscious or unconscious parent-

child attachment styles; as he or she could discuss their childhood hopes, fears, needs,

and expectations (Patrick, Knee, & Canevello, 2007).

Limitations

As stated at several points throughout the discussion, one major limitation that

existed for this study was that the study was conducted on heterosexual adults in a

committed relationship in college, making it difficult to generalize the results to the wider

adult population in society. Also, the sample was primarily Black/American descent,

Caucasian, and Hispanic-Latino, which presented another limitation in generalizing the

68
results to populations of other ethnicities in South Florida. Therefore, a more ethnically

and racially diverse sample would have been more desirable. In addition, the use of self-

report in this study only provides one perspective, which is that of the human participant.

Social desirability bias was possible in the study, due to the participants’ possible desire

to appear educationally and socially acceptable to the experimenter.

Conclusions

Despite the limitations of this study, several important implications can be taken

from its findings. Based on the results of the study, it appears that romantic relationships

are extremely important in predicting relationship satisfaction. Also, it appears that it is

important to educate singles, couples, and married adults about the importance of healthy

communication skills they have as an individual, so they can have a greater barrier

against relationship dissatisfaction. However, self-confidence and healthy attachment and

relationship styles suggest that communication skills, while positive, may need to be

included within both mates in an ultimate satisfied relationship. Nevertheless, romantic

and committed relationships really streams from unconditional love that does not seek

unreasonable expectations of a self and others. To be in love is to be in touch with

unconditional love, which prepares one to comprehend that loving and committed

relationships are flexible dynamic, and evolving. Last, love is not meant to hurt; for love

requires room for change and interaction; moreover, allows new behaviors and learning

experiences. Once all individuals within loving and committed unions welcome these

aspects into their lives, we all will open ourselves up to love and affection; rather than

fear and disappointment. In essence, we all need to acquire the appropriate knowledge to

69
utilize our inner unconditional-love to love where it does not hurt anyone or ourselves.

The findings of this study are also important for future directions in research and practice.

Recommendations for Future Research

Future studies should include a more ethnically diverse population, with a wide

society range. It might also be interesting to study individuals’ responses to self-report

measures and compare their responses to how others perceive the individual’s emotional-

attachments, communication behaviors and relationships. Also, it would be interesting to

compare married couples to dating/co-habituating couples to determine whether there are

differences in relationship communication skills and relationship satisfaction. This

research could also be extended to individuals in the 30s and 40s age population, as many

individuals in the 30s and 40s age population may be experiencing a greater need for

relationship satisfaction and quality as well. Finally, the present study is useful clinically

for its applications to individuals, couples, and marriages who need to develop greater

emotional, social-interactional, and relationship skills. The results of this study can help

couple therapists, marital and family psychologist, and social consultants in aiding clients

to positively increase secure attachment styles and effective communication skills in their

lives and target more efficient ways for coping and maintaining self well-being along

with romantic and committed relationships.

70
 REFERENCES

Adams, H. E., Jr., Wright, L. W., & Lohr, B. A. (1996). Is homophobia associated with
homosexual arousal? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 195, 440-445.

Anisworth, M. D. S. (1979). Infant-mother attachment. American Psychologist, 34, 932-

937.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of
attachment: A psychological study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Allen, J. P, Hauser, S.T., O’Connor, T. G., Bell, K. L. (2002). Prediction of peer-rated
adult hostility from autonomy struggles in adolescent-family interactions.
Development and Psychopathology, 14:123–137.
Aloni, M. & Bernieri, F. J. (2004). Is love blind? The effects of experience and
infatuation on the perception of love. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 287-
295.
Altman, I. & Taylor, D. A. (1973) Social penetration, New York: Holst, Rinehart,
Winston.

Altman, I. & Taylor, D. (1987). Communication in interpersonal relationships: Social

Penetration Theory. In M. E. Roloff and G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal
processes: New directions in communication research, 257-277. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.

Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-

analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 651.

Armsden, G. C. & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer

attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-
being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427–454.

Barbato, C., Graham, E., &, Perse, E. (2003). Communicating in the family: An
examination of the relationship of family communication climate and
interpersonal communication motives. Journal of Family Communication 3(3),
123-148.

Bartholomew, K. & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A

test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61,
226-244.

71
Baumeister, R. F. & Leary, M. R. (1999). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3),
497-529.

Baxter, L. A. (2004). A Tale of two voices: Relational dialectics theory. Journal of

Family Communication, 4(3), 181-192.

Beeton, T. (2005). Imago and research. Imago Relationships International, 1-7.

Beeton, T. (2006) Dyadic adjustment and the use of Imago skills among past participants
of the “Getting the love you want” workshop for couples. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Walden University, Minneapolis MN.

Bello, R. S., Brandau-Brown, F. E. & Ragsdale, J. (2006)." Attachment style, marital

satisfaction, commitment, and communal strength effects on relational repair
message interpretation" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International
Communication Association, Dresden International Congress Centre, Dresden,
Germany Online. Sam Houston State University, 1-28.

Bensley, D. A. (1998). Critical thinking in psychology: A unified skill approach. Pacific

Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Berger, K. (2003). The developing person through the life span (5th ed.). New York:
Worth.

Berman, W. H., Marcus, L., & Berman, E. R. (1994). Attachment in marital relation
attachment in adults: Theory, assessment and treatment (M. B. Sperling & W. H.
Berman, Eds.). New York: Guilford.

Block, J. (1971). Lives through time. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft Books.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment: Vol. 1. Attachment and loss. New York: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. New York: Routledge.

Bowlby, J. (1988). Developmental psychiatry comes of age. The American Journal of

Psychiatry, 145(1), 1-10.

Breakwell, G., Hammond, S., & Fife-Schaw, C. (2000). Research methods in

psychology, London: Sage.

Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult
attachment: An integrative overview [Attachment theory and close relationships]
(J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes, Eds.). New York: Guilford Press.

72
Bretherton, I. (1991). The roots and growing points of attachment theory. [Attachment
across the life cycle] (C. M. Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris, Eds.). New
York: Routledge.

Bretherton, I. & Munholland, K. A. (1999). Internal working models in attachment

relationships: A construct revisited. [Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research,
and Clinical Implications.] (J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver, Eds.). New York:
Guildford Press.

Brown, J. (2005). The compelling nature of romantic love: A psychosocial perspective.

Journal for the Psychoanalysis of Culture & Society, 10, 23-44.

Campbell, D. T. & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs

for research. Chicago, IL: McNally.

Carnelley, K. B., Pietromonaco, P. R., & Jaffe, K. (1996). Attachment, care giving, and
relationship functioning couples: Effects of self and partner. Personal
Relationship, 3, 257-278.

Carrere, S., Buehlman, K. T., Gottman, J. M., Coan, J. A., Ruckstuhl, L. (2000).
Predicting Marital Stability and Divorce in Newlywed Couples. Journal of Family
Psychology, 14, 42-58.

Carstensen, L. L., Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1995). Emotional behavior in

long term marriage. Psychology and Aging, 10(1), 140-149.

Cassidy, J. (1999). The nature of the child’s ties. [Handbook of Attachment: Theory,
Research, and Clinical Implications] (J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver, Eds.). New
York: Guildford Press.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohn, D., Silver, D., Cowan, P., Cowan, C., & Pearson, J. (1992). Working models of
childhood attachment and couples relationships. Journal of Family Issues, 13(4),
432-449.

Cole, C., & Cole, A. (1999). Marriage enrichment and prevention really works:
Interpersonal competence training to maintain and enhance relationships. Family
Relations, 48, 273-275.

Collins, W. A. (1990). Parent-child relationships in the transition to adolescence:

Continuity and change in interaction, affect, and cognition. In: Montemayor R,
Adams G.R., Gullotta T.P., editors. From childhood to adolescence: A transitional

73
 period? Advances in Adolescent Development, 2, Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 85–
106.

Collins, N. L. & Feeney, B. C. (2004). Working models of attachment shape perceptions

of social support: Evidence from experimental and observational studies. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 363-383.

Collins, N. L. & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship
quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 644-
663.

Collins, N.L. & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship
quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1053-
1073.

Cowan, P. & Cowan, C. (1990). Becoming a family: Research and intervention.

[Methods of family research: Biographies of research projects]. (I. Sigel & G.
Brody, Eds.), 1, Normal families. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cramer, D. (2004). Emotional support, conflict, depression, and relationship satisfaction

in a romantic partner. The Journal of Psychology, 138(6), 532–542.

Creasey, G. (2002). Association between working models of attachment and conflict

management behavior in romantic couples. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
49(3), 365-375.

Creasey, G., & Hesson-McInnis, M. (2001). Affective responses, cognitive appraisals,

and conflict tactics in late adolescent romantic relationships: Associations with
attachment orientations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48(1), 85-96.

Davilla, J., & Bradbury, T. N. (2001). Attachment insecurity and the distinction between
unhappy spouses who do and do not divorce. Journal of Family Psychology,
15(3), 371-393.

Davis, K. E. & Todd, M. J. (1985). Assessing friendships: Prototypes, paradigm cases,

and relationship description. [Understanding personal relationships: Sage series in
personal relationships] (S. Duck & D. Perlman, Eds.), 1, 17-37. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.

Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Doob, C. B. (2000). Sociology: An introduction (6th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt
Press.

74
Doohan, E. M., & Manusov, V. (2004). The communication of compliments in romantic
relationships: An investigation of relational satisfaction and sex differences and
similarities in compliment behavior. Western Journal of Communication, 68, 170-
194.

Dwyer, K. K. (2000). The multidimensional model: Teaching students to self-manage

high communication apprehension by self-selecting treatments. Communication
Education, 49, 72–81

Edwards, D.C. (1999). Motivation & emotion. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eng, W., Heimberg, R. G., & Hart, T. A. (2001). Attachment in individuals with social
anxiety disorder. The relationship among adult attachment styles, social anxiety,
and depression. Emotion, 1(4), 365-380.

Feist, J. & Feist, G. J. (2002). Theories of personality (5th ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.

Fincham, F. D., Beach, S. R. H. (2006). Relationship satisfaction. In: A. Vangelisti & D.

Perlman (Eds.). The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Fincham, F. D., Bradbury, T. N., Beach, S. R. H. (1990). To Arrive Where We Began: A

Reappraisal of Cognition in Marriage and Marital Therapy. Journal of Family
Psychology, 4, 167-184.

Fletcher, G. J., Simpson, J. A., Thomas, G. (2000). The measurement of perceived

relationship quality components: A confirmatory factor analytic approach.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 340-354.

Freud, S. (1949). An outline of psychoanalysis. New York: Norton. (Translated by J.

Stratchley; originally published, 1940).

Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical

developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of
General Psychology, 4, 132-154.

Fraley, R. C., Brumbaugh, C. C., & Marks, M. J. (2005). The evolution and function of
adult attachment: A comparative and phylogenetic analysis. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 89, 731-746.

Fromm, E. (1956). The Art of Loving. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Furman, W. (2002). The emerging field of adolescent romantic relationships. Current

Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 177.

75
Galotti, K. M. (1999). Cognitive psychology in and out of the laboratory (2nd ed.).
Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Gonzaga, G. C., Campos, B., & Bradbury, T. (2007). Similarity, convergence, and
relationship satisfaction in dating and married couples. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 93(1), 34-48.

Gottman, J. M. (1979). Marital interaction: Experimental investigations. New York:

Academic Press.

Gottman, J. M. (1993). A theory of marital dissolution and stability. Journal of Family

Psychology, 7, 57-75.

Gottman, J. M. (1993). The roles of conflict engagement, escalation, and avoidance in

marital interaction: A longitudinal view of five types of couples. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61(1), 6-15.

Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce: The relationship between marital

processes and marital outcomes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gottman, J. M. (1999). Couple's handbook: Marriage Survival Kit Couple's Workshop.

Seattle, WA: Gottman Institute.

Gottman, J. M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., Swanson, C. (1998). Predicting marital happiness
and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
60(2), 5-22.

Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predicative of later

dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63(2), 221-233.

Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (in press). The role of positive affect in long-term
marital stability. Journal of Marriage and the Family.

Griffin, D. W., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). The metaphysics of measurement: The case
of adult attachment. [Advances in personal relationships] (K. Bartholomew & D.
Perlman, Eds.), 5, 17-52. London: Jessica Kingsley.

Guagenti-Tax, E. (2003). Integrating Imago Therapy and educational techniques for court
ordered men who batter: A preliminary investigation. The Journal of Imago
Relationship Therapy, 5(2), 45-54.

Guber, D. L. (1999). Getting what you pay for: The debate over equity in public school
expenditures. Journal of Statistics Education, 7, 2.

76
Harden, B. (2007). Numbers drop for the married with children: Institution becoming the
choice of the educated, affluent. The Washington Post, A03.

Hauser, S. T. (1991). Adolescents and their families: Paths of ego development. New
York: Macmillan.

Hawkins, M., Carrere, S., & Gottman, J. (1999). Marital interaction as observed
objectively and perceived subjectively: A study of sentiment override. Manuscript
submitted for publication.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270-280.

Heavey, C. L., Larson, B. M., Zumtobel, D. C., & Christensen, A. (1996). The
communication patterns questionnaire: The reliability and validity of a
constructive communication scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58(3),
796-800.

Heene, D. E., Buysse, A., & Vanoost, P. (2005). Indirect pathways between depressive
symptoms and marital distress: The role of conflict communication, attributions,
and attachment style. Family Process, 43, 413–440.

Hendrick, S. S., Dicke, A., & Hendrick, C. (1998). The Relationship Assessment Scale.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 137-142.

Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (2002). Love. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.),
Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 472–484). New York: Oxford University
Press.

Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (2006). Measuring respect in close relationships. Journal
of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 881-899.

Hendrick, S. S., Hendrick, C., & Adler, N. L. (1988). Romantic relationships: Love,
satisfaction, and staying together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 980-988.

Hendrix, H. (1988). Getting the love you want: A guide for couples. New York: Henry
Holt.

Henry, N. J. M., Berg, C. A., & Timothy, W. (2007). Positive and negative
characteristics of marital interaction and their association with marital satisfaction
in middle-aged and older couples. Psychology and Aging, 22(3), 428-441.

77
Hill, P. C., & Pargament, K. I. (2003). Advances in the conceptualization and
measurement of religion and spirituality: Implications for physical and mental
health research. American Psychologist, 58, 64–74.

Hooley, J. M. & Hiller, J. B. (2000). Personality and expressed emotion. Journal of

Abnormal psychology, 109, 40-44.

Hooley, J. M., & Hoffman, P. D. (1999). Expressed emotion and clinical outcome in
borderline personality disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 1557-1562.

Howell, D. C. (2007). Statistical Methods for psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Wadsworth, A Wadsworth Imprint.

Howell, D. C. (2008). Fundamental Statistics for the behavioral Sciences (6th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth Publisher.

Huang, L. N. (1999). Family communication patterns and personality characteristics.

Communication Quarterly, 47, 230–243.

Jacobson, N., Gottman, J., Waltz, J., Rushe, R., Babcock, J., &, Holtzworth-Munroe, A.
(2000, June). Affect, verbal content, and psychophysiology in the arguments of
couples with a violent husband. Prevention & Treatment, 3(1), 19a. Retrieved
December 30, 2007, from PsycARTICLES database.

Jang, S. A., Smith, S. W., & Levine, T. R. (2002). To stay or to leave: The role of
attachment styles in communication patterns and potential termination of
romantic relationships following discovery of deception. Communication
Monographs, 69, 236-252.

Karen, R. (1994). Becoming attached: First relationships and how they shape our
capacity to love. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kobak, R. R. & Hazan, C. (1991). Attachment in marriage: Effects of security and

accuracy of working models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6),
861-869.

Krokoff, L.J., Gottman, J.M., & Haas, S.D. (1989). Validation of a rapid couple’s inter-
action scoring system. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 65-79.

Lawler, E. J., &, Thye, S. R. (1999). Bringing emotions into social exchange theory.
Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 217-244.

Laws, R. D., & O’Donahue, W (1997). Sexual deviance: Theory, assessment, and
treatment. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

78
Leedy, P. D. & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Lemay Jr., E. P., Clark, M. S., & Feeney, B. C. (2007). Projection of responsiveness to
needs and the construction of satisfying communal relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 834-853.

Le Poire, B. A., Haynes, J., Driscoll, J., Driver, B. N., Wheels, T. F., Hyde, M. K.,
Prochaska, M., &, Ramos, L. (2006). Attachment as a function of parental and
partner approach-avoidance tendencies. Journal of Human Communication
Research, 23(3), 413-441.

Lopez, S. J. & Snyder, C. R. (Eds.) (2003). Positive psychological assessment: A

handbook of models and measures. New York: American Psychological
Association.

Main, M. (1996). Introduction to the special section on attachment and psychopathology:

2. Overview of the field of attachment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 64, 237-243.

Mallinckrodt, B. & Wei, M. (2005). Attachment, social competencies, social support, and
psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(3), 358-367.

Mayseless, O., &, Scharf, M. (2007). Adolescents' attachment representations and their
capacity for intimacy in close relationships. Journal of Research on Adolescence,
17(1), 23–50.

Meeks, B.S., Hendrick, S.S., &, Hendrick, C. (1998). Communication, love, and
relationship satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(6), 755-
773.

Mercer, J. (2006). Understanding attachment. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Mills, J., Clark, M. S., & Ford, T. E. (2004). Measurement of communal strength.
Personal Relationships, 11(2), 213-230.

Montgomery, M. J. (2005). Psychosocial intimacy and identity: from early adolescence to

emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20, 346-374.

Morgan, H. J., & Shaver, P. R. (1999). Attachment processes and commitment to

romantic relationships. In J. M. Adams & W. H. Jones (Eds.), Handbook of
interpersonal commitment and relationship stability (pp. 109-124). New York:
Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

79
Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2005). To Know You Is to Love You: The Implications of
Global Adoration and Specific Accuracy for Marital Relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 480-497.

Noller, P., & Feeney, J. A. (1998). Communication in early marriage: Response to

conflict, nonverbal accuracy, and conversational patterns. In T. N Bradbury (Ed.),
The developmental course of marital dysfunction (pp. 11-43). New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Oner, B. (2000). Relationship satisfaction and dating experience: Factors affecting future
time orientation in relationships with the opposite sex. Journal of Psychology,
134, 527-536.

Papp, L. M., Goeke-Morey, M. C., &, Cummings, E. M. (2007). Journal of Family

Psychology, 21(3), 533-537.

Park, H. (2006). "Effects of parent-child communication on achievement by family SES: A

comparison of 14 countries" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Sociological Association, Montreal Convention Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Online . 2008-09-13 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p104408_index.html.

Patrick, H., Knee, C. R., & Canevello, A. (2007). The role of need fulfillment in relationship
functioning and well-being: A self determination theory perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 434-457.

Post, S. G. (2003). Unlimited love: Altruism, compassion, and service. Philadelphia:

Templeton Foundation Press.

Post, S. G., Johnson, B., McCullough, M. E., & Schloss, J. P. (2003). Research on altruism
and love: An annotated bibliography of major studies in psychology, sociology,
evolutionary biology, and theology. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.

Post, S. G., & Underwood, L. G. (2002). Concluding summary: Future research needs on
altruism and altruistic love. In S. G. Post, L. G. Underwood, J. P. Schloss, & W. B.
Hurlbut (Eds.), Altruism and altruistic love: Science, philosophy, and religion in
dialogue (pp. 379–386). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Post, S. G., Underwood, L. G., Schloss, J. P., & Hurlbut, W. B. (2002). General introduction.
In S. G. Post, L. G. Underwood, J. P. Schloss, & W. B. Hurlbut (Eds.), Altruism and
altruistic love: Science, philosophy, and religion in dialogue (3–12). Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.

Reik, T. (1963). The need to be loved. New York, NY: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.

80
Roisman, G., Holland, A., & Fortuna, K. (2007). The adult attachment interview and self-
reports of attachment style: An empirical rapprochement. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 92(4), 678-697.

Sanders, M. R., Halford, W. K., &, Behrens, B. C. (1999). Parental Divorce and Premarital
Couple Communication. Journal of Family Psychology (1999) 13 (1), 60-74.

Schachner, D. A., Shaver, P. R. &, Mikulincer, M. (2005). Patterns of nonverbal behavior

and sensitivity in the context of attachment relationships. Journal of Nonverbal
Behavior, 29, 141-169.

Scott, R. L., & Cordova, J. V. (2002). The influence of adult attachment styles on the
association between marital adjustment and depressive symptoms. Journal of Family
Psychology, 16(2), 199-208.

Segrin, C. (2005). Communication and the study of personal well-being. Gazette: The
International Journal for Communication Studies, 67, 547-549.

Segrin, C., & Flora, J. (2005). Family communications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erhlbaum
Associates.

Senchak, M., & Leonard, K. E. (1992). Attachment styles and marital adjustment among
newlywed couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 51-64.

Shaver, P.R. & Brennan, K.A. (1992). Attachment styles and the big five personality traits:
their connections with each other and with romantic relationship outcomes.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 536-545.

Shorey, H. S. & Snyder, C. R. (2006). The role of adult attachment styles in psychopathology
and psychotherapy outcomes. Review of General Psychology, 10(1), 1-20.

Simon, M. K. & Francis, J. B. (2001). The Dissertation and Research Cookbook from Soup
to Nuts: A practical guide to help you start and complete your dissertation or research
project (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.

Simpson, J. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 971-980.

Simpson, J. A., Winterheld, H. A., & Rholes, W. S. (2007). Working models of attachment
and reactions to different forms of care giving from romantic partners. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 93(3), 466-477.

Slatcher, R. B., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2006). How do I love thee? Let me count the words:
The social effects of expressive writing. Psychological Science, 17, 660-664.

81
Solomon, J. & George, C. (1999). Attachment disorganization. New York: Guilford Press.

Sousa, L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2001). Life satisfaction. In J. Worell (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
women and gender: Sex similarities and differences and the impact of society on
gender, 2, 667-676. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Sperling M. B. & Berman, W. H. (1991). An attachment classification of desperate love.

Journal of Personality Assessment, 56, 45–55.

Sroufe, L. A. & Waters, E. (1977). Attachment as an organizational construct. Child

Development, 48, 1184-1199.

Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119-135.

Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Construct validation of a triangular love scale. European Journal of

Social Psychology, 27, 313-335.

Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Love is a story. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sternberg, R.J. & Barnes, M.L. (1988). The psychology of love. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Hojjat M. (Eds.). (1997). Satisfaction in close relationships. New York:
Guilford Press.

Steinberg, L. (1990). Interdependency in the family: Autonomy, conflict, and harmony in the
parent-adolescent relationship. In: Feldman S, Elliott G., editors. At the threshold:
The developing adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 255–276.

Stocker, C. M. & Richmond, M. K. (2007). Longitudinal association between hostility in

adolescents’ family relationships and friendships and hostility in their romantic
relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(3), 490-497.

Sullway, M., & Christensen, A. (1983). Assessment of dysfunctional interaction patterns

in couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 653-659.

Sümer, N., & Güngör, D. (1999). Yetişkin bağlanma stillerinin Türk örneklemi üzerinde
psikometrik değerlendirmesi ve kültürler arası bir karşılaştırma. Türk Psikoloji
Dergisi, 14(43), 71-106.

Tabachnick, B. G., &, Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New
York: Harper-Collins.

Tesser, A. (1995). Advanced social psychology. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

82
Tjeltveit, A. C. (2006). Psychology’s love-hate relationship with love: Critiques,
affirmations, and Christian responses. Journal of Psychology and Theology,
34(1), 8-22.

Tolmacz, R., Goldzweig, G., &, Guttman, R. (2004). Attachment styles and the ideal
image of a mate. European Psychologist, 9(2), 87-95.

Turner, J. H., & Stets, J. E. (2006). Sociological Theories of Human Emotions. Annual
Review of Sociology, 32, 25-52.

Waters, E., Crowell, J., Elliott, M., Corcoran, D., & Treboux, D. (2002). Bowlby's secure
base theory and the social/ personality psychology of attachment styles: Work(s)
in progress: A commentary on Shaver & Mikulincer's attachment-related
psychodynamics. National Institute for Mental Health, 4, 230-242.

Waters, E., Hamilton, C. E., & Weinfield, N. S. (2000). The stability of attachment
security from infancy to adolescence and early adulthood: General discussion.
Child Development, 71, 678-683.

Wei, M., Russell, D. W., & Zakalik, R. (2005). Adult attachment, social self-efficacy,
self-disclosure, loneliness, and subsequent depression for freshman college
students: A longitudinal study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4), 602-
614.

Weigel, D. J., & Ballard-Reisch, D. S. (2001). The impact of relational maintenance

behaviors on marital satisfaction: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Family
Communication, 1(4), 265-279.

Weiten, W. (2007). Psychology: Themes & variations (7th ed.) Belmont, CA: Thomson
Learning, Inc.

Westen, D., Nakash, O., & Thomas, C. (2006). Clinical assessment of attachment
patterns and personality disorder in adolescents and adults. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 74(6), 1065-1085.

Whisman, M. A., Uebelacker, L. A., &, Weinstock, L. M. (2004). Psychopathology and

marital satisfaction: The importance of evaluating both partners. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 830-838.

Zolten, K., &, Long, N. (2006). Parent/child communication. Department of Pediatrics,

University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences.

83
 APPENDIX A.
INFORMED CONSENT FORM (ICF)

Capella University ▪ 225 South 6th Street, 9th Floor ▪ Minneapolis, MN 55402 ▪ 1
(888) 227-3552
DEPARTMENT OF HAROLD ABEL SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGY (HASOP)
ADULT ATTACHMENT STYLES, COMMUNICATION PATTERNS, AND
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION
RESEARCH STUDY: ADULT PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT FORM

Please note that you must be 18-25yrs old to participate in this voluntary study. If you

wish to decline or withdraw at any time, you may do so. The location of the research study is in

South, Florida. If you agree to participate in the study, you are not likely to experience any

unique discomfort or risk from answering these questionnaires. You will not receive any

payment or direct personal benefit or reward from this research. Do not attach this consent form

to your questionnaires. When you have completed this form, the researcher will collect it before

handing you the questionnaires. Once the questionnaires are completed, return them to

researcher in the self-adhesive envelope. Data will be stored by identification numbers rather

than names and in group form only. THEREFORE, NO NAMES SHOULD BE WRITTEN ON

THE QUESTIONNAIRES. This is to ensure anonymity (privacy/confidentiality). Note:

Participants may receive a copy of this form upon request.

PURPOSE: This study will ask you to complete a series of questionnaires about an

individual’s personal thoughts and feelings about themselves and their romantic relationships

through three dimensions (attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction).

You will be asked questions about your romantic relationships as well as questions involving

information about you and attitudes and opinions about yourself and others.

As the researcher, I will be pleased to answer any questions that you may have in

concerning the study. If you have any questions during, between, or after your participation, please

84
send an e-mail to: icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com or jeff.shen@faculty.capella.edu. Please do not

discuss the content of questionnaire with other participants until after all the materials have been

sealed in the envelope. The results of this study will contribute to scientific knowledge, but will

probably have no benefits or risks to you as a participant. The entire study should take about 30

minutes to complete.

CONFIDENTIALITY: Any information that you provide will be kept strictly private,

confidential, and anonymous. Your name will not be attached to your responses in any way. Results

from this study will be presented as statistical summaries, but no information will be presented

about individual participants/respondents. You may discontinue participation at any time during

assessment or prior to the completion of the project.

If you have any question about this research, you may contact me, India L. Cutler, at

786-251-3871. My mentor, Dr. Shen, can be contacted at jeff.she@faculty.capella.edu. You may

also contact Dr. Randy Johnson of the Institutional Review Board with the Harold Abel School of

Psychology at Capella University by calling 1- 888-227-3552. Thank you for your time, and

willingness to participate.

Participant: I am between 18-25 years old, and give my consent to voluntarily participate

in this study. I have read and understood the above information. I have been completely informed

of the general nature of this study. YES NO

Print Name Initial

Signature Date

85
 APPENDIX B.
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA SURVEY (DDS)

1. What is your Age? ___________

2. What is your Gender? (Check One) Male Female

3. What is your Ethnicity? (Select)

Caucasian Native American Black/African Descent Asian/Pacific Islander

Hispanic-Latino Arabic/Middle-Eastern Other

4. What is your Education Level? (Select One)

Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior

5. What is your Relationship Status? (Select One)

Dating Engaged Newly Married

6. What is your relationship length? (Select One)

1-6 Months 7- 12 Months 12 Month - More

7. Do you and your partner/spouse live together?

YES NO

86
 APPENDIX C.
ADUILT ATTACHMENT SCALE (AAS)

To answer the questions, write the number between 1 (Strongly Disagree) and 7 (Strongly
Agree) that best reflects your feelings about your relationship with this relationship.

Depend

1. I find it difficult to allow myself to depend on others."

2. People are never there when you need them.'
3. I am comfortable depending on others.
4. I know that others will be there when I need them.
5. I find it difficult to trust others completely."
6. I am not sure that I can always depend on others to be there when I need them."

Anxiety

7. I do not often worry about being abandoned."

8. I often worry that my partner does not really love me.
9. I find others are reluctant to get as close as I would like.
10. I often worry my partner will not want to stay with me.
11 . I want to merge completely with another person.
12. My desire to merge sometimes scares people away.

Close

13. I find it relatively easy to get close to others.

14. I do not often worry about someone getting too close to me.
15. 1 am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others."
16. I am nervous when anyone gets too close."
17. I am comfortable having others depend on me.
18. Often, love partners want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being."

87
 APPENDIX D.
RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (RQ)

PLEASE READ THE DIRECTIONS!

1. Following are descriptions of four general relationship styles that people often
report. Please read each description and CIRCLE the letter corresponding to the style
that best describes you or is closest to the way you generally are in your close
relationships.
A. It is easy for me to become emotionally dose to others. I am comfortable depending
on them and having them depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others
not accept me.
B. I am uncomfortable getting dose to others. I want emotionally dose relationships, but
I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I worry that I will be hurt
if I allow myself to become too dose to others.
C. I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others
are reluctant to get as dose as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without dose
relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them.
D. I am comfortable without dose emotional relationships. It is very important to me to
feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have others
depend on me.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Please rate each of the following relationship styles according to the extent to
which you think each description corresponds to your general relationship style.

A. It is easy for me to become emotionally dose to others. I am comfortable depending

on them and having them depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others
not accept me.
B. I am uncomfortable getting dose to others. I want emotionally dose relationships, but
I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I worry that I will be hurt
if I allow myself to become too dose to others.
C. I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others
are reluctant to get as dose as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without dose
relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them.
D. I am comfortable without dose emotional relationships. It is very important to me to
feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have others
depend on me.

Not Somewhat Very

at all like me much
like like me
Style A. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Style B. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Style C. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Style D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

88
 APPENDIX E.
COMMUNICATION PATTERN QUESTIONNAIRE (CPQ)

COMMUNICATION PATTERNS QUESTIONNAIRE (short form)

Andrew Christensen and Megan Sullaway

Directions: We are interested in how you and your partner typically deal with problems in your
relationship. Please rate each item on a scale of 1 (= very unlikely) to 9 (= very likely).

A. WHEN THIS ISSUE OR PROBLEM ARISES, Very Unlikely Likely

1. Mutual Avoidance. Both members 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
avoid discussing the problem.

2. Mutual Discussion. Both members try to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

discuss the problem.

3. Discussion/Avoidance.
Man tries to start a discussion while 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Woman tries to avoid a discussion.

Woman tries to start a discussion while 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Man tries to avoid a discussion.

B. DURING A DISCUSSION OF THIS ISSUE OR PROBLEM,

4. Mutual Expression. Both members 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

express their feelings to each other.

5. Mutual Blame. Both members blame, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

accuse, and criticize each other.

6. Mutual Negotiation. Both members 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

suggest possible solutions and compromises.

7. Demand/Withdraw.
Man pressures, nags, or demands while 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Woman withdraws, becomes silent, or
refuses to discuss the matter further.

Woman pressures, nags, or demands while 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Man withdraws, becomes silent, or
refuses to discuss the matter further.

8. Criticize/Defend.
Man criticizes while Woman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
defends herself.

Woman criticizes while Man 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

defends himself.

89
 APPENDIX F.
RELATIONSHIP ASSESSMENT SCALE (RAS)

RELATIONSHIP ASSESSMENT SCALE

Please mark on the answer sheet the letter for each item which best answers that item for
you.

How well does your partner meet your needs?

A B C D E
Poorly Average Extremely well

In general, how satisfied are you with your relationship?

A B C D E
Unsatisfied Average Extremely satisfied

How good is your relationship compared to most?

A B C D E
Poor Average Excellent

How often do you wish you hadn’t gotten in this relationship?

A B C D E
Never Average Very often

To what extent has your relationship met your original expectations:

A B C D E
Hardly at all Average Completely

How much do you love your partner?

A B C D E
Not much Average Very much

How many problems are there in your relationship?

A B C D E
Very few Average Very many

90
 APPENDIX G.
PERMISSION REQUEST-USE OF INSTRUMENTS

225 South 6th Street, 9th Floor,

Minneapolis, MN 55402
1 (888) 227-3552

RE: Requesting Permission to use the Adult Attachment Style, Relationship Questionnaire, Communication
Pattern Questionnaire, and Relationship Assessment Scale

I am a doctoral student at Capella University, and as part of the graduate requirements for General
Psychology. I am undertaking a study of adult romantic relationships; attachment styles, communication
patterns, and relationship satisfaction of young adult individual relationship behaviors of 18-25 years of
age, in South Florida. My mentor professor is Dr. Jeff Shen of Capella University Professor, Department of
Harold Abel School of Psychology (HASOP) and General Psychology Specialization Program.

The purpose of the study is to examine the relationships among the three variables to determine if
Attachments Styles influence Communication Patterns and Relationship Satisfaction of young adults.
ANOVA and/or Multiple Regression will be the design method of choice to explore the relationships.

I am requesting permission to use the Adult Attachment Style, Relationship Questionnaire, Communication
Pattern Questionnaire, and Relationship Assessment Scale for individual use to measure the construct of
Attachment Styles to Communication Patterns to Relationship Satisfaction of young adults in heterosexual
relationships. Upon your approval I am hoping I could receive it in writing on a letterhead and/or through
e-mail. I would also like to order a copy of the indicated surveys for preview. The general results of the
study and raw data will be shared with you upon your request in the event that your approval is granted.
Your assistance and approval will be greatly appreciated. Furthermore, I can be reached at e-mail:
icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com.

Sincerely,

India L. Cutler
Principal Investigator

CC:
Enclosure:
RE: Adult Attachment RE: Relationship RE: Communication Pattern
Style Questionnaire Questionnaire RE: Relationship Assessment
Scale
NO PERMISSION Dr. Kim Bartholomew Andrew Christensen
Susan Hendrick
NEEDED TO USE THE Department of Psychology UCLA Psych-Clin
Horn Professor
SURVEY 8888 University Drive BOX 951563, A326B FH
Texas Tech University
Simon Fraser University Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563
Lubbock, TX 79409
http://www.richardatkin Burnaby, BC Phone: 310-825-7732
Phone: (806) 742-3711
s.co.uk/atws/document/5 V5A 1S6 CANADA Alt.: 310-825-2961
Ext. 244
7.html Fax: 604.291.3427 Fax: 310-206-5895 E-mail: s.hendrick@ttu.edu
E-mail: christensen@psych.ucla.edu
http://www.richardatkin URL: Amy Dicke
s.co.uk/atws/index.html http://www.psych.ucla.edu/Faculty/Ch Texas Tech University
ristensen Lubbock, TX 79409

Megan E. Sullaway Clyde A. Hendrick

UCLA Psych-Clin/WOS Horn Professor
91 951563, 2191 FH
BOX Texas Tech University
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563 Lubbock, TX 79409
Phone: 310-825-2395
pacificpsych@aol.com
 APPENDIX H.
APPROVAL: ADULT ATTACHMENT SCALE (AAS)

http://www.richardatkins.co.uk/atws/index.html

Adult Attachment, Working Models and Relationship Quality in Dating Couples

Collins, N.L., & Read, S.J. (1990). Adult Attachment, Working Models and Relationship
Quality in Dating Couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 644-663.
http://www.richardatkins.co.uk/atws/document/57.html
http://www.richardatkins.co.uk/atws/index.html
Copyright Statement and Policy

http://www.richardatkins.co.uk/atws/index.htmlThese pages are Copyright © 2006

Richard J. Atkins. Reproduction is permitted for non-profit private study, educational
and academic purposes only. Where content has been supplied by third-parties this has
been indicated and the appropriate third-party should be consulted prior to any further
reproduction.

As far as I am aware none of the material on this site breaches anyone's copyright. All
summaries were written by myself or other authors who have given permission for this
site to display their material and who are credited. Summaries of published content
reference the original publication, are written in my own words (except indicated
quotations) and, to the best of my knowledge, fall within conventions of fair use. The
site links to but does not host or directly present abstracts and full-text of material
published commercially in journals. It is assumed that the authors making these available
over the web retain copyright in the materials presented.

If you are concerned that I am breaching your or any third-party copyright either with
respect to materials hosted and presented on this site, or if you believe any of the
materials I provide links to are provided by third-parties without the copyright holders
permission, please let me know so I can remove the offending content or links.

For further information and our policy on linking to external content please see our link
policy. Home What's New Add Materials Feedback Technology Advertising
Policy Link Policy Copyright Copyright © 2006 Richard J. Atkins

http://www.richardatkins.co.uk/atws/page/54.html
No permission is needed to use these scales in your research. The scales were published in a
scientific journal for use in the public domain. You do not need to contact any of the authors for
permission to use these scales in non-commercial research. You may not use the scales for
commercial purposes without permission.

92
 APPENDIX I.
APPROVAL: RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (RQ)

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

KIM BARTHOLOMEW, PHD 8888 UNIVERSITY DRIVE

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR BURNABY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY CANADA V5A 1S6
Telephone: (604) 291-3094
bartholo@sfu.ca Fax: (604) 291-3427
http://www.sfu.ca/psychology/

India Cutler <icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com>

Research Request
1 messages

XXXXX@sfu.ca <XXXXX@sfu.ca> Thu, May 10, 2007 at 6:50 PM

Reply-To: bartholo@sfu.ca
To: icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com
Dear India,

I received your faxed letter outlining your research plans. You are most
welcome to use the Relationship Questionnaire for your study. You can get a
copy of the measure on my website.

Best of luck with your project.

XXXXXX XXXXXX

XXX XXXXXXXX, PhD

Department of Psychology
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C.
Canada V5A 1S6
fax: (XXX) XXX-XXXX

website: http://www.sfu.ca/psyc/faculty/bartholomew/

93
 APPENDIX J.
APPROVAL: COMMUNICATION PATTERN QUESTIONNAIRE (CPQ)
SHORT-FORM

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
1282A FRANZ HALL
BOX 951563
LOS
ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1563

India L. Cutler
Doctoral Candidate/Principal Investigator
Capella University

Dear Ms. Cutler

You are welcome to use our measure, the Communication Patterns Questionnaire, in your
research. In your write-up of your research, please be sure to cite it as “Christensen, A. &
Sullaway, M., 1984. You might also want to cite some of the research on the measure as listed in
the file I recently sent you.

Best of luck with your research.

Yours truly,

XXXXXX XXXXXXXX, Ph.D.

Professor
Department of Psychology, UCLA
XXX XXXX XXXXX
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563
Christensen@psych.ucla.edu
Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
FAX: (XXX) XXX-XXXX

Thu, May 10, 2007 at 4:08 PM

India Cutler <icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com>
Christensen, Andrew <Christensen@psych.ucla.edu>
To: India Cutler <icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com>

Hi India

You are welcome to use the questionnaire. I have attached a Word file that contains the questionnaire
and relevant information about it.

XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX, Ph.D.

94
 APPENDIX K.
APPROVAL: RELATIONSHIP ASSESSMENT SCALE (RAS)

May 11, 2007

India Cutler
P.O. Box 540542
Miami, FL 33054

Dear Ms. Cutler:

You have my permission to use the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) in your
research. I am the original author of the scale and the person who is appropriate to grant this
permission. The scale is in the public domain, and I am pleased that you wish to use it. I am
attaching a copy of the scale for your use. If you wish any further information, including relevant
reprints, please e-mail me your mailing address for postal mail. Thank you.

Sincerely,

XXXXX XXXXXX, Ph.D.

Paul Whitfield Horn Professor of Psychology
Department of Psychology
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX 79409-2051
Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
E-mail: s.hendrick@ttu.edu

Fri, May 11, 2007 at 11:05

Hendrick, S <X.XXXXXXX@ttu.edu> AM
To: India Cutler <icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com>
Cc: "Hendrick, S" <X.XXXXX@ttu.edu>
Dear Ms. Cutler,

You have my permission to use the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) in your research. I
am the original author of the scale and the person who is appropriate to grant this permission. The
scale is in the public domain, and I am pleased that you wish to use it. I am attaching a copy of the
scale for your use. If you wish any further information, including relevant reprints, please e-mail me
your mailing address for postal mail. But I would prefer that your university
accept this e-mail permission. Thank you.

Sincerely,

XXXXX.XXXXXX, Ph.D

95
 APPENDIX L.
REQUEST TO CONDUCT INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH

Capella University
225 South 6th Street, 9th Floor,
Minneapolis, MN 55402
1 (888) 227-3552

May 20, 2007

St. Thomas University

16400 NW 37th Avenue
Miami Gardens, FL 33054

RE: IRB, St. Thomas University

To Whom It May Concern;

I am a Ph.D. learner in the School of General Psychology under the direction of Dr.
Jeffrey Shen in the School of Harold Abel School of Psychology at Capella University. I
write this letter for the possibility of seeking the opportunity to conduct research with the
undergraduate young adult learners for my dissertation in fulfillment of my Philosophy of
Doctorate (Ph.D).

For my research study, I am attempting to explore how individual young adults’

attachment styles fulfill their communication patterns while obtaining relationship
satisfaction. I am studying individual participants through a Correlational study on
Attachment Styles, Communication Patterns, and Relationship Satisfaction in young
adults in romantic relationships [dating, engaged, or newly married] for at least one
month. The aim is to find out how individuals’ attachment styles and communication
patterns affect their relationship satisfaction. The projected title of my study is
Attachment Styles, Communication Patterns, and Relationship Satisfaction in
Heterosexual Individuals.

Thank you for your time and consideration in advance. I look forward to working with
the university and the learners.

Respectfully,

India L. Cutler
Tel: 786-251-3871
E-mail: icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com

96
 APPENDIX M.
LOCAL UNIVERSITY APPROVAL FOR HUMAN PARTICIPANTS

97
 APPENDIX. N.
INVITATION LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS

Capella University
225 South 6th Street, 9th Floor,
Minneapolis, MN 55402
1 (888) 227-3552
Dear Sir / Madam:

I am a Ph.D. candidate in the School of General Psychology under the direction of Dr.
Jeff Shen in the School of Harold Abel School of Psychology at Capella University. You
are being provided with a copy of this invitation letter for your possible voluntary
participation in this research study.
My research goal is to explore how individual’s adult attachment styles fulfill their
communication patterns while seeking relationship satisfaction. I am studying individual
participants through a quantitative and relational study on adult attachment styles,
communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction in romantic relationships. The
major aim is to find out how individuals’ adult attachment styles and communication
patterns affect their relationship satisfaction. The projected title of my study is
Attachment Styles, Communication Patterns, and Relationship Satisfaction in
Heterosexual Individuals.
As you voluntarily participate, you will be given this invitation letter to introduce you
to the research study and allow you to decide whether or not you want to further
participate in the research study by the principal investigator. Upon your voluntary
participation, the investigator will also submit your e-mail address into an electronic
database for confidentiality of receiving the surveys associated with this study. As a
participant, you will receive an informed consent form to assure that you the human
participant agreed to voluntarily participate in the research study. You will be asked to
read, understand the informed consent form as to admitting that you fully understand the
consent form and agreed to the terms and conditions by entering your name, date, and
time.
I will be recruiting about two hundred participants for this study. The human
participants will participate voluntarily and e-mail addresses will be entered in a drawing
to win one of three gift certificates as an incentive for participating in the research study.
The participants must be between 18 years old and 25 years old, be able to speak, read,
write, and express themselves in English fluently (however, English does not have to be
the participants only language spoken, read, or written), currently live in South Florida,
and involved in a heterosexual monogamous relationship for at least one month. Also,
each human participant will be asked to complete an Informed Consent Form,
Demographic Item, Adult Attachment Scale, Attachment Style Inventory,
Communication Pattern Questionnaire (short form), and Relationship Assessment Scale.

98
To participate in this study. Fluency is regarded as the ability to speak, read, and write
efficiently to express one's self. For this study, all participants must be able to express
themselves fluently in English. The entire study should take about 30 minutes to
complete.
Your participation in this study is totally voluntary; nevertheless, your participation in
self-report surveys will contribute to the success of this research and will be greatly
appreciated. Your participation will fill in a gap in the research literature and will
contribute valuable information to the knowledge on the adult attachment styles,
communication patterns, and relationship satisfaction contexts. All your responses would
be anonymous since no names or unique identifiers are required for the Demographic
Item, Adult Attachment Scale, Attachment Style Inventory, Communication Pattern
Questionnaire (short form), and Relationship Assessment Scale. However, your
identifying information, such as your informed consent form, will be kept confidential to
ensure (privacy and anonymity) of the extent allowed by law, ethical and moral ethics,
and you may simply indicate your desired e-mail address for interest in participation in
this study to the principal investigator. Before your participation in this study, you must
complete your informed consent form. After you print, sign and date the consent form
and the researcher has collected the consent form, your participation is accepted. As a
reminder, you can always request a copy of the informed consent form. I am located in
Miami Gardens, Florida therefore; if there are any questions with regards to this study,
please feel free to contact me at (786) 251-3871 or e-mail address at
icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com.
I would like to assure you that your consent to participate in this research study will
not affect your life or relationship, and that you have the right to not participate or
withdraw from participation at anytime without prejudice, penalty or loss of respect and
confidentiality. Finally, the results of the research study may be published, but your name
or e-mail addresses will not be used under any circumstances. In case you have any
questions about your rights as a human participant in this research, or should you feel you
have been placed at risk, you can contact Dr. Jeff Shen at Jeff.Shen@capella.edu and/or
the Institutional Review Board, through the Provost of Research for the Office of
Research at 1(888) 227-3552. Thank you for your consideration in participating in this
research study and deepest gratitude for your time, effort, and help in advance.

Sincerely,

India L. Cutler, Principal Investigator

99
 APPENDIX. O.
EXIT LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS

Capella University
225 South 6th Street, 9th Floor,
Minneapolis, MN 55402
1 (888) 227-3552

Dear Human Participants:

You are being provided with a copy of this exit participation letter for your participation
and completion in this research. As voluntarily participated, you were given an
invitation letter to introduce you to the research study and allow you to decide whether or
not you wanted to further participate in the research study by the principal investigator.
The investigator also submitted you with an Informed Consent Form to assure that you
the human participant agreed to voluntarily participate in the research study. You were
asked to read, understand, print, sign, and date the informed consent form as to admitting
that you fully understood the consent form and agreed to the terms and conditions.

For review, the principal investigator mentioned what the research attempts to explore
were how individuals adult attachment styles fulfill their communication patterns while
seeking relationship satisfaction, The aim is to find out how individuals’ adult attachment
styles and communication patterns influence their relationship satisfaction. The projected
title of the study is: Attachment Styles, Communication Patterns, and Relationship
Satisfaction in Heterosexual Individuals.

More so, all participants who volunteered to participate in the research through signing
the informed consent form understood that human participants will participate voluntarily
and with the chance at winning a gift certificate incentive. The participants agreed that he
or she was between 18 years old and 25 years old, able to speak, read, write, and express
themselves in English fluently (however, English does not have to be participants only
language spoken, read, or written), currently live in South Florida, and involved in a
heterosexual monogamous relationship for at least one month. Fluency is regarded as the
ability to speak, read, and write efficiently to express one's self. Therefore, for this study,
all participants must be able to express themselves fluently in English.

All human participants completed an Informed Consent Form, Demographic Data Item,
Adult Attachment Style, Relationship Questionnaire, Communication Pattern
Questionnaire (short form), and Relationship Assessment Scale as a participation
procedure for this study. Remember that your participation in this study was totally
voluntary; nevertheless, your participation in self-report surveys will contribute to the
success of this research and will always be greatly appreciated. Your participation will
fill in a gap in the research literature and will contribute valuable information to the
knowledge on the adult attachment styles, communication patterns, and relationship

100
satisfaction contexts. All your responses would be anonymous since no names are
required for the Demographic Data Item, Adult Attachment Style, Relationship
Questionnaire, Communication Pattern Questionnaire (short form), and Relationship
Assessment Scale.

However, your identifying information, such as your Informed Consent Form, will be
kept confidential while ensuring protection and safeguards to your (privacy and
anonymity) to the extent allowed by law, ethical, and moral ethics. Keep in mind that
you may simply send your further interest or concerns of your participation in this study
to me by e-mail. After your participation in this study, you are free to discuss the
assessment under your own discretion. Through your printed name, signature, and date
collected upon the consent form, you agreed to your voluntarily participation, and it was
accepted by the principal investigator. Another remainder, you can always request a copy
of the informed consent form. I am located in Miami, Florida therefore; if there are any
questions, please feel free to contact me at (786) 251-3871 or my e-mail address at
icutler.cu.edu@gmail.com. I would like to assure you that your consent to participate in
this study will not affect your life or relationship, and that you were told you had the right
to not participate or withdraw from participating at anytime without prejudice, penalty or
loss of respect and confidentiality, privacy, and anonymity. Finally, the results of the
research study may be published, but your name or any other identifiable information will
not be used or compromised under no circumstances.

In case you have any questions about your rights as a human participant in this research,
or should you feel you have been placed at risk or discomfort, you can contact Dr. Jeffrey
Shen at Jeff.Shen@capella.edu 614-404-0248 and/or the Institutional Review Board,
through William H. Percy, PhD, LP, Faculty Lead, Psychology Research Support,
Capella University, 225 S. 6th Street, 9th Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55402. 612-879-6600,
Bill.Percy@Capella.edu.

For local help participants can call the Switchboard of Miami, the community’s only 24-
hour free information/ a crisis/referral/phone counseling hotline. All individuals are
trained counselors who speak English, Spanish and Creole ready to listen and to guide
callers to the appropriate services within the Miami South Florida community.
Participants can call (305) 358-HELP or (305) 358-4357.

Thank you for your consideration in participating in this research study; for your time,
effort, and help is valued.

Sincerely,

India L. Cutler
Principal Investigator

101
 APPENDIX P.
SURVEYMONKEY PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY

Privacy Policy
Last Updated 5/2/2008

TRUSTe Privacy Program

SurveyMonkey.com is a licensee of the TRUSTe Privacy Program. TRUSTe is an

independent, non-profit organization whose mission is to build user’s trust and
confidence in the Internet by promoting the use of fair information practices. This privacy
statement covers the Web site http://www.surveymonkey.com. Because this Web site
wants to demonstrate its commitment to your privacy, it has agreed to disclose its
information practices and have its privacy practices reviewed for compliance by
TRUSTe. If you have questions or concerns regarding this statement, you should first
contact Chris Finley at support@surveymonkey.com. If you do not receive
acknowledgement of your inquiry or your inquiry has not been satisfactorily addressed,
you should contact TRUSTe at
http://www.truste.org/consumers/watchdog_complaint.php TRUSTe will then serve as a
liaison with us to resolve your concerns. SurveyMonkey.com complies with the EU Safe
Harbor framework as set forth by the Department of Commerce regarding the collection,
use, and retention of data from the European Union. This list can be found at:
http://web.ita.doc.gov/safeharbor/SHList.nsf/WebPages/Oregon.

Information Collection

You may view some areas of our site for free and register for a free account. We collect
information such as your name, address, e-mail. We use this information to contact you
about the services on our site in which you have expressed interest.

You have the option to provide demographic information (such as income level and
gender) to us; we encourage you to submit this information so we can provide you a more
personalized experience on our site.

If you purchase a product or service from us, we request certain personally identifiable
information from you on our order form. You must provide contact information (such as
name, e-mail, and shipping address) and financial information (such as credit card
number, expiration date).

We use this information for billing purposes and to fill your orders. If we have trouble
processing an order, we will use this information to contact you.
102
When you register for SurveyMonkey.com, you will receive a short welcome e-mail. If
you opt to receive newsletters from us, you will receive a monthly e-mail. As a paid
subscriber, you will receive e-mails regarding your account status and billing.

We will not use the information collected from your surveys in any way, shape, or form.
In addition, any other material you provide us (including images, e-mail addresses, etc.)
will be held in the strictest confidence.

In addition, we do not collect personally identifiable information about you except when
you specifically provide this information on a voluntary basis. We will make every effort
to ensure that whatever information you provide will be maintained in a secure
environment.

Log Files

As is true of most Web sites, we gather certain information automatically and store it in
log files. This information includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, browser type,
internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp,
and click stream data.

We use this information, which does not identify individual users, to analyze trends, to
administer the site, to track users’ movements around the site and to gather demographic
information about our user base as a whole.

We do not link this automatically-collected data to personally identifiable information.

Cookies

"Cookies" are small text files a website can use to recognize repeat users.
SurveyMonkey.com uses cookies to recognize visitors and more quickly provide
personalized content or grant you unimpeded access to the website. With cookies
enabled, you will not need to fill in password or contact information.

Information gathered through cookies also helps us measure use of our website. Cookie
data allow us to track usage behavior and compile data that we can use to improve the
site. This data will be used in aggregate form; no specific users will be tracked.

Generally, cookies work by assigning a unique number to the user that has no meaning
outside of the Web site that he or she is visiting. You can easily turn off cookies. Most
browsers have a feature that allows the user to refuse cookies or issues a warning when
cookies are being sent. However, our site will not function properly without cookies.
Enabling cookies ensures a smooth, efficient visit to our website.

We use a third-party tracking service that uses cookies to track non-personally

identifiable information about visitors to our site in the aggregate to capture usage and

103
volume statistics to help us improve our site. We have no access or control over these
cookies.

This privacy statement covers the use of cookies by www.surveymonkey.com only and
does not cover the use of cookies by any third party.

Information Use

SurveyMonkey.com reserves the right to perform statistical analyses of user behavior and
characteristics. We do this in order to measure interest in and use of the various areas of
the website.

SurveyMonkey.com collects IP addresses for system administration and record keeping.

Your IP address is automatically assigned to your computer when you use the World
Wide Web. Our servers record incoming IP addresses. The IP addresses are analyzed
only in aggregate; no connection is made between you and your computer's IP address.
By tracking IP addresses, we can determine which sites refer the most people to
SurveyMonkey.com. (Think of an IP address like your zip code; it tells us in general
terms where you're from.)

Communications from the Site

Service-related Announcements

We will send you strictly service-related announcements on rare occasions when it is

necessary to do so. For instance, if our service is temporarily suspended for maintenance,
we might send you an e-mail.

Generally, you may not opt-out of these communications, which are not promotional in
nature. If you do not wish to receive them, you have the option to deactivate your
account.

Customer Service

Based upon the personally identifiable information you provide us, we will send you a
welcoming e-mail to verify your username and password. We will also communicate
with you in response to your inquiries, to provide the services you request, and to manage
your account. We will communicate with you by e-mail or telephone, in accordance with
your wishes.

Newsletters

If you wish to subscribe to our newsletter(s), we will use your name and e-mail address to
send the newsletter to you. Out of respect for your privacy, we provide you a way to
unsubscribe. Please see the “Opting out” section.

104
Sending E-mails on User’s Behalf

We also send survey invitation e-mails on behalf of our customers. The customer's e-mail
list is stored on our system, but is not used by SurveyMonkey.com in any other way. The
e-mails sent on our customer's behalf appear to come from the customer's e-mail address.

Surveys or Contests

From time-to-time we may provide you the opportunity to participate in contests or

surveys on our site. If you participate, we will request certain personally identifiable
information from you. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary
and you therefore have a choice whether or not to disclose this information. The
requested information typically includes contact information (such as name and shipping
address), and demographic information (such as zip code).

We use this information to notify contest winners and to monitor site traffic or
personalize the site (in the case of anonymous information collected in surveys).

Testimonials

We post testimonials from time to time. We always receive permission to post prior to
posting.

Sharing Information

Service Providers

We use other third parties to provide billing services on our site. When you purchase a
service from us, we will share contact and credit card information as necessary for the
third party to provide that service.

These third parties are prohibited from using your personally identifiable information for
any other purpose including their own marketing purposes.

Opting Out

Upon request, SurveyMonkey.com will allow any user to opt out of our monthly
newsletter. You can contact us through our Help Center or follow the unsubscribe
instructions included in each promotional e-mail sent to you including the newsletter.

For more information regarding opting out of any mailing from SurveyMonkey.com,
please visit our Help Center.

105
 Links to Other Sites

This Web site contains links to other sites that are not owned or controlled by
SurveyMonkey.com. Please be aware that we, SurveyMonkey.com, are not responsible
for the privacy practices of such other sites.

We encourage you to be aware when you leave our site and to read the privacy statements
of each and every Web site that collects personally identifiable information.

This privacy statement applies only to information collected by this Web site.

Access to Personally Identifiable Information

If your personally identifiable information changes, or if you no longer desire our service,
you may correct, update, delete or deactivate it by making the change on our My Account
page or by e-mailing our Customer Support at support@surveymonkey.com or by
contacting us by telephone or postal mail at the contact information listed below. We will
respond to any request for access within 30 days.

Legal Disclaimer

We reserve the right to disclose your personally identifiable information as required by

law and when we believe that disclosure is necessary to protect our rights and/or to
comply with a judicial proceeding, court order, or legal process served on our Web site

General Security Policy

SurveyMonkey.com is aware of your privacy concerns and strives to collect only as much
data as is required to make your SurveyMonkey experience as efficient and satisfying as
possible, in the most unobtrusive manner as possible.

The security of your personal information is important to us. When you enter sensitive
information (such as credit card number and/or social security number) on our
registration or order forms, we encrypt that information using secure socket layer
technology (SSL).

We follow generally accepted industry standards to protect the personal information

submitted to us, both during transmission and once we receive it. No method of
transmission over the Internet, or method of electronic storage, is 100% secure, however.
Therefore, while we strive to use commercially acceptable means to protect your personal
information, we cannot guarantee its absolute security.

If you have any questions about security on our Web site, you can send e-mail us at
support@surveymonkey.com

106
 Changes in this Privacy Statement

If we decide to change our privacy policy, we will post those changes to this privacy
statement, the home page, and other places we deem appropriate so that you are aware of
what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we
disclose it.

We reserve the right to modify this privacy statement at any time, so please review it
frequently. If we make material changes to this policy, we will notify you here, by e-mail,
or by means of a prominent notice on our home page.

Contact Us

If you have any questions or suggestions regarding our privacy policy, please contact us
at:

Online Support: http://www.surveymonkey.com/HelpCenter

Phone: 503-225-1202
Fax: 503-225-1200
E-mail: support@surveymonkey.com
Mailing Address: SurveyMonkey.com
815 NW 13th Ave. Suite D
Portland, OR 97209

107
 APPENDIX Q.
SURVEYMONKEY ONE PERSON/ONE COMPUTER POLICY

Can I limit the survey to one response per respondent?

You have the ability to control how many responses a respondent can submit through two
different options:

• Option 1: Through the anonymous link delivered by your own e-mail client (A
Web Link collector).
• Option 2: Through the link delivered on your behalf by SurveyMonkey (An E-
mail Invitation collector).

Please note: While the Web Link can try to limit the number of responses per
computer, the E-mail Invitation collector will truly allow only ONE response at all
times. To learn more, please click here.
Option 1: Web Link Collector and Survey Settings:
Through the use of a Web Link collector, the survey can set a limit of allowing only one
response per computer by placing a cookie on the individual's browser.
Please note! Respondents can still take this link to a different computer or clear the
cookies on their current browser and submit a second response. This link is cookie
dependent to the web browser.
Setting 1: Allow Multiple Responses?
Once the Web Link is created, access the Change Settings button to configure the
settings.
• The first option is to choose if you want to Allow multiple responses?
• In this case, select: No, only allow one response per computer.

Setting 2: Allow Responses to be edited?

Next configure if you want the respondents to be able to edit their responses. This is
established under the Allow responses to be edited? option.
You can decide if you want respondents to be able to edit or not edit through the
following methods:

108
What do these settings mean?
When you configure the collector settings, they enable you to Allow Responses to be
Edited according to the following criteria.
These three options will be active only if you have the link configured to allow ONE
response:

I. No: Respondents can only progress forward. No one can move back to previous pages
to edit a response. The Previous button will be removed from the bottom of the page for
respondents. It will be visible while in the Preview Mode in the Edit Survey section.

II. Yes: (Option 1) Respondents can edit or go back to a previous page while taking the
survey or until it is finished.
Please note: This gives respondents the option of going back and editing or updating
existing responses until the survey is finished. With this setting and once the Done button
is clicked, the respondent will not be able to re-enter the survey.

III. Yes: (Option 2) Respondents can come back at any time to edit or finish an
incomplete survey.
Clicking the link opens the survey and permits editing even after the Done button has
been clicked or the browser window has been closed. This link MUST be accessed on the
same computer from which the cookies have not been cleared.

Important! Cookies must be enabled to take a survey using this

collector type!
• Some browsers do offer restricted cookie settings for users concerned about
their privacy.
• If the respondent's browser is set to dump cookies each time the browser is
closed, then these settings will not work. The cookie will be refreshed and a
new or blank survey will open the next time the link is accessed.

Option 2: E-mail Invitation Collector and Survey Settings:

Only this option truly allows one response. Even if the link is taken to a different
computer after the initial response, it will not allow a new one. This setting is not
controlled by cookies:
109
 • With the E-mail Invitation collector, the recipient's information is encoded to the
survey link that is sent to the intended recipient. No matter where the recipient
goes, s/he can use that link to access his/her one survey response.
• This link will not allow multiple responses.

If you set a collector to have SurveyMonkey send an e-mail invite on your behalf, the e-
mail message containing the survey URL is now link related and not cookie related. The
benefits of this function include the following:
1. If a respondent starts a survey and needs to exit early, then he/she can access the
e-mail message later from a different computer. Many people may start a survey
at work and then want to finish it later at home.
2. No one can submit additional responses. Only one response is allowed at all times
with this method. The settings will not allow you to enable more than one
response for the link. If you do need a person to answer more than once, consider
the following option: Multiple Responses for E-mail Invitation Collectors

110
 APPENDIX R.
SURVEYMONKEY TERM OF USE

Terms of Use

ANY PERSON OR ENTITY ("User") ACCESSING THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM

WEB SITE (the "Site" or "Service") OR ANY OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED
HEREIN AGREES TO AND IS BOUND BY THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF THIS SURVEYMONKEY.COM WEB SITE TERMS OF USE
("Agreement"):

This Agreement is a legal agreement between the User and SurveyMonkey.com

Corporation for the SurveyMonkey.com Software Application Services you subscribe to.
These Software Application Services include computer software, data storage
mechanisms, databases and related designs, printed materials, and online or electronic
documentation (Software Application Services, Application Services, or Software). By
using the Software Application Services, you agree to be bound by the terms of this
Customer Agreement. If you do not agree to the terms of this Customer Agreement, you
are not authorized to use the Software Application Services.

1. PAYMENT

You agree to pay all applicable charges under this Agreement, including any applicable
taxes or charges imposed by any government entity, and that SurveyMonkey.com may
change its minimum pricing at any time. User must supply SurveyMonkey.com with
correct credit card information, and any changes in credit card validity or expiration date
must be updated. SurveyMonkey.com will automatically renew and charge User's
account every month, quarter, or year for subscriptions. The renewal charge will be equal
to the original subscription price, unless SurveyMonkey.com notifies User otherwise in
advance. If the credit card cannot be processed for any reason, SurveyMonkey.com
reserves the right to cancel the Service.

2. MEMBER ACCOUNT, PASSWORD AND SECURITY

You will receive a password and account designation upon completing the Service's
registration process. You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of the
password and account, and are fully responsible for all activities that occur under your
password or account. You agree to (a) immediately notify SurveyMonkey.com of any
unauthorized use of your password or account or any other breach of security, and (b)
ensure that you exit from your account at the end of each session. SurveyMonkey.com
cannot and will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your failure to comply
with this Section.

111
3. MEMBER CONDUCT

You understand that all information, data, text, software, music, sound, photographs,
graphics, video, messages or other materials ("Content"), whether publicly posted or
privately transmitted, are the sole responsibility of the person from which such Content
originated. This means that you, and not SurveyMonkey.com, are entirely responsible for
all Content that you upload, post, e-mail, transmit or otherwise make available via the
Service. SurveyMonkey.com does not control the Content posted via the Service and, as
such, does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of such Content. You
understand that by using the Service, you may be exposed to Content that is offensive,
indecent or objectionable. Under no circumstances will SurveyMonkey.com be liable in
any way for any Content, including, but not limited to, for any errors or omissions in any
Content, or for any loss or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of any
Content posted, e-mailed, transmitted or otherwise made available via the Service.

User agrees not to attempt to damage, deny service to, hack, crack, reverse-engineer, or
otherwise interfere (collectively, "Interfere") with SurveyMonkey.com's web site in any
manner. If User in any way Interferes with SurveyMonkey.com's web site, User agrees to
pay all damages incurred by SurveyMonkey.com, including any consequential damages,
and agrees that the measure of hard to determine damages will be the highest estimate of
damages as provided by SurveyMonkey.com. User's Interference with
SurveyMonkey.com's web site relieves SurveyMonkey.com of any of its contractual or
other legal obligations to User, including SurveyMonkey.com's obligations under its
Privacy Policy. SurveyMonkey.com will cooperate with the authorities in prosecuting
any User who Interferes with SurveyMonkey.com's web site, attempts to defraud
SurveyMonkey.com, or attempts to defraud credit card companies or any other parties
through User's use of SurveyMonkey.com's web site or services.

You agree to not use the Service to:

• upload, post, e-mail, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that is
unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar,
obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or
otherwise objectionable;
• harm minors in any way;
• impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a
SurveyMonkey.com official, forum leader, guide or host, or falsely state or
otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity;
• upload, post, e-mail, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that you
do not have a right to make available under any law or under contractual or
fiduciary relationships (such as inside information, proprietary and confidential
information learned or disclosed as part of employment relationships or under
nondisclosure agreements);

112
 • upload, post, e-mail, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that
infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights
("Rights") of any party;
• upload, post, e-mail, transmit or otherwise make available any unsolicited or
unauthorized advertising, promotional materials, "junk mail," "spam," "chain
letters," "pyramid schemes," or any other form of solicitation;
• interfere with or disrupt the Service or servers or networks connected to the
Service, or disobey any requirements, procedures, policies or regulations of
networks connected to the Service;
• intentionally or unintentionally violate any applicable local, state, national or
international law, including, but not limited to, regulations promulgated by the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any rules of any national or other
securities exchange, including, without limitation, the New York Stock Exchange,
the American Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ, and any regulations having the
force of law;

Violation of any of the items in this Section relieves SurveyMonkey.com of any of its
contractual or other legal obligations to User, including SurveyMonkey.com's obligations
under its Privacy Policy.

SurveyMonkey.com reserves the right to refuse any or all service to any User for any
reason, at any time, at SurveyMonkey.com's sole discretion. User agrees that
SurveyMonkey.com may block its IP address or addresses at any time, and at
SurveyMonkey.com's sole discretion, thereby disallowing User's continued use of
SurveyMonkey.com's web site.

4. COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT AND LAWS

You shall use the survey tool only in compliance with this Terms of Use, the FTC's
CAN-SPAM Law, and all other applicable U.S., state, local, and international laws
(including, but not limited to, policies and laws related to spamming, copyright and
trademark infringement, defamation, privacy, obscenity, and child protective e-mail
address registry laws).

You also agree not to intentionally or unintentionally violate any applicable local, state,
national, or international law, including, but not limited to, regulations promulgated by
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any rules of any national or other
securities exchange, including, without limitation, the New York Stock Exchange, the
American Stock Exchange, or the NASDAQ, and any regulations having the force of law.

Although SurveyMonkey has no obligation to review the content provided by you or your
use of the Survey Tool, SurveyMonkey may do so and may block any e-mail messages
and or terminate any use of the Survey Tool that SurveyMonkey believes may be (or is
alleged to be) in violation of the foregoing.

113
You also agree not to upload survey links to message boards or newsgroups without
express permission.

5. ANTI-SPAM

E-mail and Prohibited Content

E-mail messages sent in connection with the Survey Tool must contain an "unsubscribe"
link that allows subscribers to remove themselves from your e-mail messages. You
acknowledge and agree that you will not hide, disable, or remove or attempt to hide,
disable, or remove the opt-out link from the e-mail invitation. You will actively manage
and process unsubscribe requests received by you directly within ten days of submission,
and update your e-mail lists and address books to reflect the unsubscribe requests. You
are responsible for ensuring that during use of the Survey Tool your e-mail messages do
not generate a number of spam complaints in excess of industry standards. If
SurveyMonkey determines that your level of spam complaints is higher than industry
standards, SurveyMonkey, at its sole discretion, has the right to terminate your use of its
Survey Tool.

Permission Lists Only

SurveyMonkey has a zero-tolerance spam policy. Subscriber accounts will be terminated

for sending unsolicited e-mail messages. This means that all recipients sent to must have
opted in to receiving communications from you, the sender.

You can only use SurveyMonkey to send e-mails to lists of people that gave you
permission to e-mail them. If you don't have proof that each recipient on your list opted
in for your e-mails, don't import them into SurveyMonkey.

• We prohibit the use of third-party, purchased, rented, or harvested mailing lists.

SurveyMonkey will terminate accounts violating the foregoing.
• You cannot mail to newsgroups, message boards, distribution lists, or unsolicited
e-mail addresses.
• You agree that you shall not utilize the Survey Tool to send any commercial
electronic mail messages (as defined in the Act of 2003) to any recipient who has
opted out, unsubscribed, or otherwise objected to receiving such messages from
you or another party on whose behalf you may be commissioned. The CAN-
SPAM Act outlines requirements for sending out commercial e-mails. These rules
govern the Internet by United States law. A brief description of the CAN-SPAM
Act follows:
1. Bans false of misleading header information. Requires valid "reply" and
"from" addresses. These must be accurate and identify the person who
initiated the e-mail.
2. Prohibits deceptive subject lines. The subject line cannot mislead the
recipient about the contents or subject matter of the message.

114
 3. Requires the e-mail to provide recipients with a valid opt-out method.
You must provide a return e-mail address or another Internet-based
response mechanism that allows a recipient to ask you not to send future
e-mail messages to that e-mail address, and you must honor the requests.
You may create a "menu" of choices to allow a recipient to opt out of
certain types of messages, but you must include the option to end any
commercial messages from the sender.

Any opt-out mechanism you offer must be able to process opt-out requests
for at least thirty days after you send your commercial e-mail. When you
receive an opt-out request, the law gives you ten business days to stop
sending e-mail to the requestor's e-mail address. You cannot help another
entity send e-mail to that address, or have another entity send e-mail on
your behalf to that address. Finally, it's illegal for you to sell or transfer
the e-mail addresses of people who choose not to receive your e-mail,
even in the form of a mailing list, unless you transfer the addresses so
another entity can comply with the law.

4. Include physical mailing address. You message must contain clear and
conspicuous notice that the message is an advertisement or solicitation and
that the recipient can opt out of receiving more commercial e-mail from
you. It also must include your valid physical postal address.

Reporting Spam

If you suspect that SurveyMonkey.com has been used to send spam, please contact us
immediately at abuse@surveymonkey.com and we will investigate accordingly.

6. MODIFICATIONS TO SERVICE

SurveyMonkey.com reserves the right at any time and from time to time to modify or
discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the Service (or any part thereof) with or without
notice. You agree that SurveyMonkey.com shall not be liable to you or to any third party
for any modification, suspension or discontinuance of the Service.

You agree that SurveyMonkey.com has no responsibility or liability for the deletion or
failure to store any survey data or other Content maintained or transmitted by the Service.
You acknowledge that SurveyMonkey.com reserves the right to delete accounts that are
inactive for an extended period of time. You further acknowledge that
SurveyMonkey.com reserves the right to change these general practices and limits at any
time, in its sole discretion, with or without notice.

115
7. COPYRIGHTS

The Software Application Services are protected by copyright laws and international
copyright treaties, as well as other intellectual property laws and treaties. The Software
Application Services are licensed, not sold.

All title and copyrights in and to the Software are owned by SurveyMonkey.com or its
suppliers. All title and intellectual property rights in and to the content which may be
accessed through use of the Software Application Services is the property of the
respective content owner and also may be protected by applicable copyright or other
intellectual property laws and treaties.

8. LINKS TO THIRD PARTIES

SurveyMonkey.com makes no claims or representations about any Web Site not under
SurveyMonkey's control that a User may access from SurveyMonkey.com's web site-- by
link, frame, or any other means ("Linked Site"). Any link, frame, or any other means to
access any Linked Site provided by SurveyMonkey.com or otherwise on
SurveyMonkey.com's web site does not constitute SurveyMonkey.com's endorsement,
recommendation, or acceptance of any responsibility for the content of that Linked Site
or the operators of that Linked Site.

9. LIABILITY DISCLAIMER

THE INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, AND SERVICES INCLUDED IN

OR AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES
MAY INCLUDE INACCURACIES OR TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS. CHANGES
ARE PERIODICALLY MADE TO THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES
AND TO THE INFORMATION THEREIN. SURVEYMONKEY.COM AND/OR ITS
RESPECTIVE SUPPLIERS MAY MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR CHANGES IN
SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES AT ANY TIME.

SURVEYMONKEY.COM CORPORATION AND/OR ITS RESPECTIVE SUPPLIERS

MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT THE SUITABILITY, RELIABILITY,
AVAILABILITY, TIMELINESS, LACK OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL
COMPONENTS AND ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION, SOFTWARE,
PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS CONTAINED WITHIN THE
SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES FOR ANY PURPOSE. ALL SUCH
INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED
GRAPHICS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND.
SURVEYMONKEY.COM AND/OR ITS RESPECTIVE SUPPLIERS HEREBY
DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS WITH REGARD TO THIS
INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED
GRAPHICS, INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS OF

116
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE,
WORKMANLIKE EFFORT, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT.

YOU SPECIFICALLY AGREE THAT SURVEYMONKEY.COM SHALL NOT BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR
TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA, ANY MATERIAL OR DATA SENT OR RECEIVED
OR NOT SENT OR RECEIVED, OR ANY TRANSACTIONS ENTERED INTO
THROUGH A SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITE/SERVICE. YOU SPECIFICALLY
AGREE THAT SURVEYMONKEY.COM IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE FOR
ANY THREATENING, DEFAMATORY, OBSCENE, OFFENSIVE OR ILLEGAL
CONTENT OR CONDUCT OF ANY OTHER PARTY OR ANY INFRINGEMENT OF
ANOTHER'S RIGHTS, INCLUDING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS. YOU
SPECIFICALLY AGREE THAT SURVEYMONKEY.COM IS NOT RESPONSIBLE
FOR ANY CONTENT SENT USING AND/OR INCLUDED IN A
SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITE/SERVICE BY ANY THIRD PARTY.

IN NO EVENT SHALL SURVEYMONKEY.COM AND/OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE

LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING,
WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS,
ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR
PERFORMANCE OF THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES, WITH THE
DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES
OR RELATED SERVICES, THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE
SERVICES, OR FOR ANY INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES
AND RELATED GRAPHICS OBTAINED THROUGH THE
SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES, OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF
THE USE OF THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES, WHETHER BASED
ON CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE,
EVEN IF SURVEYMONKEY.COM OR ANY OF ITS SUPPLIERS HAS BEEN
ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES. BECAUSE SOME
STATES/JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION
OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, THE
ABOVE LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED
WITH ANY PORTION OF THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES, OR
WITH ANY OF THESE TERMS OF USE, YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY
IS TO DISCONTINUE USING THE SURVEYMONKEY.COM SITES/SERVICES.

If for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction finds any provision or portion of the
Terms of Use to be unenforceable, the remainder of the Terms of Use will continue in
full force and effect. These Terms of Use constitute the entire agreement between the
parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes and replaces all prior or
contemporaneous understandings or agreements, written or oral, regarding such subject
matter. Any waiver of any provision of the Terms of Use will be effective only if in
writing and signed by SurveyMonkey.com Corporation.

117
 APPENDIX S.
TABLE 1.

Table 1. Summary of the Participants’ Responses to the Demographic Data

Characteristics Percentage
Age 18 31.0%
19 28.5%
20 13.5%
21 8.0%
22 3.0%
23 6.0%
24 3.5%
25 6.5%
Gender Male 50.0%
Female 50.0%
Ethnic Background Caucasian 32.5%
Native-American 1.5%
Black/African Descent 38.5%
Asian/Pacific-Islander 0.5%
Hispanic-Latino 27.0%
Arabic/Middle-Eastern 0.0%
Other 0.0%
Education Level Freshmen 46.0%
Sophomore 36.0%
Junior 10.0%
Senior 8.0%
Relationship Status Dating (Monogamously) 94.0%
Engaged 3.0%
Newly Married 3.5%
Relationship Length 1-6 Months 39.5%
6-12 Months 34.5%
1 Year or More 26.0%
Living with Partner Yes 14.0%
No 86.0%

Note. The number of total participants that responded, N= 240

118
 APPENDIX T.
TABLE 2.

Table 2. Correlation of the Adult Attachment Style (AAS) & Communication Pattern
Questionnaire (CPQ)
Communication Communication Communication
Communication Pattern Pattern Pattern Communication
Pattern Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Pattern
Questionnaire Mutual Man Demand Woman Questionnaire
Mutual Constructive Woman Demand Man Total Demand
Avoidance Communication Withdraw Withdraw Withdraw
Adult

Attachment

Scale_ .287** .189** .132* .161* .176**

Dependent

Adult

Attachment

Scale_ .192** .061 .042 -.026 .005

Anxiety

Adult

Attachment

Scale .350** .184** .002 .166* .109

_Close

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

119
 APPENDIX U.
TABLE 3.

Table 3. ANOVA of Adult Attachment Styles (AAS) & Communication Patterns (CPQ) of
heterosexual committed adults.
Sum of Mean
Squares Df Square F Sig.
Communication Pattern Between Groups 6.521 2 3.260 1.168 .313
Questionnaire_ Within Groups 661.475 237 2.791
Mutual Avoidance
Total 667.996 239
Communication Pattern Between Groups 72.687 2 36.344 1.853 .159
Questionnaire_ Mutual Within Groups 4649.296 237 19.617
Constructive
Total 4721.983 239
Communication
Communication Pattern Between Groups 25.203 2 12.602 1.268 .283
Questionnaire _ Within Groups 2354.780 237 9.936
Man Demand Women
Total 2379.983 239
Withdraw
Communication Pattern Between Groups 41.253 2 20.627 1.400 .249
Questionnaire_ Women Within Groups 3490.747 237 14.729
Demand
Total 3532.000 239
Man Withdraw
Communication Pattern Between
57.135 2 28.567 .825 .439
Questionnaire_ Groups
Total Demand Withdraw Within
8202.849 237 34.611
Groups
Total 8259.983 239

120
 APPENDIX V.
TABLE 4.

Table 4. Correlations between Adult Attachment Style (AAS) & Relationship

Assessment Scale (RAS)

Relations
hip
Assessme
nt Scale
Adult Pearson
Attachme Correlation
nt Scale_ .042
Dependen
t

Adult Pearson
Attachme Correlation
.121
nt Scale_
Anxiety

Adult Pearson
Attachme Correlation
.098
nt Scale_
Close

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

121
 APPENDIX W.
TABLE 5.

Table 5. Correlations of Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) & Communication Pattern

Questionnaire (CPQ)

Relationship Relationship Relationship Relationship

Questionnaire Questionnaire_ Questionnaire_ Questionnaire_
_ Secure Dismissing Preoccupied Fearful
Communication Pearson
Pattern Correlation
Questionnaire_ .282** .022 .407** .053
Mutual
Avoidance
Communication Pearson
Pattern Correlation
Questionnaire_
.545** -.112 .044 -.049
Mutual
Constructive
Communication
Communication Pearson
Pattern Correlation
Questionnaire_
-.061 .207** .231** .142*
Man Demand
Woman
Withdraw
Communication Pearson
Pattern Correlation
Questionnaire_ -.097 .220** .168** .025
Woman Demand
Man Withdraw
Communication Pearson
Pattern Correlation
Questionnaire_ -.096 .255** .234** .093
Total Demand
Withdraw

122
 APPENDIX X.
TABLE 6

Table 6. Stepwise multiple regression analysis of AAS, RQ, CPQ, Length of relationship
& RAS Coefficients (a)
Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients T Sig.
Std. Std.
B Error Beta B Error
1 (Constant) 2.559 .096 26.600 .000
RQ_A .197 .021 .522 9.445 .000
2 (Constant) 2.264 .107 21.161 .000
RQ_A .129 .024 .342 5.477 .000
CPQ_MCC .052 .010 .330 5.289 .000
3 (Constant) 2.632 .137 19.149 .000
RQ_A .101 .024 .267 4.227 .000
CPQ_MCC .055 .010 .347 5.718 .000
RQ_B -.091 .022 -.218 -4.076 .000
4 (Constant) 2.988 .164 18.212 .000
RQ_A .121 .024 .322 5.089 .000
CPQ_MCC .051 .009 .325 5.472 .000
RQ_B -.093 .022 -.224 -4.312 .000
RQ_C -.080 .021 -.192 -3.751 .000
5 (Constant) 2.614 .225 11.595 .000
RQ_A .112 .024 .297 4.677 .000
CPQ_MCC .052 .009 .330 5.610 .000
RQ_B -.101 .022 -.244 -4.680 .000
RQ_C -.092 .022 -.221 -4.250 .000
AAS_ Anx .023 .010 .124 2.392 .018
a Dependent Variable: Rela_Satis

AAS_ANX = Adult Attachment Scale_ Anxiety

CPQ_MCC = Communication Pattern Questionnaire_ Mutual Constructive
Communication

RQ_A = Relationship Questionnaire_ Secure

RQ_B = Relationship Questionnaire_ Dismissing

RQ_C = Relationship Questionnaire_ Preoccupied

Rela_ Satis = Relationship Satisfaction

123
 APPENDIX Y.
TABLE 7

Table 7. ANOVAf
¤ Mean
Model Sum of Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 32.136 1 32.136 89.211 .000a
Residual 85.733 238 .360
Total 117.868 239
2 Regression 41.188 2 20.594 63.651 .000b
Residual 76.680 237 .324
Total 117.868 239
3 Regression 46.231 3 15.410 50.768 .000c
Residual 71.637 236 .304
Total 117.868 239
4 Regression 50.277 4 12.569 43.701 .000d
Residual 67.591 235 .288
Total 117.868 239
5 Regression 51.890 5 10.378 36.807 .000e
Residual 65.978 234 .282
Total 117.868 239
a. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A

b. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC

c. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC, RQ_B

d. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC, RQ_B, RQ_C

e. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC, RQ_B, RQ_C, AAS_Anx

f. Dependent Variable: Rela_Satis

AAS_ANX = Adult Attachment Scale_ Anxiety

CPQ_MCC = Communication Pattern Questionnaire_ Mutual Constructive
Communication

RQ_A = Relationship Questionnaire_ Secure

RQ_B = Relationship Questionnaire_ Dismissing

RQ_C = Relationship Questionnaire_ Preoccupied

Rela_ Satis = Relationship Satisfaction

124
 APPENDIX Z.
TABLE 8

Table 8. Model Summaryf

Adjusted R Std. Error of
Model R R Square Square the Estimate
a
1 .522 .273 .270 .600184
b
2 .591 .349 .344 .568811
3 .626c .392 .385 .550950
d
4 .653 .427 .417 .536304
e
5 .664 .440 .428 .530997
a. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A
b. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC
c. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC, RQ_B
d. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC, RQ_B, RQ_C
e. Predictors: (Constant), RQ_A, CPQ_MCC, RQ_B, RQ_C, AAS_Anx
f. Dependent Variable: Rela_Satis

AAS_ANX = Adult Attachment Scale_ Anxiety

CPQ_MCC = Communication Pattern Questionnaire_ Mutual Constructive
Communication

RQ_A = Relationship Questionnaire_ Secure

RQ_B = Relationship Questionnaire_ Dismissing

RQ_C = Relationship Questionnaire_ Preoccupied

Rela_ Satis = Relationship Satisfaction

125