89 (SD = dos.27); 4.94 (SD = dos.97), each other groups differing between six months and you may eleven several years of relationship; eight.76 (SD = 4.01), between a couple of and you can 19 many years; and you can (SD = 4.82), between below per year and you will 29 ages. 8%) and you can lived with family, while you are those people living with its partners was indeed primarily functioning people (69.2%), of which 53% got college or university otherwise postgraduate stages. Of official partnership people, 67% had college or university otherwise blog post-scholar degrees, of which 89.8% was functioning, 2% retired and 8.2% unemployed. The functional state towards hitched participants are comparable: 89.5% was basically functioning, 2.9% were resigned and you may six.3% was in fact out of work, and you can step 1.3% called another a job standing. Inside category, 62.5% of your people got college or postgraduate level.
Matchmaking Quality, chose to confirm conditions authenticity, was counted into Dating Score Means–Changed (RRF-R; Davis, 1996, adapt
The information exhibited is actually built-up inside framework away from bigger look ideas, which contained an in depth sociodemographic and you will relationship research, as well as other scales inside the extent regarding romantic relationships.
Private commitment is actually skout analyzed according to the Portuguese variation (Desk step 1) of one’s less form of the brand new Time and effort Scale (Stanley, 1986), that has been translated depending on the following translation and retroversion tips: shortly after permission was given from the copywriter, the initial scale is translated of the several experts in industry, these two translations had been exposed to retroversion of the a couple of pros, that bilingual and one experienced in the aid of the fresh English language; finally, per type is actually than the brand-new scale, opting for the use of the newest terms and facts having deeper proximity to it. New Portuguese type therefore contained the new fourteen totally new affairs and you can a similar answer level and you will are named, once deliberation because of the team, the private Commitment Scale (‘Escala de- Compromisso Pessoal’–ECP). Toward final phase of the translation process, the latest tool are administered to 3 players on the goal of confirming the newest adequateness of your own language therefore the unambiguous understanding of the things, which have been discussed for the users immediately after applying of brand new survey. Because there have been zero comments saying if not, the things stayed the same.
With respect to the overall lifetime of the relationship, the typical, in years, to your other statuses discussed was, respectively: dos
by Lind, 2008). Resulting from a revision of the original Davis (1996, cited in Lind, 2008) scale, this instrument is intended to measure relationship quality perception, with the expectation that, according to the theoretical assumptions, both scales will positively correlate. The items are presented in the form of questions that the subjects will answer according to a rating scale of 1 (not at all) to 9 (completely or extremely). The Portuguese version consists of a total of 46 items grouped in four dimensions: Passion, Confidence, Conflict and Intimacy. The RRF-R revealed psychometric properties ranging from good to excellent, obtaining an excellent internal consistency at the total scale level, with Cronbach’s alpha values between .97 and .98, for women and men respectively, and .81 and .97 at subscale level, a good temporal stability (significant correlations ranging between .70 and .87; p < .01) and high concurrent validity with a marital satisfaction scale (significant global score correlations between .88 and .85, for women and men respectively; p < .01). In the current sample, the RRF-R presented for the total scale, an excellent Cronbach's alpha of .96; .94 for the Passion subscale, .93 for Confidence, .77 for Conflict and .83 for Intimacy. The internal consistency of the total scale remained excellent for the four subsamples: .95 for participants in a dating relationship, .94 for those in a dating relationship with cohabitation and .97 for participants in both formal unions and married relationships.