A strong relationality view of mindfulness and flourishing I-Thou relations: A dyadic analysis.

Despite the increasing popularity of mindfulness and research concerning its role in relationships, there is limited strongly relational theoretical discussion explaining the role of mindfulness in intimate couple relationships. In this article, we articulate a strongly relational view of the role of mindfulness in couple relationships. We then empirically test theoretically relevant associations using dyadic data (N = 514 heterosexual couples) from couples in the U.S. and Canada. In Study 1, we evaluated a model with male and female mindfulness predicting couple relational-connectivity (a sense of friendship, intimacy, and belonging) through couple responsible actions (behaviors intentionally enacted to strengthen couple connection), which indicated a fully mediated effect; the influence of male and female mindfulness on couple relational-connectivity was fully accounted for by associations with couple responsible actions (indirect standardized betas of .08). With a subsample of 120 of these couples, in Study 2 we used a daily diary design to explore how mindfulness was associated with ethical responsiveness (a tendency to respond benevolently to a perceived need), responsible actions, and relational-connectivity at the within-person level. Study 1 results were reinforced, showing stronger associations in these within-person analyses (indirect standardized betas of .21 and .23). In conceptualizing individual mindfulness and ethical responsiveness as dimensions of a more relational form of mindfulness, one way by which mindfulness may influence couples' relational-connectivity is through its influence on responsible actions. These results provide initial support for using a strongly relational paradigm to understand the role of mindfulness in intimate couple relationships. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Satisfaction or connectivity?: Implications from the strong relationality model of flourishing couple relationships.

A central feature of couple relationships research is the use of self-report measures of relationship satisfaction. Despite the widespread use of such measures in couples' research, scholars have raised critical questions about satisfaction-focused assessment, including concerns about taking an ontologically individualistic focus. Moving beyond ontological individualism, drawing from the Strong Relationality Model of Relationship Flourishing and data from 615 couples in the United States and Canada (N = 1230 individuals), we explored similarities and differences between assessments of relationship satisfaction and a measure based on strong relationality (relational-connectivity). We evaluated associations with other scales assessing relationship factors including indicators of well-being, relationship processes, virtues, and responsible actions. Using confirmatory latent profile analysis, we classified individuals as Flourishing (55.4%), Languishing (31.8%), Connected, Less-Satisfied (7.8%), or Satisfied, Less-Connected (5.0%). Our results suggest that attending to richer perspectives of relationship quality may spur additional understanding of many factors associated with meaningful couple relationships.

What Are They Thinking? A National Study of Stability and Change in Divorce Ideation.

This study reports on a nationally representative sample of married individuals ages 25-50 (N = 3,000) surveyed twice (1 year apart) to investigate the phenomenon of divorce ideation, or what people are thinking when they are thinking about divorce. Twenty-eight percent of respondents had thought their marriage was in serious trouble in the past but not recently. Another 25% had thoughts about divorce in the last 6 months. Latent Class Analysis revealed three distinct groups among those thinking about divorce at Time 1: soft thinkers (49%), long-term-serious thinkers (45%), and conflicted thinkers (6%). Yet, divorce ideation was not static; 31% of Time 1 thinkers were not thinking about it 1 year later (and 36% of nonthinkers at Time 1 were thinking about it 1 year later). Also, Latent Transition Analysis revealed 49% of Time 1 long-term-serious thinkers, 56% of soft thinkers, and 51% of conflicted thinkers had shifted groups at Time 2, mostly in the direction of less and softer thinking about divorce. Overall, divorce ideation is common but dynamic, and it is not necessarily an indication of imminent marital dissolution.