Development of Relational Turbulence Scale for Young Married Individuals

Received 10 Sep, 2021

Accepted 19 May, 2022

Published 30 Jun, 2023

The present study was intended to develop a measure of relational turbulence for the young married individuals in Pakistan’s cultural framework. In the first phase of developing scale, 19 semi-structured interviews were taken from married individuals. The married individuals were taken with inclusion criteria of 1-5 years marital duration and age between 21- 40 years to generate an item pool that encompassed 45 items. Based on connection, similarity or matching themes, 29 items were finalized after 11 experts’ validation and piloted on 8 participants. To determine psychometric properties of scale, Relational Turbulence Scale (RTS) was presented along with demographic sheet to 156 young married individuals (67 men, 89 women) with age range 21-40 years. Principal Component Analysis of RTS comprised of three different factors namely Lack Understanding, Apprehensions, and Lack of Support. Moreover, RTS was found to have high internal consistency (.83), test-retest reliability .83 (p < .001), split half reliability of .82 (p < .001), and acceptable convergent validity. Furthermore, results are discussed in context of factor structure of RTS, demographics, and risk factors as predictors of RTS in cultural context.

Marriage is such a unit that is a base for civilized society. It includes the connection of two persons for the purpose of achieving need for love; satisfying biological, social, psychological, and motivational desires; and healthy sexual functioning (Zaheri et al., 2016). Correspondingly, satisfaction in marriage require harmony with partner’s tastes, information of personality features, concern, care, acceptance, (Ansari-Shahidi, 2006) and set rules of behavior for  quality relationship patterns (Tavakol et al., 2017). During the initial years of married life, some little changes that seem unimportant or nonexistent can turn into major conflicts (Lavner & Bradbury, 2010) that lead towards precarious relationship.
As young married individuals make a significant part of population and their initial time period can be very sensitive time because the excitement and newness wear off, the reality sets in, and conflicts start to originate (Heyman, 2001). The beginning period of marriage  in Pakistan comprise of number of  adjustment issues and most common marital adjustment issues highlighted are  the extended family system (Ali et al., 2021), socioeconomic status difference (Ismail & Ansari, 2006), women suppression (Qadir et al., 2005), no understanding and cooperation (Qamar et al., 2013), unwelcoming attitude of people for spouse communication (Trotter et al., 2019) compromises (Husain, 2001) cultural beliefs (Qadir et al., 2005), dowry issue (Anjum et al., 1995), disputes on decision making in home (Hamid et al., 2011), gender inequality (Gul et al., 2011), polygamy (Zakaria, 2014, Oct 1), age at marriage (Mahmood et al., 2016), education, financial issues, drugs use  by husband (Nawaz, 2016), and contraceptives problems (Hamid et al.,  2011).
Subsequently, maintaining a satisfying and ideal relationship is an uphill battle for most couples (Stassen & Bates, 2010), and without earlier preparation for the hurdles, couples often conclude that their relationship is not working. In line with early years problems of young married individuals, there exist a concept, relational turbulence which is described as a relationship period in which spouses subjectively experience a spike in negative emotions toward one another through associated relational instability and tumultuousness. Basically, it’s a global and persistent evaluation of the relationship by partners as tumultuous, shaky, breakable, and chaotic that arises from the increase of specific episodes (Solomon & Knobloch, 2004). Such transitions are crises through which partner turn out to be alert about their partnership and respond intensely to even minor incidence (Knobloch & Theiss, 2010). Furthermore, this model explains two relationship qualities. The first one is relational uncertainty which means lack of clarity about the nature of relationship itself. It has three sources the self, partner and communication over time. The second quality is partner interference that indicates nature of relational turbulence as harmful, irritating, and ambiguous for both partners in the relationship (Theiss, 2010).
Work on relational turbulence is very limited and less explored in Pakistani culture, the reasoning or strong predictors behind this concept and consequences are mostly explored in western literature. Nevertheless, a study that has shown strong connection with relationship in Pakistan’s cultural context regarding gender difference in marital chaos underlined those traditional wives scored higher in experiencing lower expectations about marital equality in response to unfair decision about household chores. Whereas wives happier in their marriages were those who accepted whatever they received, because they do not distinguish and associate equity with equality (Tartakovsky, 2023).
Correspondingly, regarding chaos and turbulence in relationship about husbands, it has been found that those husbands who accepted all cultural or social norms of marriage, invested more and seen happier in their marital relationship as they experience very less spousal dissatisfaction with the household tasks issues (Erickson, 2005). Regarding consequences, another study shed light that those who experience relational uncertainty take unexpected events to be more upsetting; hurtful episodes to be more distressing; sexual intimacy to be less satisfying; and perceive social circle to be less supportive (Nagy, 2010).
Relational turbulence included a key ingredient, the communication that contained within information processing as a principal and foremost track of any relationship journey (Theiss & Solomon, 2006). Another study supports the importance of communication by suggesting gender difference that women have a tendency not to just bring up the current problem, but also backtrack to stuffs that have occurred days, even weeks before. They can process up to nine events that usually revolve around picking up the children, taking care of significant ones, and organizing or managing homebased routine tasks, but men usually only process three to five things, where two of them are frequently sex-related (Zieliński, 2019).
There is a limited literature on relational turbulence in Pakistan’s literature. Some notable about marital turmoil in Pakistan’s culture include studies partner’s interference (Solomon et al., 2015), and confusions, misperception, and ambiguity about relationship investment by both partner in their marriage (Farooq, 2018). Additionally, some other strong predictors and problems emphasized having risks of taking marriage to end point quickly were infidelity; physical, emotional, and economic abuse; substance dependency; polygamy; conflict resolution avoidance; ego of partner; birth of baby girl; unreasonable expectation from partner; lack of communication; extended family issues; dowry related violence; taunts; and husband’s lack of investment (Ali et al., 2021). In another study, it was found that man’s perception about his wife post marriage body image also adds to a significant contributing factor in marital journey (Zubair & Ali, 2021).
By keeping in view relational turbulence factor of lack of understanding in Pakistan’s culture, it was seen that marriages are more between families where family interfere in every matter of couple’s life; parental pressure and arranged marriages are most common and women are forced to remain quiet on any family dispute and alone have to work it out for marriage as divorce is a taboo (Shaw, 2001 ) In addition, regarding apprehension factor, differences in opinion about religious beliefs, disclosing of pregnancy status, openly speaking with spouse after dispute, worries of conceiving child, pressure and interference from in-laws, fear of being answerable to everybody, parents’ decisions to leave studies, spousal pressure for not giving permission for job, and uncertainties regarding noncooperation of spouse in work status can be widely observed (Saleem & Isa, 2004). In case of lacking support, it was seen that women are more bound to gender stereotypes in marriage and because of socioemotional reciprocity; it also led them towards depressive symptoms (Choi & Ha, 2011).
Marriage in Pakistan has a unique relationship dictionary with some other risk factors like patriarchal culture supremacy and women being less powerful in decision-making in marital journey (Hamid et al., 2011). Some other challenging factors included joint family system, stigmas like caste, cousin marriages, no freedom of choosing spouse (Zaidi & Shuraydi, 2002), parents’ interference in their children’s marital life as a support, blurred boundaries between spouse and parents (Critelli, 2012).
Keeping in view the significance of turbulence in marital relationship and little research in Pakistan’s culture that is, only couple of research on relational turbulence using western scale of relational turbulence were found (Farooq, 2018; Knobloch et al., 2007). Therefore, this study is aimed to fill the gap by emphasizing significance of relational turbulence in Pakistan’s culture highlighting risks factors to escape from. Secondly, objective is to develop an indigenous scale of relational turbulence to have more phenomenological knowledge, understanding, prevalence indication, and manifestation and report degree of relational turbulence.

Method

Phase I: Item Generation
In order to explore phenomenology of relational turbulence in Pakistan’s culture, a question based on definition of relational turbulence was conceptualized by taking 19 semi-structured in-depth interviews from young married individuals of Lahore. Interviews were taken both  in-person and online. The sample included 7 men and 12 women with marital duration of 1-5 years and their age range was 21-40 years. All participants were approached through personal acquaintances by using non-probability snow ball sampling technique.
The phenomenology question was asked that “What kind of difficulties and ups and downs, do you think a married couple faces in the early stages of a marital relationship”? After exploring phenomenology, 79 items were made on the basis of participants verbatim and those items that were unclear, sounding somehow slang or colloquialism, and imprecise even after explanation of participants were discarded from the list of verbatim, Some of those items that were sounding somehow slang or colloquialism were modified and those items that were overlaping and having same meaning were merged to make  one  appropriate statement. In this manner from pool of 79, 27 items were finalised after first phase of scale development .

Phase II: Expert Validation

In this section, 27 items that were finalized in item generation phase were given to 11 experts for the rating of items on the degree of their relevance to the desired construction 1-5 Likert type rating scale where 1 means strongly disagree, 2 as disagree, 3 as undecided, 4 as agree, and 5 means strongly agree. Majority of experts rated items on 4 or 5. Based upon ratings of 11 experts, few items were molded, one item was divided into two because of possible different etiologies behind each, and one item was added about a sense of freedom. A final 29 items were retained. After expert validation, the final list was transformed into 5-point rating scale (0- 4) and named as Relational Turbulence Scale.

Phase III: Pilot Study

The scale finalized in expert validation scale, was administered on, eight married men and women participants as trial phase to check language difficulty, statements’ understanding level, and queries. The participants reported no difficulty; therefore, the Scale was finalized.

Phase IV: Main Study

The main study was carried out to assess psychometric properties of RTS.

Participants

The sample was composed of 156 young married individuals (67 men and   89 women) of Lahore with age range between 21-40 years (M = 27.90, SD = 4.15) and had duration of 1-5 marital years. The husbands and wives were instructed to fill in questionnaires individually. All participants were approached through personal acquaintances by using nonprobability snowball sampling technique.

Measures

Relational Turbulence Scale (RTS).The newly developed RTS in Urdu language was used for measuring turbulence in relationship among young married couples. The scale contained 29 statements on 5-point rating scale reflecting theme of marital relationship turmoil. The 5-point scoring categories encompassed (0) not at all, (1) rarely, (2), sometimes, (3) often, (4) always. High score characterized more turbulence in marital relationship. The scale items reflect the miscommunication, understanding, trust issues, irritation and disputes or disagreements with partner or in-laws such as “Difficulty in understanding each other’s mood”; “difficulty in building healthy relationships with spousal’s family”; “fear of being answerable at any point”; “disappointment on adapting oneself according to others”; and “Argument with spouse on having different opinion”.

Depression Subscale of Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21).Lovibond and Lovibond (1995) developed this 21-item scale. In present study, it was used to establish convergent validity. Fundamentally it’s a 21-item scale with 3 factors, that is, Depression, Anxiety, and General Stress symptoms on 3-point rating scale with options of 0 as never, 1 sometimes, 2 asoften, and 3 as almost always. For the current study, DASS-21 was used by taking Depression factor 7 items in study that included themes of dysphoria, hopelessness, devaluation of life, self-deprecation, lack of interest / involvement, anhedonia, and inertia.

Procedure

Firstly, permission was taken from the Director for institutional approval to conduct this study. After that data were collected through snowball sampling procedure. Moreover, Google Form was also prepared. Data were collected both online and through one-to-one administration with certain participants in university settings, different departments (government and private offices), family, relatives, friends, and their recommended participants through chain of references. The husbands and wives were instructed to fill in questionnaires independently on an individual basis. The aim and rationale of the research was discussed with the participants. Privacy and confidentiality were assured before and after study. Participants were informed that they reserved the right to withdraw from participation at any time and those who agreed to participate were given demographic sheet along with RTS and DASS-21 questionnaires. If participants felt any difficulty in understanding questions, statements were read by researchers to make them understand. After data collection, the whole data was analyzed by using SPSS 20 version.

Results

Exploratory Factor Analysis

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of RTS was done for refining, identifying, and meaningfully finding underlying factors of RTS. Scree Plot was used to explore the factor structure of RTS. Principle component analysis with varimax rotation was employed to determine the factor structure of scale. Criteria that Eigen value should be more than one and every factor must include minimum 5 items were used for determining factors.

Figure 1
Scree Plot Showing the Extraction of Factors of Relational Turbulence Scale

Figure 1 of scree plot suggests factors with the help of inflection of scree plot and number of factors under elbow was total factors. From scree plot initially exploratory factor analysis was carried out on 4-factors solution, but due to number of dubious values and unclear picture it was not considered appropriate. Later, in 3-factors solution, a clear picture of items was observed. However, to confirm further, 2-factor extraction was also explored, but that discarded for having 3 items in a factor and provided blurred picture of items. Therefore, 3-factor solution was finalized where just item 15 was not loading, but a very fine picture of items with no dubious values and clear reflection of different themes could be comprehended. The factor loading of 29 items are mentioned as follows.

Table 1
Factor Loadings, Eigen Values, Cumulative Variance, and Total Variance of 29 Items of RTS With Varimax Rotation (N = 156)

Note. Factor loadings > .40 are bold faced.

Table 1 indicates 3-factors pattern and respective items. The bold factor loadings show that they are equal and more than .40. Item 15 did not load as its value was less than .40. Furthermore, the Eigen values of all three factors of RTS are more than one and depict factors with no dubious items.

Factors Description of Relational Turbulence Scale (RTS)

The scale RTS is based on 4-point Likert scale with 28 items distributed in three different factors and factors are given label according to similarity content of items. These are discussed below:

Factor 1: Lack of Understanding. This factor consisted of 12 items and a higher score in it represents more predisposition of understanding issues in marriage including features of difficulty in understanding each other’s nature, routine, difficulty in bonding with each other’s families, pre-marriage unfamiliarity issue, disputes on disagreement, household chores, lack of mental harmony, others’ interference, budget management, cultural pressure, and problem of self-control on other’s annoyed response.

Factor 2: Apprehensions. This factor includes 7 items with theme of apprehension and a higher score in it represents more tendency to have it. Items included are having themes of negative evaluation fear by others; fear and anxieties of not meeting other’s expectations; fear of being answerable to everybody; anxious on increased responsibilities; frustration on changing and sacrificing self-according to others; fear of taking feelings wrong by spouse; and trouble of bearing criticism regarding self and partner.

Factor 3: Lack of Support. It involves 9 items that represent lack of support and more score on this factor means more problems in supporting domain in marriage. The items falling in this factor have themes of fear of snatching freedom by partner; tension of not having enough communication; hesitation and distant in physical relationship; trust issues; spouse’s pressure of sharing stuff without realizing one’s interest; society pressure in childbirth; fights on spouse’s new request; and partner’s no support in household chores and in employment matters.

Reliabilities of RTS
 
Cronbach Alpha Reliability

To assess the reliability of the RTS, Cronbach’s alpha was used. Table 2 shows Cronbach’s   alpha of RTS and subscales that reflect satisfactory internal consistency.

Table 2
Cronbach’s Alpha for Total and Factors of RTS (N= 156)

Note. n = Total number of items.

Test-Retest Reliability

The test-retest reliability of RTS scale was established by taking 11 participants, 6 men and 5 women from main study and they were given RTS again after one week gap of first administration. The output of test-retest analysis shows .83 (p < .001) reliability coefficient of RTS which is highly significant.

Split-Half Reliability

The splitting of test in two parts was done through even-odd method and 2 halves contained 14 items each.  The correlation coefficient an indicator of reliability between two halves is .82 (p < .001). The internal consistency of 1st Half is .84 and 2nd Half is .82. The spearman–brown coefficient is found to be .90 and Guttmann split half coefficient is found as .90.

Convergent Validity of RTS

For assessing the convergent validity of RTS, it was correlated with Depression subscale of DASS-21 and result was assessed through Pearson Product Moment correlation.

Table 3
Inter-Correlation of RTS, Its Subscales, and Depression (N= 156)

Note. Boldface shows the relationship of RTS and subscales with Depression.
***p < .001.

Table 3 shows a highly significant positive relationship between subscales and with total RTS. Moreover, Table 3 also depicts significant positive relationship between RTS factors and Depression subscale of DASS-21 which points out that if young married individuals experience that they do not understand their spouse, they have worries taking future as unpleasant, and if they encounter lack of support then they are likely to have depression or vice versa.

Discussion

Marriage in collectivistic culture like Pakistan unfortunately is considered successful if practiced by spending more efforts, energies, investments on number of events, costumes, dowry, pressure of parents in choosing spouse, interference of family in couple’s life regarding advices, considering men’s financial status, assessment of women perfections  in cooking, and following many stereotypes and gender norms to make outward preparation of marriage in a wonderful way rather than focusing more on working and thinking about how to prepare both men and women to make their marital relationship efficient. By considering all that, the present study was aimed to pinpoint the significance of relational turbulence. It was underscored that there are couple of studies done on relational turbulence in Pakistan which used western scale to measure relational turbulence. Keeping in view the significance of construct in Pakistan, current study was aimed to develop an indigenous scale of relational turbulence in order to discover  cultural phenomenology, customs, behaviors, role of social pressure on couple’s marital life, nature of  choosing partners, influence of collectivistic system, diverse traditions in  relationship, spouse’s perception in marriage, stereotypes with gender roles, parents and in-laws influence on marriage, risk factors, prevalence rate, manifestation and degree of relational turbulence. The tool was developed with 28 items by using EFA with 3-factors solution having 4-point Likert-type scale. The three factors of RTS scale reflected three different themes including Lack of Understanding that comprised of 12 items, Apprehensions factor contained 7 items, and Lack of Support had 9 items.
Lack of Understanding refers to not understanding each other’s nature, mood, meaning of what other say, feelings, expression of emotions, and an ambiguous understanding of each other’s action. In any marital journey one of the utmost imperative ingredients of relationship understands emotional and evolving changes and desires among each other (Bernstein, 2010). In collectivistic culture the problem of understanding has many explanations as literature supports that in Pakistan’s culture, marriages are more between families where family interferes in every matter of couple’s life and parental pressure over spouse’s selection is greatly observed. Arranged and cousin marriages are common. Generally, women are forced to remain quiet on any family dispute and alone try to work it out for marriage as divorce is a taboo (Shaw, 2001). In addition, several gender related norms pressurize spouses in their marriage (Ali et al., 2021) that contribute to problems in understanding. In another study, it was seen that men scored high on relating body image of their spouse as a way of satisfaction in marriage and if not, it generates reasons and drives for having disturbances in marriage (Zubair & Ali, 2021). Another indigenous study showed that those couples who had arranged marriages, unsatisfactory relationship, more restrictions from husbands, and less decision making in home reported more intimidating, chaotic, and confused relationship pattern (Hamid et al., 2011).
The second factor of RTS was Apprehensions that comprised of restlessness, discomfort or being worried most of the time due to fear of assuming worst outcome in future regarding self and associated things and relationships. Apprehensions in relationships cannot make couples enjoy the present moment wholly, it always makes them on alarm state of discomfort. About apprehensions in marriage, it was reported in one indigenous study that marriage in Pakistan mostly revolve around differences in opinions among husband and wife   about religious beliefs, disclosing of pregnancy status not known to the husbands before, taking oral pills in secret and thinking about husband reaction, openly speaking with spouse after dispute, worries of conceiving child when one’s spouse was against that, pressure and interference from in-laws through spouse, fear of being answerable to everybody, worries regarding in-laws and parents decisions to decline from the studying, spouse pressure and not giving permission for job, and uncertainties regarding noncooperation of spouse in work status (Saleem & Isa, 2004). It was observed that Apprehension factor of RTS exists more in women. An indigenous study highlighted that in Pakistan, married women experience overburdened by household chores; answerable to in-laws in cooking; upset by mother in-laws  and consequently fears getting in arguments with husband;  clashes with sister in-laws; husband’s anger; worries regarding pregnancy and family planning; fear of talking with husband on matter of moving from susral (in-laws home) to have a separate home; indecisiveness on choices in life; fear of evaluation; lack of support by family and in-laws; and apprehension of going contrary to will of God (Kazi et al., 2020).
Third factor “Lack of Support” that takes into account spouse who do not believe or stand with other partner in good or bad life circumstances. Regarding lack of support, it was evident in studies that women face more problems regarding support in marriage as compared to men, as women are more bound to gender stereotypes in marriage and as a result, it leads them towards depressive symptoms (Choi & Ha, 2011).  Gender difference in Pakistan’s culture regarding support, it was seen that self-silencing is imposed on women by parents and in-laws and women suffered more in marital adjustment and this led them towards depression (Ahmed & Iqbal, 2019). From convergent validity, it is evident that there exists a strong positive relationship between all factors of RTS and depression. Literature supports that because of lack of understanding, emotional pressure, and isolation perception in relationship; spouse struggles a great deal in mental health recovery (Mcmahon, 2014). Moreover, another study discussed that wives’ daily apprehensions and husbands’ distress can somewhere lead them towards psychological disturbances and future concerns (Jalili et al., 2017). Regarding lack of support, studies evidently show that low perceived spouse support was connected strongly with higher depressive symptoms (Choi & Ha, 2011).
Hence, the importance of RTS is substantial for more exploration, assessment and working on risk factors behind that in our culture. Moreover, the RTS scale has high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, split-half reliability, and acceptable convergent validity with mental health problems that also had support of literature.  

Implications

The implication of current study is significant for development of indigenous scale of relational turbulence in our culture to explore couple’s subjective experiences of turmoil regarding our patriarchal culture and joint family system. It highlights how in this culture young married couples’ relationship problems occur, manifested, and reported which is different from western regions. This tool may help young married couples to ponder marital counseling. The results of current study would be valuable for educators and practitioners to create more awareness and psychoeducation through workshops and seminars and explore relational turbulence in culture as a primary prevention step.

Limitations and Suggestions

As the current study was conducted in COVID-19 lockdown period, therefor, the population of young married couples was challenging to approach, as a result, researcher could not approach a large sample size that might influence generalizability and stability of factor structure. It is suggested for future research to take a large sample size and choose longitudinal design to assess how with passage of time relational turbulence influence adjustment and distance within relationship. There should be more focus on taking both partners as a couple to explore differences in their experiences, manifestation, and cultural influence in marital relationship. In future, it is also suggested for upcoming studies to conduct the confirmatory factor analysis to confirm and validate the factor structure of relational turbulence.

Conclusion

Present research has played a vital role by developing an indigenous scale on relational turbulence in context of Pakistani culture to help better understand relationship nature, risks, and predictors of relational turbulence organized in 3-factors like understanding, apprehensions, and support difficulties and all these factors had strong correlation with depression that emphasized future studies to work on as primary prevention step. Moreover, RTS ca be used in clinical or social setup while working with marital couples for assessing relationship problems.

References

1. Ahmed, F., & Iqbal, H. (2019). Self-silencing and marital adjustment in women with and without depression. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 34(2), 311-330.
2. Ali, P. A., O’Cathain, A., & Croot, E. (2021). Influences of extended family on intimate partner violence: Perceptions of Pakistanis in Pakistan and the United Kingdom. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(9-10), 3965-3993.
3. Anjum, T., Malik, N. H., & Khan, S. A. (1995). A study of dowry and marriage arrangements in a rural area of district Faisalabad. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 32(4), 298-299.
4. Ansari-Shahidi, M., Rezaei-Jamalouei, H., Shahidi, M. A., Shahr, I., & Najafabad, I. (2006). Predicting marital conflicts between couples in Isfahan: The role of defense mechanisms, gender role beliefs, and interpersonal emotional regulation. Borneo Research Bulletin, 37, 31-47.
5. Bernstein, J. (2010). Understanding is more important than love. Psychology Today.
6. Choi, N. G., & Ha, J. H. (2011). Relationship between spouse/partner support and depressive symptoms in older adults: Gender difference. Aging & Mental Health, 15(3), 307-317.
7. Critelli, F. M. (2012). Between law and custom: Women, family law and marriage in Pakistan. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 43(5), 673-693.
8. Erickson, R. J. (2005). Why emotion work matters: Sex, gender, and the division of household labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(2), 337-351.
9. Farooq, Z. (2018). Predictors of relational turbulence in early years of marriage. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 28(1), 70-87.
10. Gul, R., Asad, N., Johansson, E., & Mogren, I. (2011). Gender roles and their influence on life prospects for women in urban Karachi, Pakistan: A qualitative study. Global Health Action, 4(1), 7448.
11. Hamid, S., Stephenson, R., & Rubenson, B. (2011). Marriage decision making, spousal communication, and reproductive health among married youth in Pakistan. Global Health Action, 4(1), 5079.
12. Heyman, R. E. (2001). Observation of couple conflicts: Clinical assessment applications, stubborn truths, and shaky foundations. Psychological Assessment, 13(1), 5.
13. Husain, Y. J. (2001). The story of a wedding in Pakistan. Asian Folklore Studies, 26(1), 119-127.
14. Ismail, Z., & Ansari, K. (2006). Socioeconomic status as a predictor of marital adjustment in working women. Business Review, 1(1), 29-40.
15. Jalili, L., Najar, S., Nezamivand-Chegini, S., & Yaralizadeh, M. (2017). The relationship between factors related to divorce request and mental health among divorce applicant women referred to legal medicine organization in Ahvaz, Iran. Journal of Family & Reproductive Health, 11(3), 128.
16. Kazi, A. K., Nazir, H., Atiq, M., Atif, N., Rauf, N., & Surkan, P. J. (2020). “A woman is a puppet.” women’s disempowerment and prenatal anxiety in Pakistan: A qualitative study of sources, mitigators, and coping strategies for anxiety in pregnancy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14), 4926.
17. Knobloch, L. K., Miller, L. E., & Carpenter, K. E. (2007). Using the relational turbulence model to understand negative emotion within courtship. Personal Relationships, 14(1), 91-112.
18. Knobloch, L. K., & Theiss, J. A. (2010). An actor—Partner interdependence model of relational turbulence: Cognitions and emotions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(5), 595-619.
19. Lavner, J. A., & Bradbury, T. N. (2010). Patterns of change in marital satisfaction over the newlywed years. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(5), 1171-1187.
20. Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behavior Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335-343.
21. Mahmood, Z., Anwer, M. S., Javaid, A., & Nawaz, S. (2016). Social and economic determinants of divorce in Pakistan: A case study of Multan District. Journal of Culture, Society and Development, 19. https://core.ac. uk/download/pdf/234691136.pdf
22. McMahon, J. (2014). The importance of relationships in understanding the experiences of spouse mental health careers. Qualitative Health Research, 24(2), 254-266.
23. Nagy, M. E. (2010). Applying the relational turbulence model to the empty-nest transition: Sources of relationship change, relational uncertainty, and interference from partners. Journal of Family Communication, 13(4), 280-300.
24. Qadir, F., de Silva, P., Prince, M., & Khan, M. (2005). Marital satisfaction in Pakistan: A pilot investigation. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 20(2), 195-209.
25. Qamar, Z., Haider, S. S., Ahmed, G., & Saleem, M. D. (2013). Marital disharmony in Pakistani women: A doctor's role.  The Journal of Pakistan Medical Association, 63(11), 1457.
26. Saleem, S., & Isa, M. A. (2004). Facilitating inter-spousal communication for birth spacing: A feasibility study of Pakistani Couples for policy implications. Journal of Pakistan Medical Association, 54(4), 182.
27. Shaw, A. (2001). Kinship, cultural preference and immigration: Consanguineous marriage among British Pakistanis. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 7(2), 315-334.
28. Solomon, D. H., & Knobloch, L. K. (2004). A model of relational turbulence: The role of intimacy, relational uncertainty, and interference from partners in appraisals of irritations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 795-816.
29. Solomon, D. H., Knobloch, L. K., Theiss, J. A., & McLaren, R. M. (2015). Relational turbulence theory: Explaining variation in subjective experiences and communication within romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 42(4), 507-532.
30. Stassen, H., & Bates, B. (2010). Constructing marriage: Exploring marriage as an ideograph. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 11(1), 1-5.
31. Tavakol, Z., Nasrabadi, A. N., Moghadam, Z. B., Salehiniya, H., & Rezaei, E. (2017). A review of the factors associated with marital satisfaction. Galen Medical Journal, 6(3), 197-207.
32. Theiss, J. A. (2010). An actor—Partner interdependence model of relational turbulence: Cognitions and emotions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(5), 595-619.
33. Theiss, J. A., & Solomon, D. H. (2006). A relational turbulence model of communication about irritations in romantic relationships. Communication Research, 33(5), 391-418.
34. Tartakovsky, E. (2023). A dyadic study of the spouses’ assessment of the division of domestic labour and marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Studies, 1-16. doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2023.2173082
35. Trotter, P. B., Orbuch, T. L., & Shrout, M. R. (2019). Spouses’ perceptions of network interference in the early years of marriage. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 13(2), 220-236.
36. Zaheri, F., Dolatian, M., Shariati, M., Simbar, M., Ebadi, A., & Azghadi, S. B. H. (2016). Effective factors in marital satisfaction in perspective of Iranian women and men: A systematic review. Electronic physician, 8(12), 3369
37. Zaidi, A. U., & Shuraydi, M. (2002). Perceptions of arranged marriages by young Pakistani Muslim women living in a Western society. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 33(4), 495-514.
38. Zakaria, R. (2014, Oct 1). The problem of polygamy. The DAWN. https://www.dawn.com/news/1135346
39. Zieliński, C., Figat, M., & Hexel, R. (2019). Communication within multi-fsm based robotic systems. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 93(3-4), 787-805.
40. Zubair, S., & Ali, U. (2021). Men’s perception of post-marriage body image: Pakistan milieu. Culture & Psychology, 27(1), 96-117.

Received 10 September 2021
Revision received 19 May 2022