The Effects of Intra-Family Communication Patterns on Marital Satisfaction in Married Couples: An Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) Analysis

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effects of family communication patterns (dialogue and harmony orientation) of married couples on both individual marital satisfaction and their spouses' marital satisfaction within the framework of the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM).. The sample consisted of 150 married couples selected through convenience sampling. Participants completed a personal information form, the Family Communication Patterns Scale, and the Marital Life Scale. Two separate APIM analyses were conducted: one model tested the effects of harmony orientation, and the other focused on dialogue orientation as predictors of marital satisfaction. The results showed that dialogue orientation positively predicted both individual and partner marital satisfaction, while harmony orientation had no significant effect. These findings highlight the importance of open communication over traditional harmony in fostering marital satisfaction. The study underscores the relevance of the APIM framework for understanding dyadic processes in Turkish culture and suggests that couple therapy interventions should emphasize dialogue-based strategies to enhance relationship quality.

Keywords

• family communication
• marital satisfaction
• APIM
• couple relationships

Evli Çiftlerde Aile İçi İletişim Kalıplarının Evlilik Doyumuna Etkisi: Aktör-Partner Karşılıklı Bağımlılık Model Analizi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada evli çiftlerin aile iletişim örüntülerinin (diyalog ve uyum yönelimi) hem bireysel evlilik doyumu hem de eşlerinin evlilik doyumu üzerindeki etkilerini Aktör-Partner Bağımlılık Modeli (APIM) çerçevesinde araştırmak amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmanın örneklemini kolayda örnekleme yöntemi ile seçilen 150 evli çift oluşturmuştur. Evli çiftlere kişisel bilgi formu, Aile İletişim Örüntüleri Ölçeği ve Evlilik Yaşamı Ölçeği uygulanmıştır. Eşlerin aile iletişim örüntüleri ile evlilik doyumu arasındaki aktör-partner ilişkilerini araştırmak için temel bir APIM modeli kullanılmıştır. Bağımsız değişken aile iletişim örüntülerinin alt boyutları dikkate alınarak iki ayrı APIM modeli analiz edilmiştir. Birinci modelde aile uyum yönelimi değişkeni (yordayıcı değişken) ve evlilik doyumu (sonuç değişkeni) değişkenleri dikkate alınmıştır. İkinci modelde aile diyalog yönelimi değişkeni (yordayıcı değişken) ve evlilik doyumu (sonuç değişkeni) değişkenleri dikkate alınmıştır. Sonuç olarak, bu çalışma aile iletişim kalıplarının, özellikle diyalog yöneliminin, hem bireysel hem de çift düzeyinde evlilik memnuniyetini olumlu yönde etkilediğini ortaya koymuştur. Buna karşılık, uyum yöneliminin evlilik memnuniyeti üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisinin olmaması, ilişkisel memnuniyetin yalnızca geleneksel uyuma değil, aynı zamanda açık iletişime ve karşılıklı anlayışa da dayandığını göstermektedir. Bu araştırma bulguları, APIM modelinin Türk kültüründe uygulanabilirliğini göstererek literatüre hem teorik hem de metodolojik katkılar sunmaktadır. Ayrıca çift terapisinde diyalog temelli müdahalelerin önceliklendirilmesi gerektiğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

• Aile iletişimi
• evlilik memnuniyeti
• APIM
• çift ilişkileri

References

1. Akçıl, S.,(2026). Psychological maltreatment, trait mindfulness, and marital quality: an actor–partner interdependence model. Psychiatric Quarterly. 97, 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-025-10171-5
2. Babasoy, Y., (2025). Navigating the conceptual landscape of communication: Principles and processes. Acta Globalis Humanitatis et Lingiuarum, 2(1), 155-164. https://doi.org/10.69760/aghel.02500119
3. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. Vol. 1. Attachment. Pelican Books.
4. Chaffee, S. H., & McLeod, J. M. (1972). Adolescent television use in the family context. In G. A. Comstock & E. A. Rubinstein (Eds.), Television and social behavior (Vol. 3). Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office.
5. Cook, W. L. (1998). Integrating models of interdependence with treatment evaluationsin marital therapy research. Journal of Family Psychology, 12(4), 529542. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.12.4.529·
6. Cook, W. L., & Kenny, D. A. (2005). The actor–partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250444000405
7. Cüceloğlu, D. (2012). Again, human to human [Yeniden insan insana] [in Turkish]. Remzi Kitabevi.
8. Dönmezler, İ. (2009). Communication and interaction in the family [Ailede iletişim ve etkileşim] [in Turkish]. Hegem Yayıncılık.

9. Erdinç, B. (2025) Childhood psychological maltreatment and depression sensitivity in married couples: Actor–Partner Interdependence Model. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Journal of Social Sciences. (Special Issue), 1569-1582. https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4795-159
10. Erdoğan, Ö. (2020). The relationship between family members' perceptions of family communication patterns. Erciyes Communication Journal, 7(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.17680/erciyesiletisim.622576 [in Turkish]
11. Erdoğan, Ö., & Anık, C. (2018). Validity and reliability study of the Turkish form of the Family Communication Patterns Scale. Turkish Journal of Communication Studies, 29, 21-46. https://doi.org/10.17829/maruid.340460 [in Turkish]
12. Erkılınç, M. M. (2020). An examination of the relationship between family communication patterns, self-concept, and marital adjustment [Unpublished master’s thesis, Işık University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center [in Turkish].
13. Falconier, M. K., Jackson, J. B., Hilpert, P., & Bodenmann, G. (2015). Dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 42, 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.07.002
14. Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (1999). Conflict in marriage: Implications for working with couples. Annual Review of Psychology, 50 (1), 47–77. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.47
15. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Koerner, A. F. (1997). Family communication schemata: Effects on children’s resiliency. In H. I. McCubbin (Ed.), Promoting resiliency in families and children at risk: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 1–24). Sage Publications.
16. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Ritchie, L. D. (1994). Communication schemata within the family: Multiple perspectives on family interaction. Human Communication Research, 20(3), 275–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1994.tb00324.
17. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed). McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.
18. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). Frequencies. In IBM SPSS statistics 23 step by step (pp. 115-125). Routledge.
19. Goldenberg, H., & Goldenberg, I. (2008). Family therapy: An overview (7th ed.). Brooks/Cole.
20. Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. Crown.
21. Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W., (2000). The timing of divorce: predicting when a couple will divorce over a 14-year period. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 62. 737–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00737.x
22. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.
23. Kara, N., Balcı, B. B., ve Araz, A. (2022). A systematic review of longitudinal studies with couples on marital quality, satisfaction, and harmony. Turkish Psychology Writings, 25(50), 56-91. doi: 10.31828/tpy1301996120230124m000051. [in Turkish]
24. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3
25. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Publications.
26. Kenny, D. A., & Ledermann, T. (2010). Detecting, measuring, and testing dyadic patterns in the actor–partner interdependence model. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(3), 359-366. doi: 10.1037/ a0019651.
27. Knox, L., Karantzas, G. C., Ferguson, E., & Lawless, N. (2023). A dyadic analysis of partner maltreatment using an attachment-based diathesis–stress model: A lab-based study. Psychology of Violence, 13(2), 149. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/vio0000439
28. Koerner, A. F., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1997). Family type and conflict: The impact of conversation orientation and conformity orientation of conflict in the family. Communication Studies, 48, 59-75. doi: 10.1080/10510979709368491.
29. Koerner, A. F., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (2002). Toward a theory of family communication. Communication Theory, 12(1), 70–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00260.x
30. Kurdek, L. A. (2005). Gender and marital satisfaction early in marriage: A growth curve approach. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(1), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00006.x
31. Kuru, G. (2022). An actor-partner interdependence mediation model of emotional manipulation on commitment via satisfaction of couples in romantic relationships [Unpublished master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University].
32. Lavner, J. A., Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (2016). Does couples' communication predict marital satisfaction, or does marital satisfaction predict communication? Journal of Marriage Family, 78(3), 680–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12301
33. Li, X. S., Wikle, J. S., Schraedel, J., Yorgason, J., & James, S. (2022). Relational communication as a moderator for links between family of origin adversity and marital satisfaction. Family Relations, 72(3), 1955–1973. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12808
34. Markman, H. J., Stanley, S. M., & Blumberg, S. L. (2001). Fighting for your marriage: Positive steps for preventing divorce and preserving a lasting love. Jossey-Bass.
35. Masood, A., & Mazahir, S. (2015). Relational communication, emotional intelligence, and marital satisfaction. International Journal of Research Studies in Psychology, 4(4), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsp.2015.1159.
36. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
37. Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Harvard University Press.
38. Özdaş,S., Akcanbaş, M. (2025). An Examination of Marital Adjustment Among Married Individuals: The Case of Diyarbakır Province. Journal of Family Psychological Counseling, 8(2), 84-100. doi:10.58434/apdad.1703154. [in Turkish]
39. Parsakia, K., Rostami, M., & Saadati, S. M. (2023). The Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Marital Conflicts Using Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. Journal of Psychosociological Research in Family and Culture. 1(1), 23-28. https://doi.org/10.61838/kman.jprfc.1.1.6
40. Rehman, U. S., & Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (2007). A cross-cultural examination of the relation of marital communication behavior to marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 759–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.759
41. Rogers, S. J., Amato, P. R., & Gonzalez, L. (2021). Spouses' communication and marital quality: Actor-partner analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 35(6), 736–748. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000831
42. Sakmar-Balkan, E. ve Fışıloğlu, H. (2017). Marital adjustment in the framework of vulnerability-stress-adaptation model. Object Psychology Journal, 5(9), 167–186. doi:10.7816/nesne-05-09-09
43. Scherer, H., (2012) Communication as a social process. Journal of Mass Communication & Journalism, 2(8). 1-2. doi:10.4172/2165-7912.1000e125
44. Simpson, J. A., & Rholes, S.W., (2017) Adult attachment, stress, and romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 19–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.04.006.
45. Stas, L., Kenny, D. A., Mayer, A., & Loeys, T. (2018). Giving dyadic data analysis away: A user-friendly app for actor-partner interdependence models. Personal Relationships, 25(1), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.122307
46. Şahin, S., ve Aral, N. (2012). Aile içi iletişim. Ankara Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 1(3), 55-66.
47. Tezer, E. (1996). Satisfaction derived from marital relationship: Marital Life Scale. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 2(7), 1–7 [in Turkish].
48. Ünal Ö., Akgün S. (2022). Conflict resolution styles as predictors of marital adjustment and marital satisfaction: an actor–partner interdependence model. Journal of Family Studies, 28(3), 898-913. doi: 10.1080/13229400.2020.1766542