Designing a Model of Marital Stability Based on Relational Commitment, Couple Psychological Capital, and Perceived Spousal Support among Couples Experiencing Economic Pressure
Keywords:
Marital stability, economic pressure, relational commitment, couple psychological capital, perceived spousal support, qualitative research, grounded theoryAbstract
Objective: This study aimed to design a qualitative model of marital stability among couples experiencing economic pressure by exploring the roles of relational commitment, couple psychological capital, and perceived spousal support.
Methods and Materials: This qualitative study was conducted using a grounded theory approach. Participants included 18 married individuals living in Tehran who had experienced significant economic pressure in their marital life. They were selected through purposive and theoretical sampling. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews and continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. Inclusion criteria were at least three years of marital life, experience of economic pressure during the past two years, willingness to participate, and ability to articulate lived marital experiences. Data analysis was performed concurrently with data collection through open, axial, and selective coding. NVivo software was used to manage, classify, and organize the qualitative data. Trustworthiness was ensured through member checking, peer review, analytical memo writing, constant comparison, and an audit trail.
Findings: Data analysis resulted in five main categories: “economic pressure as a threat to relational security,” “agentic relational commitment,” “couple psychological capital,” “perceived spousal support,” and “reorganization of marital life under constraint.” The findings indicated that marital stability under economic pressure is not merely the result of passive endurance, but emerges through shared mechanisms such as transparent financial communication, collective hope, dyadic resilience, emotional and practical support, participatory decision-making, and protecting the partner’s dignity.
Conclusion: The final model showed that economic pressure becomes a serious threat to marital stability when it is accompanied by reduced perceived support, erosion of shared hope, and weakened relational commitment. Conversely, couples who transform economic hardship into a shared problem and rely on couple psychological capital and spousal support demonstrate greater capacity to maintain the relationship, manage conflict, and reconstruct the meaning of marital life.
Downloads
References
Bodenmann, G. (2005). Dyadic coping and its significance for marital functioning. In T. A. Revenson, K. Kayser, & G. Bodenmann (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping (pp. 33–49). American Psychological Association.
Bradbury, T. N., Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2000). Research on the nature and determinants of marital satisfaction: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 964–980. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00964.x
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., Elder, G. H., Jr., Lorenz, F. O., Simons, R. L., & Whitbeck, L. B. (1992). A family process model of economic hardship and adjustment of early adolescent boys. Child Development, 63(3), 526–541. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131344
Conger, R. D., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (Eds.). (1994). Families in troubled times: Adapting to change in rural America. Aldine de Gruyter.
Conger, R. D., Elder, G. H., Jr., Lorenz, F. O., Conger, K. J., Simons, R. L., Whitbeck, L. B., Huck, S., & Melby, J. N. (1990). Linking economic hardship to marital quality and instability. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52(3), 643–656. https://doi.org/10.2307/352931
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Cutrona, C. E., Shaffer, P. A., Wesner, K. A., & Gardner, K. A. (2007). Optimally matching support and perceived spousal sensitivity. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 754–758. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.754
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
Feeney, B. C., & Collins, N. L. (2015). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314544222
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
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford University Press.
Randall, A. K., & Bodenmann, G. (2009). The role of stress on close relationships and marital satisfaction. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(2), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2008.10.004
Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(2), 172–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(80)90007-4
Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5(4), 357–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x
Rusu, P. P., Nussbeck, F. W., Leuchtmann, L., & Bodenmann, G. (2020). Stress, dyadic coping, and relationship satisfaction: A longitudinal study disentangling timely stable from yearly fluctuations. PLOS ONE, 15(4), e0231133. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231133
Stanley, S. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Whitton, S. W. (2010). Commitment: Functions, formation, and the securing of romantic attachment. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(4), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00060.x
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Walsh, F. (2016). Strengthening family resilience (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
