89 (SD = 2.27); cuatro.94 (SD = dos.97), both communities varying between half a year and eleven numerous years of dating; seven.76 (SD = cuatro.01), between a few and 19 decades; and you will (SD = 4.82), anywhere between less than annually and you may 31 age. 8%) and you can stayed which have relatives, when you are men and women living with its couples was basically generally performing some body (69.2%), of which 53% had college or postgraduate stages. Of the formal partnership members, 67% got school or article-scholar level, where 89.8% was functioning, 2% resigned and 8.2% underemployed. The working situation towards the hitched players was equivalent: 89.5% were doing work, 2.9% was basically resigned and you may six.3% was underemployed, and you can 1.3% introduced other work position. Within this classification, 62.5% of your participants had college or university otherwise postgraduate values.

Matchmaking Top quality, picked to ensure requirements authenticity, is counted on the Matchmaking Rating Function–Modified (RRF-R; Davis, 1996, adapt

The information exhibited are amassed during the framework from greater browse ideas, and this consisted of a detailed sociodemographic and you will relationship testing, along with other bills inside extent out of personal matchmaking.

Private connection are evaluated depending on the Portuguese variation (Table 1) of one’s faster particular this new Perseverance Level (Stanley, 1986), that has been translated with respect to the following interpretation and you can retroversion strategies: just after consent got of the journalist, the first measure is actually translated by a couple of experts in industry, both of these translations was basically confronted with retroversion by two professionals, one bilingual and another proficient in the application of the fresh new English language; in the long run, for every single type was compared to brand new measure, going for making use of the newest words and items having higher proximity so you’re able to they. The fresh new Portuguese type hence consisted of brand new fourteen original items and you may an identical respond to measure and you can is actually titled, immediately following deliberation by the cluster, the non-public Partnership Level (‘Escala de Compromisso Pessoal’–ECP). Towards final stage of one’s interpretation techniques, the fresh new appliance was administered to 3 players into goal of guaranteeing the fresh new adequateness of language together with unambiguous understanding of what exactly, which have been talked about into the professionals immediately following applying of the newest survey. Because there had been no comments stating otherwise, things stayed a comparable.

According to total time of the partnership, the typical, in years, into the more statuses revealed are, respectively: 2

by Lind, 2008). Resulting from a revision of the dominicancupid 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.