Correlational findings

Study Austrom (1984): study CA Ontario 1982

23-59 aged English speaking, Toronto and Ontario, Canada, 198?
N = 1038
Non Response:
Questionnaire: paper


Authors's Label
Satisfaction with love relationship
Our Classification
Factor analysis based on answers to closed questions. The respondents were asked to indicate how satisfied they were with their: 1. marital status, 2. love relationship(s), 3. sex life. Rated on a 11-point scale ranging from completely dissatisfied to completely satisfied.

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks O-SLW-u-sq-n-11-a r = +.47 ALL Ss (married (including not formally married cohabitating Ss (considered as married) and non-married).

O-SLW-u-sq-n-11-a Beta = +.25 ß controlled for: gender, age, household income, marital status, being in love, desire to change dating pattern or marital status, locus of control, social support.
1. instrumental: problems managing money,deciding how to spend money, not enough money to do things, unsatisfying job, not enough money to get by on;
2. expressive: unsatisfactory sex life, problems communicating, dissatisfied with marital status, not enough close friends, no one to show love/affection, too dependent on others, not having children, no one to understand problems; 3. interpersonal demands: too many responsibilities, no one to depend on, too many demands on time, problems communicating, problems with children, problems with spouse/ex-spouse, conflicts with those who are close), and satisfaction with job and financial situation, friendships and living situation.

                                                - - neutral or dissatisfied: Mt = 6.6
- satisfied:               Mt = 7.9
Difference significant (001)     

- males:    r = +.41        ß = +.27
- females:  r = +.45        ß = +.21
Beta's controlled for the same variables as above, except marital status and gender.