Lawrence A. Kurdek

What Do We Know About Gay and Lesbian Couples

Research on gay and lesbian couples is highlighted with regard to household labor, conflict, satisfaction, perceived social support, stability, and the variables that predict relationship quality. Relative to partners from married heterosexual couples, partners from gay and lesbian couples tend to assign household labor more fairly, resolve conflict more constructively, experience similar levels of satisfaction, and perceive less support from family members but more support from friends. The limited data available indicate that gay and lesbian couples may be less stable than married heterosexual couples. The factors that predict relationship quality tend to be the same for gay, lesbian, and heterosexual married couples. Overall, research paints a positive picture of gay and lesbian couples and indicates that they tend to be more similar to than different from heterosexual couples.

Relationship Outcomes and Their Predictors: Longitudinal Evidence from Heterosexual Married, Gay Cohabiting, and Lesbian Cohabiting Couples

Data from partners of 236 married, 66 gay cohabiting, and 51 lesbian cohabiting couples were used to assess if members of married couples differed from those of either gay couples or lesbian couples on five dimensions of relationship quality (intimacy, autonomy, equality, constructive problem solving, and barriers to leaving), two relationship outcomes (the trajectory of change in relationship satisfaction and relationship dissolution over 5 years), and the link between each dimension of relationship quality and each relationship outcome. Relative to married partners, gay partners reported more autonomy, fewer barriers to leaving, and more frequent relationship dissolution. Relative to married partners, lesbian partners reported more intimacy, more autonomy, more equality, fewer barriers to leaving, and more frequent relationship dissolution. Overall, the strength with which the dimensions of relationship quality were linked to each relationship outcome for married partners was equivalent to that for both gay and lesbian partners. Key Words: gay couples, lesbian couples, relationship dissolution, relationship quality. Five themes recur in the research regarding how heterosexual close relationships are maintained over time. Theme 1-women define themselves in terms of their relationships-is consistent with evidence that women are more likely than men to derive their self-worth from the quality of their relationships (Cross & Madson, 1997). Theme 2men prize autonomy-is derived from findings that men in relationships are more likely than women in relationships to value independence and self-sufficiency (Buss & Schmitt, 1993). Theme 3-men and women make unequal contributions to the maintenance of their relationships-is grounded on reports that women are more likely than men to identify relationship problems, to do a disproportionate share of household labor, and to seek support for relationship problems (Thompson & Walker, 1989). Theme 4men and women find it difficult to resolve relationship conflict constructively-is consonant with the claim that, whereas women are motivated to talk about relationship problems, men tend to withdraw from such conflict (Gottman, 1994). Finally, Theme 5-institutional barriers are needed to stabilize marriages-is in accord with the view that, if society is to benefit from stable marriages, then it must pose barriers (e.g., the loss of rights and privileges) to prevent unhappy spouses from ending their marriages (Adams & Jones, 1997). The study presented here is based on the premise that these five themes provide the basis for constructing a five-dimensional model of relationship quality. The major assumption of this model is that relationship quality can be understood in terms of gender-linked forces within the relationship that promote the happiness of each partner, as well as institutionalized forces outside of the relationship that enable partners to continue their relationship despite personal unhappiness. Based on the five themes as well as previous accounts of the nature of relationship quality (e.g., Adams & Jones, 1997; Cochran & Peplau, 1985; Fitzpatrick, Vangelisti, & Firman, 1994; Harter et al., 1997), forces within the relationship were represented by intimacy (merging the self and the other), autonomy (maintaining a sense of self separate from the relationship), equality (having equal power and investment in the relationship), and constructive problem solving (negotiating and compromising). Forces outside of the relationship were represented by barriers to leaving the relationship (pressure to remain together). This study first compares appraisals of the five dimensions of relationship quality of partners from married couples with those of partners from both gay and lesbian cohabiting couples. If these five dimensions represent gender-linked processes of how men and women experience their close relationships and socially sanctioned barriers that promote the stability of these relationships, then the average levels of intimacy, autonomy, equality, constructive problem solving, and barriers perceived by partners from opposite-sex couples in socially approved relationships-heterosexual married couples-should differ from those perceived by partners from same-sex couples in socially stigmatized relationships-gay and lesbian cohabiting couples. …

Relationship Quality of Partners in Heterosexual Married, Heterosexual Cohabiting, and Gay and Lesbian Relationships

The relationship quality of partners in 44 married, 35 heterosexual cohabiting, 50 gay, and 56 lesbian monogamous couples was studied. Each couple lived together and did not have children living with them. Relationship quality was dimensionalized as love for partner, liking of partner, and relationship satisfaction. Cohabiting partners had the lowest Love for Partner and Relationship Satisfaction scores. Differences were also found among partner types on: barriers to leaving the relationship, alternatives to the relationship, a belief that mindreading is expected in the relationship, masculinity, femininity, androgyny, dyadic attachment, shared decision making, and perceived social support from family. The four partner groups did not differ in psychological adjustment. For each type of partner, love for partner was related to many barriers to leaving the relationship and high dyadic attachment; liking of partner was related to few alternatives to the relationship, high dyadic attachment, and high shared decision making; and relationship satisfaction was related to many attractions, few alternatives, few beliefs regarding disagreement is destructive to the relationship, high dyadic attachment, and high shared decision making. Stepwise multiple regression procedures were used to identify the best set of predictors for each partner type. Results are discussed in the context of existing models of relationship quality.

On Being Insecure about the Assessment of Attachment Styles

The psychometric properties of subscores from Collins and Reads (1990) Adult Attachment Scale (AAS, Ns = 61 gay, 42 lesbian, and 155 heterosexual couples) and Griffin and Bartholomews (1994b) Relationship Scales Questionnaire (RSQ, N = 33 gay, 52 lesbian, and 79 heterosexual couples) were examined. Type of couple did not moderate any findings. Dependency and Closeness emerged as reliable factors from the AAS, but, with controls for the Big Five personality factors, neither attachment style accounted for unique variability in relationship satisfaction, and only Closeness accounted for unique variability in relationship commitment. Closeness exerted an indirect effect on commitment through both expressiveness and dysfunctional beliefs regarding relationship standards. Avoidance and Anxiety emerged as reliable factors from the RSQ, but, with controls for the six facets of Neuroticism, only Anxiety accounted for variability in satisfaction and commitment. Anxiety exerted an indirect effect on satisfaction and commitment through positive models of the self and positive models of the other in the current relationship. It is concluded that, although closeness and anxiety may be distinct individual differences variables of relevance to close relationships that exert their indirect effects on relationship outcomes through relationship schemas, additional work is needed to develop a single measure that reliably assesses them.

Dimensionality of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale: Evidence from heterosexual and homosexual couples.

The study assessed the reliability and validity of the 4 subscores derived from the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS, Spanier 1976) with samples of both partners from 538 married heterosexual couples and 197 cohabiting homosexual couples.

The Allocation of Household Labor by Partners in Gay and Lesbian Couples

This study examined how full-time employed partners from 43 gay and 36 lesbian couples allocated labor for six household tasks typically performed by women in heterosexual couples. Although the relative frequency of performing household labor within the couple did not differ between gay and lesbian partners, compared to gay partners, lesbian partners reported that more tasks were done equally often by both partners. The relative frequency of performing household labor was related to interest in household labor, even with controls for skill in performing household labor. Satisfaction with the division of household labor exerted its effect on both relationship satisfaction and relationship stability through perceived equality in the relationship.

Pet dogs as attachment figures for adult owners.

This study assessed the extent to which, and under what conditions, owners turn to their pet dogs in times of emotional distress. This feature of an attachment figure-safe haven-is a key characteristic of an attachment bond. Participants (N = 975, mean age = 47.95 years, 789 women and 186 men) were relatively dedicated dog owners who completed an online survey. Relative to other features of an attachment figure, safe haven was the least salient. Nonetheless, participants were more likely to turn to their dogs than they were to turn to their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, best friends, and children but less likely to turn to their dogs than to their romantic partners. Characteristics of both owners (being male, widowed, highly involved in the care of the dog, and uncomfortable with self-disclosure) and dogs (strongly meeting owners needs regarding relatedness) heightened the likelihood that dogs were turned to rather than some humans. It is concluded that some owners develop attachment bonds with their pet dogs.

A developmental analysis of the relation between peer acceptance and both interpersonal understanding and perceived social self-competence.

KURDEK, LAWRENCE A., and KRILE, DONNA. A Developmental Analysis of the Relation between Peer Acceptance and Both Interpersonal Understanding and Perceived Social Self-Competence. CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1982, 53, 1485-1491. This report explored the relation between childrens peer acceptance and both interpersonal understanding and perceived social self-competence in samples of children grade 3-8. In addition, it examined correspondences between pairs of mutual friends, unilateral friends, and nonfriends for these 2 variables. Interpersonal understanding showed significant developmental increases; girls performed significantly better than boys. Childrens favored peer status was related to high levels of both interpersonal understanding and perceived social self-competence, with the relation between peer acceptance and interpersonal understanding being stronger for older than for younger children. Compared with unilateral friends and nonfriends, mutual friends were more similar to each other on both interpersonal understanding and perceived social self-competence. Results are interpreted in light of recent conceptual and methodological advances in the study of childrens peer relations.

Pet dogs as attachment figures

Four samples of college students (N = 923) were used to address the extent to which pet dogs, relative to humans, exhibited features of an attachment figure and to identify characteristics of persons with strong attachments to their pet dogs. Dogs exhibited the feature of proximity maintenance as well as fathers and siblings did, and secure basis and proximity maintenance were their most salient features. Differences in the closeness of relationships with dogs versus humans were minimal for students with high levels of attachment to their dogs. Attachment was positively linked to involvement in the care for the dog, the extent to which the dog met needs regarding relatedness, owner traits of openness, and dog traits of energy and intelligence.

Correlates of relationship satisfaction in cohabiting gay and lesbian couples: Integration of contextual, investment, and problem-solving models.

This study examined the relation between relationship satisfaction and variables representing the contextual, investment, and problem-solving models of intimate relationships. Ss were 75 gay and 51 lesbian cohabiting couples. There were very few instances in which mean levels of model variables differed significantly for gay and lesbian couples. The strength of the correlates of relationship satisfaction rarely differed between gay and lesbian couples. Relationship satisfaction was related to variables from each of the 3 models. Support was obtained for a mediational model that proposed ordered linkages among variables from the 3 models.