Success and Failure Regarding Predict Marital Achievement - Report Example

SUCCESS AND FAILURE REGARDING PREDICT MARITAL ACHIEVEMENT Stephanie Anyaoha Introduction Earnest W. Burgess developed a technique called the parole prediction, which was instrumental in his quest to develop a similar technique to predict success in marriage. Burgess, a sociology professor who studied and later taught at the University of Chicago between 1916 and 1960, argued that the technique for predicting success in marriage was similar to predicting parole. In this regard, Burgess (1938) was of the opinion that scientific research could establish the quality of a marriage. In effect, Burgess turned his views into a logical conclusion and developed a technique for predicting success in marriage through analytical procedures. Using earlier studies that identified factors to marital happiness, Burgess structured his research design to determine the predictive outcomes in a successful marriage. In addition, he incorporated Hornell Hart’s 1926 editorial in Social Hygiene, in his study. In this regard, Hart observed that women’s favorable age for a happy marriage was 24 years while men preferred 29 years. In the book Research in Marriage, Burgess observed a high possibility of a successful marriage if a wife had similar features with the husband’s mother. Research by Buttenweiser and Terman, which compared divorce patterns in happy and unhappy marriages with the interests and traits in couples, support Burgess’ findings (Burgess, 1939). In a 1938 study titled Psychological Factors in Marital Happiness, Terman noted parallels between “personality, background, sexual factors, and happiness in marriage” (Burgess, 1939, p. 1). Regardless of weak points in these studies, Burgess used the findings as an inspiration to carry out additional research. In this regard, he researched on engaged couples to challenge these responses by identifying the differences with married couples. Burgess concluded that shared experiences in marriage were a solution in marriages since they brought the couple closer (Burgess, 1939). The first methodical investigation to success in marriage was a 1931 study commenced by Leonard Cottrell and Earnest Burgess. In an eight-paged survey distributed among 7,000 married couples, the study appeared intricate. However, Cottrell and Burgess used a subsample of 526 couples while analyzing the data. For inclusion into the study, the criterion required couples to be residents of Illinois with a marriage period between one and six years at the time of filling the survey (Cottrell & Burgess, 1936, p. 739). Nonetheless, it is obvious that there is an ambiguity in defining happiness. In effect, the two researchers sought the opinion of people well acquainted with the research subjects in order for them to give a clear determination of the degree of happiness in a couple. Effectively, the evaluation of the link between the couple’s happiness with the information provided by the independent resource provided sufficient understanding of the concept of happiness in a married couple. The researchers used twenty questions to identify the various ways of defining happiness among married couples, which measured the marital adjustment in each couple. In line with this, the research included questions regarding general activities in a couple such as the level of agreement in handling finances, recreation, dealing with friends, in-laws, manners, and intimate relations. In addition, the questions tested the way the couples demonstrated affection while enquiring the confiding levels in the married couples (Cottrell & Burgess, 1936). In comparison to marital status quo, the attained adjustment had the capability of differentiating between marriages that ended in separation after some time, divorce, or those that broke. Furthermore, the adjustment levels determined the couple that contemplated divorce in a marriage that had not yet broken. Noteworthy Statistics The study identified and characterized various traits and categorized them into their predictive patterns. In this regard, these patterns included concepts that indicated disparate characteristics of interpersonal relations in a marriage. In this case, this was in relation to the psychogenetic personalities in a married couple and their influence on cultural patterns, the organization of life, the response patterns in a couple, occupations, and economic prospects in a couple (Burgess, 1938, p. 8). In terms of the most significant positive pivotal adjustments, the study found parents’ marital happiness was a result of preliminary factors such as being the youngest or an only child in the family and having four or more siblings. In addition, other factors include close attachment of the couple with their parents, comparable cultural and religious backgrounds, and the highest level of education attained by the partners, husband’s profession, and employment status of the wife before marriage. Moreover, a connection with three or more people played a critical role in determining the level of adjustment (Burgess, 1938). Based on these results, authors such as Burgess, Dr. Tim Clinton and Dr. Gary Sibcy collaborated in concluding that it is highly possible to predict success in a marriage based on a couple’s characteristics. However, a Christian foundation is important to sustain a marriage since there are plenty of results available by maintaining a healthy relationship with God. Furthermore, a healthy relationship with God contributes to a healthy marriage since the couple adopts Godly ways. Potential Constraints Depression is the primary mood disorder that may constraint a couple from attaining happiness in marriage. However, other mood disorders that act as potential constraints to happiness in the institution of marriage involve the character traits of the couple, which may have flaws based on an individual’s personality patterns. In this case, one person may not communicate their emotions effectively. On the other hand, they may lack the ability to communicate constructively with their partners, which is destructive for a marriage. In his book Love & Respect, Dr. Emerson Eggerichs noted that balancing between family, work, and other roles complicates the capacity of a married couple to stay off the “crazy cycle.” In this case, Eggerichs (2004) noted that men saw through blue filters while women’s filters were pink, which influences understanding and communication in a couple and can act as a potential setback to married couples. On the other hand, managing daily workloads can cause tension in an individual with a consequence of altering a person’s mindset and patience. In this case, it is possible for a day’s challenges to influence an individual’s behavior towards another, which is a result of projection (Eggerichs, 2004). In line with this argument, it is conventional wisdom that busy people undergo more stress and easily irritable, which may amplify a person’s senses resulting to the person becoming overly sensitive in their actions and interpretations. While considering the right partner to marry, external factors such as age, children coming into the marriage, happiness in an individual’s career, cultural backgrounds, physical attraction, existing emotional setbacks in relationships prior to the current one, similar beliefs, and education level are instrumental. In this case, it is common for people to place an exceptional significance on these factors while making the choice of the ideal partner. However, focus shifts and changes overtime once the partners get married although it may go unnoticed. In this regard, focus shifts to other external factors totally unrelated with the original external factors. These factors may include the willingness of the partners to share in performing household chores, fidelity in a marriage, and the desire of partners to have children, and the partners’ prospects in child rearing. It is important to point out that these factors determine success of a marriage (Mehrabiam & Blum, 1999). Farber (1964) provided further insight on this issue and pointed that the development was from systematic substitution in a couple to a “force for conservatism in social arrangements” whereby couples become permanently available (p. 105). In this case, the term permanently available, although married, indicates the availability of an individual to have sexual contact with other people outside the confines of their marriage. In line with this, individuals do not change their basic needs although they compare their partners with other potential suitors in their societies. In effect, the occurrence of such behavior supports the study by Burgess regarding predictions of a successful marriage and the characteristics of selecting a partner. In addition, there are other arguments that explain the evaluation of a spouse by a potential partner as ‘ideal’ to satisfy their selfish interests and desires. In effect, the outcome of such behavior is a tendency of an individual to display insufficient characteristics satisfied by another person other than their partner and may lead to divorce. However, this approach is poignant to predict an ‘ideal’ individual’s characteristics that can equally fit into the characteristics of a partner. This line of thinking suggests to a tendency by married couples to compare their partners with other people. In addition, the line of thought may simultaneously suggest that those left in a marriage may feel that their partner, who left, was the best mate. The results provide for a degree of change in marriages since Farber failed to represent his proposal of these ideals as permanent availability. In addition, Galatians 6:4 says, “Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else...,” (New International Version [NIV], 2008). Investigation of Happiness versus Joy In the contemporary society, researchers are increasingly dedicating a lot of their time and attention to study happiness in marriages and the meaning of happiness in marriages that are undergoing challenges. In itself, the word happiness may hold divergent definition and interpretations depending on an individual’s vision. Some couples may envision happiness as occasional pleasant surprises while others may envision and define happiness as a display of affection. Nevertheless, happiness is achievable to most individuals although there is a tendency for it to be shallow, capricious, or even fleeting. Generally, everyone tries to achieve happiness although to some people achieving happiness remains elusive in their lives. Burgess (1939) suggested that happiness might be a result of experiencing the satisfaction of superficial needs in an individual by the selected partner, which inclines towards the desirability of the partner to have ideal characteristics. On the other hand, individuals exhibiting happiness based on specific circumstances or other people are at a risk of becoming unhappy in case these circumstances do not go their way. These circumstances include health deterioration, ‘rusting toys,’ escalation of marital problems, financial tumbles, piling bills, and any other factor that can contribute to an individual’s happiness. In this case, these factors may result to desperation and disappearance of happiness since human beings fail to understand this joy. To most Christians, experiencing true joy, despite any challenges in life, is a result of a healthy relationship with God and exuding unyielding confidence. In effect, unfortunate circumstances result to happiness in individuals while contrary results to unhappiness. Overall, human beings classification of happiness is the level of their marriage, which contributes to an individual’s fulfillment and satisfaction in a marriage based on the prevailing circumstances. However, the Bible links happiness with coincidence, fortune, circumstances, and luck. In Philippians 3:1 Paul stated, “Rejoice in the Lord” (NIV, 2008). In this case, the Lord is the fundamental foundation and object of joy amongst Christians, which implies that having a healthy relationship with Jesus Christ, is crucial to having joy that goes past consecutive situations. In this case, following and obeying the commandments brings peace and assurance to a human being and leads to joy, which is God’s gift to humankind. In addition, this is one of the fruits of the holy spirits since Galatians 5:22 states, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness (NIV, 2008). In addition, Paul gives a description of this joy once an individual accepts the Gospel in John 15:11 that says, “I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete,” which increases in an individual’s experience and leads to a successful marriage (NIV, 2008). In effect, this implies that false expectations in human beings regarding joy and happiness may lead to self-destruction and inhibit the achievement of personal fulfillment. Practical Solutions It is important for an individual to go beyond the knowledge of external factors and understand the factors that influence productive results in order to understand marriages as happy, wrong, or even impervious to separation and divorce. This research will continue addressing the characteristics in the aforementioned. In addition, the research will include the lack of commitment in married partners while identifying the characteristics that influence happy marriages. In line with commitment in marriages, it is important to point that recent research points to the importance of addressing the quality of commitment amongst partners while also considering the natural attitude of partners. In this case, it is pertinent to indicate that a marriage whereby the level of commitment in one partner is higher can result to some level of success regardless of the other partner’s level of commitment. In previous years, women primarily depended on men for financial support. In effect, previous researches proposed that a husband’s high level of commitment in a marriage achieved great success in the end. On the other hand, the contemporary society witnesses an increment in women’s participation in the labor market, which means that wives are increasingly depending less on their husbands with time. In effect, the implication is that women are finding it easy to quit unhappy marriages since they can be able to sustain their lives through their incomes. Effectively, this factor makes it important to consider the commitment of wives in a marriage. Implications for Marital and Biblical Counseling Research studies on marriages tend to be shallow and fail to include important factors necessary to sustain a marriage. In addition, marriage counselors tend to possess little information to guide couples on approaches that ensure successful marriages. In this regard, the counselors fail to take into consideration the predictive elements, which are an important approach towards pre-marital counseling since the counselors may be able to identify the important characteristics in a couple that can sustain a marriage. On the other hand, it is important to display affection and reverence in a marriage, more so during turbulent times, which calls for understanding of partners in a marriage. During turbulent times, a marriage undergoes challenges that require an approach filled with affection, reverence, and persistency, which resolves any setbacks in advance. Conversely, human beings are oblivious of the fact that they exist in a sinful world. However, it is important to be hopeful in the active and living God who directs the existence of humankind in the world and live free of sin. In this case, Jude 24 indicates that God is “able to keep you from stumbling and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy” (NIV, 2008). In this case, individuals and married couples exhibit self-confidence and eternal joy through following God’s commandments. In effect, individuals should stop losing sight of the rewards promised by God in eternal glory, which means that individuals should not neglect the Holy word of God or scorn against trials and tribulations. However, human beings should use these challenges as essential elements of finding joy in God’s name. References Burgess, E. W. (1938). Predicting marriage adjustment. Third of four lectures on “Theory and methods of prediction in the social sciences.” University of Chicago. Unpublished paper. Burgess, E. W. (1939). Predictive factors in the success or failure of marriage. Unpublished paper. Cottrell, L. S., & Burgess, E. W. (1936). “The prediction of adjustment in marriage.” American Sociological Review. 1 (6): 737-751. Eggerichs, E. (2004). Love & respect: The love she most desires, the respect he desperately needs. Nashville, TN: Integrity Publishers. Farber, B. (1964). Family: Organization and Interaction. San Francisco, CA: Chandler Publishing Company. Hakeem, M. (1984). The Validity of the Burgess Method of Parole Prediction, American Journal of Sociology, 53(5): 376-386. Hicks, M. W., & Platt, M. (1970). Marital happiness and stability: A review of the study in the sixties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32(4): 553-574. Hill, R. (1951). Review of current research on marriage and the family. American Sociological Review, 16(5): 694-701. Kaslow, Florence and Robison, James A. (1996). Long-term satisfying marriages: Perceptions of contributing factors. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 24(2): 153-168. Mehrabiam, A., & Blum, J.S. (1999). Personality and temperament correlates of marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 67(1): 93-125. New International Version [NIV] Life Application Study Bible. (2011). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Read More