The Influence of Intimacy Rituals and Biological Sex on Relational Quality and Intimacy Among Dating Couples

Abstract

Do intimacy rituals affect perceptions of relational intimacy and relational quality? This study examined the effect of self-reported use of intimacy rituals and biological sex on perceived relational intimacy and perceived relational quality. Perceived use of intimacy rituals was positively related to perceived relational quality. However, perceived use of intimacy rituals did not influence perceived relational intimacy. In addition, women perceived significantly higher levels of relational intimacy, as well as significantly more relational quality, than did men.

Keywords:

• Biological Sex
• Dating Couples
• Intimacy Rituals
• Relational Intimacy
• Relational Quality
• Rituals

Notes

Note. The sr ² value for a hierarchical multiple regression denotes the increase in unique variance explained with the addition of the added variables above and beyond the unique variance explained from the previous steps (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).

∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01.

Note. The sr ² value for a hierarchical multiple regression denotes the increase in unique variance explained with the addition of the added variables above and beyond the unique variance explained from the previous steps (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).

∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01.

However, because of strong correlation between relational bond and relational satisfaction (r = .62), much of the potential association between relational bond and personal commitment was accounted for by relational satisfaction (Givertz & Segrin, 2005).

A measurement model, which specified the items loading onto the six respective latent factors (satisfaction, commitment, intimacy, trust, passion, and love), with one second-level factor (perceived relational quality), demonstrated adequate fit of the data to the hypothesized model, X ² (N = 579, df = 114) = 402.06, p < .05; X ²/df = 3.53; NNFI = .98; CFI = .98; GFI = .97; RMSEA = .063. In the model, the six sub-dimensions all significantly contributed unique understanding to the higher order construct of relational quality with standardized factor loadings ranging from .98 to .77. Furthermore, each of the individual 18 items significantly loaded to the respective sub-dimension with standardized loadings ranging from .90 to .65. For complete model estimates, standardized factor loadings, and sub-dimension intercorrelation statistics, please contact Jeffrey T. Child.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Judy C. Pearson

Judy C. Pearson (PhD, Indiana University, 1975) is a professor and associate dean in the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences at North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.

Jeffrey T. Child

Jeffrey T. Child (PhD, North Dakota State University, 2007) is an assistant professor in the School of Communication Studies at Kent State University, Kent, OH.

Anna F. Carmon

Anna F. Carmon (MA, Illinois State University, 2005) is a graduate student and teaching associate at North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.

Amy N. Miller

Amy N. Miller (BA, Jamestown College, 2007) is a graduate student and teaching associate at North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.