Rituals in Committed Romantic Relationships: The Creation and Validation of an Instrument

Abstract

Rituals are widely studied in interpersonal communication research, but no instrument for assessing the preceived use of rituals among couples in committed romantic relationships exists. The purpose of this investigation was to create and validate such a measure (Rituals in Committed Romantic Relationships; RCRR). Five-hundred-sixty individuals in committed romantic relationships responded to a 50-item questionnaire that measured 5 sets of rituals pertaining to daily routines and tasks, idiosyncratic behavior, everyday talk, intimacy, and couple-time. In addition, they completed measures of perceived relational quality and perceived relational intimacy. Multiple analyses supported a 5-factor model consisting of 30 of the original 50 items. Perceived use of rituals was predictive of alterations in both perceived relational quality and perceived relational intimacy.

Keywords:

• Committed Romantic Relationships
• Relational Intimacy
• Relational Quality
• Rituals

Notes

Note. RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; CFI = comparative fit index.

^a Three error variance terms for specific ritual items were allowed to correlate (Idiosyncratic item 2 with Idiosyncratic item 3; Idiosyncratic item 5 with Idiosyncratic item 6; and Intimacy item 1 with Intimacy item 2).

Note. Items were mixed and were not grouped together by similar subject on the survey.

*Denotes the item has been recoded (reverse-scored).

*p < .05. **p < .01.

The asterisk reflects significance level with *p < .05. **p < .01.

The standardized factor loadings and standard error for each item in the final CFA model are available upon request from the second author.

Separate structural equation models were also computed by relational status (married versus cohabitating relationships). The same patterns of results emerged among these two groups as in the overall analysis with slight variations in standardized estimates from one model to the other. Full differentiated results are available upon request from the second author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Judy C. Pearson

Judy C. Pearson (PhD, Indiana University) is Professor and Associate Dean at North Dakota State University

Jeffrey T. Child

Jeffrey T. Child (PhD, North Dakota State University) is Assistant Professor at Kent State University

Anna F. Carmon

Anna F. Carmon (PhD, North Dakota State University) is Assistant Professor at Indiana University–Purdue University Columbus.