The impact of sexual compatibility on sexual and relationship satisfaction in a sample of young adult heterosexual couples

Abstract

The associations between sexual compatibility and sexual and relationship satisfaction were examined in a sample of 133 college-age heterosexual couples. Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to assess the relationship between two types of sexual compatibility (actual sexual compatibility and perceived sexual compatibility) and sexual and relationship satisfaction. Age, length of relationship, and satisfaction were included as covariates in the hierarchical regression analyses. Couple difference scores from four subscales of the Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Inventory used to measure actual sexual compatibility, and women's and men's Hurlbert's Index of Sexual Compatibility scores measuring perceived sexual compatibility were included as predictors of sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction in the analyses. The strongest predictor of sexual satisfaction, after accounting for relationship satisfaction, was perceived sexual compatibility. Similarly, the strongest predictor of relationship satisfaction, after accounting for sexual satisfaction, was perceived sexual compatibility. The final models predicting sexual satisfaction accounted for 66% of the variance in the women's model and 75% of the variance in the men's model. The final models predicting relationship satisfaction accounted for 20% of the variance in the women's model and 27% of the variance in the men's model. Perception of sexual compatibility may be more important to couple satisfaction than actual sexual compatibility of specific sexual acts.

Keywords:

• sexual compatibility
• perceived compatibility
• sexual satisfaction
• relationship satisfaction
• heterosexual couples

Notes

Note: p < .05*, p < .01**, p < .001***. W = women; M = men; ISS = sexual satisfaction; DAS-S = relationship satisfaction; SC = perceived sexual compatibility; SESII-A = arousability; SESII-S = setting; SESII-RI = relationship importance.

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. R ² based on Adjusted R ².

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. R ² based on Adjusted R ².