The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction Index.
Abstract
The present study took a critical look at a central construct in couples research: relationship satisfaction. Eight well-validated self-report measures of relationship satisfaction, including the Marital Adjustment Test (MAT; H. J. Locke & K. M. Wallace, 1959), the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS; G. B. Spanier, 1976), and an additional 75 potential satisfaction items, were given to 5,315 online participants. Using item response theory, the authors demonstrated that the MAT and DAS provided relatively poor levels of precision in assessing satisfaction, particularly given the length of those scales. Principal-components analysis and item response theory applied to the larger item pool were used to develop the Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI) scales. Compared with the MAS and the DAS, the CSI scales were shown to have higher precision of measurement (less noise) and correspondingly greater power for detecting differences in levels of satisfaction. The CSI scales demonstrated strong convergent validity with other measures of satisfaction and excellent construct validity with anchor scales from the nomological net surrounding satisfaction, suggesting that they assess the same theoretical construct as do prior scales. Implications for research are discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The CSI-32 was found to have excellent construct validity and convergent validity with other measures of relationship satisfaction (Funk and Rogge, 2007).”
From Partner symptom accommodation in generalized anxiety disorder: A preliminary examination of correlates with symptoms and cognitive behavioural therapy outcome (2024) · cites this paper as Funk and Rogge, 2007
Citations
Cites
A Global Measure of Perceived Stress
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/2136404 · Cited by 32,807
Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments.
Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.286 · Cited by 3,970
Christensen, A., Atkins, D. C., Berns, S., Wheeler, J., Baucom, D. H., & Simpson, L. E. (2004) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.72.2.176 · Cited by 380
A psychometric evaluation of the Spanier dyadic adjustment scale
Sharpley, C. F., & Cross, D. G. (1982) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/351594 · Cited by 297
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 1,004
Frost, D. M., Fingerhut, A. W., & Meyer, I. H. (2022) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.1111/jomf.12827 · Cited by 43
“The CSI not only demonstrates strong validity correlations with existing measures of the construct, but it also demonstrates less noise and more power in detecting individual differences in satisfaction than existing measures (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
Gender differences in the association between sexual satisfaction and quality of life
Stephenson, K. R., Pickworth, C., & Jones, P. S. (2021) · Sexual & Relationship Therapy · doi:10.1080/14681994.2021.2004309 · Cited by 32
“The CSI is a well-validated, reliable, and commonly used scale to measure relationship satisfaction with correlations between .84 and .99 when comparing with related scales and a Cronbach’s alpha of .94 (Funk & Rogge, 2007; Graham et al., 2011).”
MethodMarital Satisfaction, Parenting Styles, and Child Outcomes in Families of Autistic Children
Greenlee, J. L., Piro-Gambetti, B., Putney, J., Papp, L. M., & Hartley, S. (2021) · Family Process · doi:10.1111/famp.12708 · Cited by 26
Hidalgo, D., & Dewitte, M. (2021) · Sexual Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.esxm.2020.100307 · Cited by 26
Beckmeyer, J. J., & Jamison, T. B. (2020) · Family Relations · doi:10.1111/fare.12464 · Cited by 26
Tuthill, E. L., Neilands, T. B., Johnson, M. O., Sauceda, J. A., Mkandawire, J., & Conroy, A. A. (2019) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-019-02583-9 · Cited by 33
“, “Generally, I am satisfied with my relationship”) [27].”
How Are Patients With Prostate Cancer Managing Androgen Deprivation Therapy Side Effects?
Wibowo, E., Wassersug, R., Robinson, J., Matthew, A., McLeod, D., & Walker, L. (2019) · Clinical Genitourinary Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2018.12.006 · Cited by 26
Lavner, J. A., Barton, A. W., & Beach, S. (2019) · The Behavior Therapist · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2018.12.006 · Cited by 26
Predictors of Change in Mothers’ and Fathers’ Parent-Child Aggression Risk
Rodriguez, C. M., Silvia, P., & Pu, D. F. (2018) · International Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect · doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.09.008 · Cited by 26
Gauthier, L. D. M., Vaillancourt‐Morel, M., Rellini, A. H., Godbout, N., Charbonneau‐Lefebvre, V., Desjardins, F., & Bergeron, S. (2018) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12345 · Cited by 30
Zygar–Hoffmann, C., Hagemeyer, B., Pusch, S., & Schönbrodt, F. D. (2018) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2145 · Cited by 32
Rivers, A. S., & Sanford, K. (2018) · Journal of family psychology · doi:10.1037/fam0000389 · Cited by 26
Communication of Military Couples During Deployment Predicting Generalized Anxiety Upon Reunion
Knobloch, L. K., Knobloch-Fedders, L. M., & Yorgason, J. (2018) · Journal of family psychology · doi:10.1037/fam0000344 · Cited by 26
“Participants completed the Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007).2 Four items comprised the measure: (a) please indicate the degree of happiness, all things considered, of your relationship (0 extremely unhappy, 6 perfect), (b) how warm and comfortable is your relationship with your…”
MethodPrayer and Forgiveness: Beyond Relationship Quality and Extension to Marriage
Fincham, F., & May, R. W. (2017) · Journal of family psychology · doi:10.1037/fam0000331 · Cited by 26
“Starting with 180 items previously used to assess relationship satisfaction, Funk and Rogge (2007) conducted an item response theory analysis to develop a four-item measure of relationship satisfaction with optimized psychometric properties.”
MethodInterpersonal Goals and Well-Being in Couples Coping with Genito-Pelvic Pain
Rosen, N., Dewitte, M., Merwin, K., & Bergeron, S. (2016) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0877-1 · Cited by 26
Natural language use and couples’ adjustment to head and neck cancer.
Badr, H., Milbury, K., Majeed, N., Carmack, C. L., Ahmad, Z. N., & Gritz, E. R. (2016) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/hea0000377 · Cited by 33
“Scores range from 6-45; a score of 30.5 or lower has been identified through IRT analysis as being indicative of marital distress (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
InfluentialMcShall, J. R., & Johnson, M. D. (2014) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0038267 · Cited by 35
Affectionate touch in satisfying and dissatisfying romantic relationships
Jakubiak, B. K. (2022) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/02654075221077280 · Cited by 28
“First, participants completed a modified version of the Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk and Rogge, 2007).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialExperiencing a Natural Disaster Temporarily Boosts Relationship Satisfaction in Newlywed Couples
Williamson, H. C., Bradbury, T. N., & Karney, B. R. (2021) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/09567976211015677 · Cited by 30
“Husbands’ and wives’ relationship satisfaction, conceptualized as each spouse’s global sentiment toward the relationship, was measured at each time point with 10 items from the Couples Satisfaction Index (the 16-item version without the six semanticdifferential items; Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MethodGieter, S. D., Cooman, R. D., Bogaerts, Y., & Verelst, L. (2021) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12314 · Cited by 26
The Baby Steps Web Program for the Well-Being of New Parents: Randomized Controlled Trial
Kavanagh, D. J., Connolly, J., Fisher, J., Halford, W. K., Hamilton, K., Hides, L. M., Milgrom, J., Rowe, H. J., Scuffham, P., White, K. M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/23659 · Cited by 27
“Relationship satisfaction was measured using the 16-item Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI-16) [28], which gives a score of increasing satisfaction from 0 to 81.”
Couple Relationship Education for Same-Sex Couples: A Preliminary Evaluation of Rainbow CoupleCARE
Pepping, C. A., Halford, W. K., Cronin, T. J., & Lyons, A. (2020) · Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy · doi:10.1080/15332691.2020.1746458 · Cited by 32
“The 16-item form of the Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI) (Funk & Rogge, 2007) was used to measure couple relationship satisfaction.”
MethodResultInfluentialHangen, F., Crasta, D., & Rogge, R. (2020) · Journal of Sex Research · doi:10.1080/00224499.2019.1669133 · Cited by 25
“Respondents completed the 4-item Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI-4; Funk & Rogge, 2007; α = .94) assessing global evaluations of relationship quality (e.g., “In general, how satisfied are you with your relationship?”).”
MethodSelf-citationLee, K. Y., Reis, H., & Rogge, R. (2020) · Sex Roles · doi:10.1007/s11199-020-01141-1 · Cited by 25
Self-citationRelationship Behaviors across the Transition to Parenthood
Rauch-Anderegg, V., Kuhn, R., Milek, A., Halford, W., & Bodenmann, G. (2020) · Journal of Family Issues · doi:10.1177/0192513x19878864 · Cited by 25
“Relationship satisfaction was assessed with the German version of the 4-item version of the Couple Satisfaction Index-4 (CSI-4; Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MethodEkas, N. V., Tidman, L., & Timmons, L. (2019) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-019-04165-z · Cited by 36
Doss, B. D., Roddy, M. K., Llabre, M. M., Salivar, E. G., & Jensen‐Doss, A. (2019) · Journal of Family Psychology · doi:10.1037/fam0000582 · Cited by 31
“On average, both mothers (M = 7.02, SD = 4.14) and fathers (M = 8.74, SD = 4.29) were below the clinical cutoff for relationship distress at baseline (13.5; Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialRoddy, M. K., Rothman, K., & Doss, B. (2018) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2018.09.002 · Cited by 25
Perceived partner responsiveness predicts smoking cessation in single-smoker couples
Britton, M., Haddad, S., & Derrick, J. L. (2018) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.08.026 · Cited by 25
Perceived Marital Support and Incident Mental Illness: Evidence from the National Comorbidity Survey
Feder, K. A., Heatherington, L., Mojtabai, R., & Eaton, W. W. (2018) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12343 · Cited by 30
Conroy, A. A., Gamarel, K., Neilands, T., Dilworth, S., Darbes, L., & Johnson, M. O. (2016) · Aids and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-016-1423-9 · Cited by 25
“Relationship satisfaction was measured using the 4-item Couples Satisfaction Index [40].”
MethodAl‐Zaben, F., Sehlo, M. G., & Koenig, H. G. (2015) · Saudi Medical Journal · doi:10.15537/smj.2015.10.12254 · Cited by 17
Pukay-Martin, N. D., Torbit, L. A., Landy, M. S. H., Wanklyn, S. G., Shnaider, P., Lane, J. E. M., & Monson, C. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1002/jclp.22166 · Cited by 25
Sturge-Apple, M. L., Rogge, R., Skibo, M., Peltz, J. S., & Suor, J. H. (2015) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0038650 · Cited by 25
“Specifically, items of the Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007) were modified in order to measure the extent to which mothers’ perceive a positive relationship with the target children.”
MethodSelf-citationDeciding on couple therapy: The role of masculinity in relationship help-seeking.
Parnell, K. J., & Hammer, J. H. (2017) · Psychology of Men & Masculinity · doi:10.1037/men0000098 · Cited by 33
Shoikhedbrod, A., Rosen, N. O., Corsini‐Munt, S., Harasymchuk, C., Impett, E. A., & Muise, A. (2022) · The Journal of Sex Research · doi:10.1080/00224499.2022.2130132 · Cited by 25
“2,3 Relationship Satisfaction Relationship satisfaction was measured using the Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MacKinnon, A., Simpson, K. M., Salisbury, M. R., Bobula, J., Penner‐Goeke, L., Berard, L. D. H., Rioux, C., Giesbrecht, G. F., Giuliano, R. J., Lebel, C. A., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.880972 · Cited by 38
Family Thriving During COVID-19 and the Benefits for Children’s Well-Being
Partington, L. C., Mashash, M., & Hastings, P. D. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.879195 · Cited by 34
Pukay‐Martin, N. D., Fredman, S. J., Martin, C. E., Le, Y., Haney, A. M., Sullivan, C., Monson, C. M., & Chard, K. M. (2021) · Journal of Traumatic Stress · doi:10.1002/jts.22781 · Cited by 35
Анатольевна, Я. В., & Liutsko, L. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18116086 · Cited by 22
“The Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI) is a 16-item questionnaire that is used to measure satisfaction in a relationship with four subscales (partner’s support, respect, the pleasure of interaction, quality of relationships) [32].”
MethodThe sexual wholeness model: An initial evaluation with two samples
Busby, D. M., Hanna‐Walker, V. R., Leavitt, C. E., & Carroll, J. S. (2021) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12529 · Cited by 28
Vaillancourt‐Morel, M., Byers, E. S., Péloquin, K., & Bergeron, S. (2020) · The Journal of Sex Research · doi:10.1080/00224499.2020.1792396 · Cited by 33
“At Time 1, the 32-item Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007) was used to assess participants’ subjective global satisfaction with their current romantic relationship, without any reference to sexual satisfaction (e.g., How well does your partner meet your needs?).”
BackgroundMethodGeneralized gratitude and prayers of gratitude in marriage
Fincham, F., & May, R. W. (2020) · doi:10.1080/17439760.2020.1716053 · Cited by 24
“Marital satisfaction Starting with 180 items previously used to assess relationship satisfaction, Funk and Rogge (2007) conducted an Item Response Theory analysis to develop a 4-item measure of relationship satisfaction with optimized psychometric properties.”
MethodRothman, K., Roddy, M. K., & Doss, B. D. (2019) · Family Relations · doi:10.1111/fare.12378 · Cited by 25
Fathers’ Involvement in Their Wives’/Partners’ Breastfeeding: A Descriptive Correlational Study
Ng, R. W. L., Shorey, S., Yin, S. L. K., Chan, C. P. P., & He, H. G. (2019) · Journal of Human Lactation · doi:10.1177/0890334419830988 · Cited by 28
“The CSI-16 yielded a strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.98) and good convergent validity compared to other existing scales that measure relationship satisfaction (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MethodResultInfluentialGoetz, G., Rodriguez, G., & Hartley, S. (2019) · Journal of family psychology · doi:10.1037/fam0000527 · Cited by 24
“…A uthor M anuscript daily diary) perceived positive couple interactions was significantly positively correlated with a global measure of couple relationship satisfaction – the Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007) – in mothers (r = .47, p < .01) and fathers (r = .39,p < .01).”
MethodFoster Caregivers' Marital and Coparenting Relationship Experiences: A Dyadic Perspective
Richardson, E. W., & Futris, T. G. (2019) · Family Relations · doi:10.1111/fare.12354 · Cited by 27
Baucom, B. R. W., Baucom, K. J. W., Hogan, J. N., Crenshaw, A. O., Bourne, S. V., Crowell, S. E., Georgiou, P. G., & Goodwin, M. S. (2018) · Family Process · doi:10.1111/famp.12353 · Cited by 24
Do You See What I See? Actor and Partner Attachment Shape Biased Perceptions of Partners
Rodriguez, L. M., Fillo, J., Hadden, B. W., Øverup, C., Baker, Z. G., & DiBello, A. M. (2018) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167218791782 · Cited by 24
“—Relationship satisfaction was assessed with the Quality of Marriage Index (QMI; Norton, 1983), the third most widely cited measure of relationship satisfaction (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MethodA Word to the Wise: Age Matters When Considering Mindfulness in Romantic Relationships
Lenger, K. A., Gordon, C. L., & Nguyen, S. P. (2018) · Contemporary Family Therapy · doi:10.1007/s10591-018-9479-5 · Cited by 18
Ryon, H. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2018) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspi0000141 · Cited by 30
Roddy, M. K., Georgia, E. J., & Doss, B. (2018) · Family Process · doi:10.1111/famp.12291 · Cited by 24
The interaction of mindful awareness and acceptance in couples satisfaction
Krafft, J., Haeger, J. A., & Levin, M. E. (2017) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.064 · Cited by 24
“The 4-item version of the CSI has been found to be reliable and valid (Funk and Rogge 2007).”
InfluentialA randomized controlled trial of the Marriage Checkup adapted for private practice.
Trillingsgaard, T. L., Fentz, H. N., Hawrilenko, M., & Córdova, J. (2016) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/ccp0000141 · Cited by 24
“According to the cut-off score for the CSI-16 (Funk & Rogge, 2007), 103 couples (44”
MethodCurran, T., & Yoshimura, S. M. (2016) · Communication Reports · doi:10.1080/08934215.2016.1170171 · Cited by 24
Lane, B., Piercy, C. W., & Carr, C. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.016 · Cited by 24
Biesen, J., & Doss, B. (2013) · Journal of family psychology · doi:10.1037/a0033422 · Cited by 24
Emotion and underlying concerns during couples' conflict: An investigation of within‐person change
Sanford, K., & Grace, A. J. (2011) · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01317.x · Cited by 24
The Systemic Interaction of Attachment on Psychophysiological Arousal in Couple Conflict.
Taylor, N. C., Seedall, R., Robinson, W., & Bradford, K. P. (2018) · Journal of Marital & Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12239 · Cited by 24
Georgia, E. J., Roddy, M. K., & Doss, B. D. (2018) · Violence Against Women · doi:10.1177/1077801217727371 · Cited by 24
“The CSI-4 is a widely used short-form measure of relationship satisfaction (Sample items: “In general, how satisfied are you with your relationship?”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHeteronormative relationship education for same-gender couples
Hatch, S. G., Rothman, K., Roddy, M. K., Dominguez, R. M., Le, Y., & Doss, B. D. (2021) · Family Process · doi:10.1111/famp.12548 · Cited by 23
Do extrinsic goals affect romantic relationships? The role of basic psychological need satisfaction
Leung, A. N. M., & Law, W. (2019) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-019-09804-7 · Cited by 24
Perez, J., & Pepping, C. A. (2024) · International Journal of Transgender Health · doi:10.1080/26895269.2024.2316690 · Cited by 33
“The CSI-4 was developed using Item Response Theory analysis and has greater power to detect satisfaction and distress compared to other widely used instruments (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
InfluentialPark, H., Leonhardt, N. D., Johnson, M. D., Muise, A., Busby, D., Hanna-Walker, V., Yorgason, J., Holmes, E., & Impett, E. A. (2023) · Personality Science · doi:10.5964/ps.11869 · Cited by 23
“Relationship satisfaction was assessed at each wave using four items from the Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI-4; Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MethodNational Couples’ Health and Time Study: Sample, Design, and Weighting
Dush, C. M. K., Manning, W. D., Berrigan, M. N., Marlar, J., van Bergen, A., Theodorou, A., Tsabutashvili, D., & Chattopadhyay, M. (2023) · Population: Research and Policy Review · doi:10.1007/s11113-023-09799-7 · Cited by 23
“Regarding couple relationships, we collected the Couples Satisfaction Index (Funk & Rogge, 2007), Relationship Constraint (Stanley & Markman, 1997), the Marital Risk Scale (MIDUS, 2004), the Dyadic Coping Inventory (Bodenmann et al., 2018), a measure of argument frequency, family acceptance (Balsam et al., 2011), the…”
MethodZhang, Q.-X., Wang, N., Hu, Y.-P., & Creedy, D. (2022) · Reproductive Health · doi:10.1186/s12978-022-01366-1 · Cited by 23
“However, 31.5% indicated notable intimate relationship dissatisfaction (CSI-4 13.5).”
InfluentialPollard, A. E., & Rogge, R. D. (2022) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-021-02208-0 · Cited by 41
“…w ith p ar tn er s o f t he sa m e se x (s ee L eg at e & R og ge , 2 01 9) 1 3 Relationship Satisfaction Respondents completed the 4-item Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI-8; Funk & Rogge, 2007) assessing relationship satisfaction (e.g., “I had a warm and comfortable relationship with my partner”).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationFlicker, S. M., Sancier‐Barbosa, F., Moors, A. C., & Browne, L. (2021) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-020-01875-9 · Cited by 35
“The Couples Satisfaction Index-4 (Funk & Rogge, 2007) is a four-item Likert self-report scale that assesses satisfaction with one’s partner.”
BackgroundAlexithymia, Fear of Intimacy, and Relationship Satisfaction
Lyvers, M., Pickett, L. L., Needham, K., & Thorberg, F. A. (2021) · Journal of Family Issues · doi:10.1177/0192513x211010206 · Cited by 23
“The CSI consisted of 32 self-report items assessing relationship satisfaction (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
MethodThe Relationship Between Conflict Topics and Romantic Relationship Dynamics
Meyer, D., & Sledge, R. (2021) · Journal of Family Issues · doi:10.1177/0192513x21993856 · Cited by 23
“We used the four-item Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007) to measure relationship satisfaction.”
BackgroundMethodMacIntosh, H. B., & Ménard, A. D. (2021) · Journal of Child Sexual Abuse · doi:10.1080/10538712.2020.1847227 · Cited by 24
Coping with minority stress in romantic relationships among lesbian, gay and bisexual people
Song, C., Buysse, A., Zhang, W., Lu, C., Zhao, M., & Dewaele, A. (2020) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-020-01188-z · Cited by 27
Wikle, J. S., Leavitt, C. E., Yorgason, J., Dew, J., & Johnson, H. M. (2020) · Journal of Family and Economic Issues · doi:10.1007/s10834-020-09728-2 · Cited by 23
Bolt, O. C., Jones, F. W., Rudaz, M., Ledermann, T., & Irons, C. (2019) · Journal of Relationships Research · doi:10.1017/jrr.2019.17 · Cited by 25
Newcomb, M. E., Sarno, E. L., Bettin, E., Carey, J., Ciolino, J. D., Hill, R., Garcia, C. P., Macapagal, K. R., Mustanski, B. S., Swann, G., et al. (2019) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/15883 · Cited by 29
“✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Couples Satisfaction Index: 4-items [67] Relationship satisfaction”
The Quality of Marriage Index (QMI): a validation study in infertile patients
Maroufizadeh, S., Almasi-Hashiani, A., Amini, P., Sepidarkish, M., & Omani-Samani, R. (2019) · BMC Research Notes · doi:10.1186/s13104-019-4438-2 · Cited by 23
“This instrument has been used among general populations [16, 17], cardiovascular [18], cancer [19], fertile couples [20], military veterans [21], and many of other samples.”
BackgroundMethodResultBelus, J. M., Pentel, K. Z., Cohen, M. J., Fischer, M. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2018) · Marriage & Family Review · doi:10.1080/01494929.2018.1458004 · Cited by 39
“Relationship satisfaction was measured using the couple satisfaction index, 16-item version (CSI-16; Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
BackgroundMethodThe Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) in infertile patients: A reliability and validity study
Maroufizadeh, S., Omani-Samani, R., Almasi-Hashiani, A., Navid, B., Sobati, B., & Amini, P. (2018) · Middle East Fertility Society Journal · doi:10.1016/j.mefs.2018.04.001 · Cited by 23
Rosenberg, N. E., Graybill, L. A., Wesevich, A., McGrath, N. M., Golin, C. E., Maman, S., Bhushan, N. L., Tsidya, M., Chimndozi, L., Hoffman, I., et al. (2017) · JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes · doi:10.1097/qai.0000000000001398 · Cited by 25
Bradford, A. B., Drean, L., Adler‐Baeder, F. M., Ketring, S. A., & Smith, T. A. (2016) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12209 · Cited by 21
Witherow, M. P., Chandraiah, S., Seals, S. R., Sarver, D. E., Parisi, K. E., & Bugán, A. (2017) · The Journal of Sexual Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.04.671 · Cited by 32
Meanings of Intimacy: A Comparison of Members of Heterosexual and Same‐Sex Couples
Frost, D. M., & Gola, K. A. (2015) · Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy · doi:10.1111/asap.12072 · Cited by 23
Relationship education and marital satisfaction in newlywed couples: A propensity score analysis.
Cobb, R., & Sullivan, K. T. (2015) · Journal of family psychology · doi:10.1037/a0039580 · Cited by 23
Ricciardi, L., Pomponi, M., Demartini, B., Ricciardi, D., Morabito, B., Bernabei, R., & Bentivoglio, A. (2015) · Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/nmd.0000000000000342 · Cited by 23
“• The Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI), a scale assessing one's satisfaction in a relationship (Funk and Rogge, 2007).”
BackgroundWoolf‐King, S. E., Neilands, T. B., Dilworth, S. E., Carrico, A. W., & Johnson, M. O. (2013) · AIDS Care · doi:10.1080/09540121.2013.855302 · Cited by 24
Short and long-term effectiveness of couple counselling: a study protocol
Schofield, M., Mumford, N., Jurkovic, D., Jurkovic, I., & Bickerdike, A. (2012) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-735 · Cited by 23
“the Marital Adjustment Test, and the DAS) [17], which supports the face validity of the scale.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialDaks, J. S., Peltz, J. S., & Rogge, R. D. (2022) · Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science · doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2022.08.011 · Cited by 22
“…true”; PHQ-9 = the Patient Health Questionnaire (Kroenke et al., 2001) using “not at all” to “nearly every day”; CSI = the Couples Satisfaction Index (Funk & Rogge, 2007) using “not at all” to “completely”; CHAOS = the Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (Matheny et al., 1995) using “strongly…”
MethodSelf-citationConroy, A. A., Hahn, J. A., Neilands, T. B., Darbes, L. A., Tebbetts, S., Mulauzi, N., Mkandawire, J., & Ssewamala, F. M. (2024) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-024-04326-x · Cited by 22
Palma, M. D., Rooney, R. M., Izett, E., Mancini, V. O., & Kane, R. T. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1054723 · Cited by 20
“99) as shown by correlations between the CSI and other validated measures of relationship satisfaction and has been found sensitive to changes in relationship satisfaction (Funk and Rogge, 2007).”
MethodFinancial communication as a mediator between financial values and marital outcomes
LeBaron-Black, A. B., Saxey, M. T., Totenhagen, C., Wheeler, B. E., Archuleta, K. L., Yorgason, J., & James, S. L. (2022) · Family Relations · doi:10.1111/fare.12786 · Cited by 22
Eyring, J. B., Leavitt, C. E., Allsop, D. B., & Clancy, T. J. (2020) · Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy · doi:10.1080/0092623x.2020.1842571 · Cited by 36
I “get” you, babe: Reflective functioning in partners transitioning to parenthood
Borelli, J. L., Slade, A., Pettit, C., & Shai, D. (2020) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/0265407520905641 · Cited by 24
“Participants completed the CSI (RelSat; Funk & Rogge, 2007), an established 32- item measuring relationship satisfaction, administered prenatally (prenatalafathers ¼ 0.92; prenatalamothers ¼ 0.92) and at the 3-month visit (postnatalafathers ¼ 0.95; postnatalamothers ¼ 0.94).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialKnobloch, L. K., Knobloch-Fedders, L. M., & Yorgason, J. B. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1002/jclp.22734 · Cited by 32
Measuring Perceived Corporate Hypocrisy: Scale Development in the Context of U.S. Retail Employees
Goswami, S., Ha‐Brookshire, J., & Bonifay, W. E. (2018) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su10124756 · Cited by 23
“Principal component analysis (PCA), inspecting dimensions’ eigenvalues, ratio of the eigenvalue of the dominant dimension to the eigenvalues of the second and other subsequent dimensions, and the bend or ‘knee’ in scree plots, was conducted to check for and confirm unidimensionality [50,64].”
Baptist, J. A., Craig, B., & Nicholson, B. (2018) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12362 · Cited by 26
Effectiveness of the online OurRelationship program for underserved couples.
Salivar, E. G., Roddy, M. K., Nowlan, K. M., & Doss, B. D. (2018) · Couple and Family Psychology Research and Practice · doi:10.1037/cfp0000110 · Cited by 23
“The CSI-4 item (Funk & Rogge, 2007) measures global relationship satisfaction, with scores 13.5 indicating relationship distress.”
BackgroundInfluentialRodriguez, C. M., Silvia, P. J., Gonzalez, S., & Christl, M.-E. (2018) · Child Maltreatment · doi:10.1177/1077559518767571 · Cited by 19
Roddy, M. K., Nowlan, K., & Doss, B. (2017) · Family Process · doi:10.1111/famp.12262 · Cited by 22
Monk, J. K., Oseland, L. M., Goff, B. S. N., Ogolsky, B. G., & Summers, K. (2017) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/jmft.12230 · Cited by 22
Crockett, E. E., & Neff, L. A. (2012) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550612451621 · Cited by 26
“Spouses’ global marital satisfaction was assessed using the 16-item version of the Couples Satisfaction Index (Funk & Rogge, 2007).”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Funk, J. L., & Rogge, R. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Rochester (US)
- ORCID
- Rogge, Ronald D.
- Venue
- Journal of Family Psychology
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 572-583
- ISSN
- 0893-3200 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1293
- OpenAlex
- W2116307289
- Cited by
- 1,806
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 108 · 2025: 155 · 2024: 153 · 2023: 144 · 2022: 186 · 2021: 181 · 2020: 167 · 2019: 129 · 2018: 105 · 2017: 104 · 2016: 81 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 50 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 19.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Family Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Rochester
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
- Keywords
- relationship satisfaction, measurement precision, scale development, Dyadic Adjustment Scale, item response theory, convergent validity, construct validity, nomological network, couples
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Marriage, Middle Aged, Personal Satisfaction, Psychological Tests, Psychological Theory, Internet, Principal Component Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review