CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 157Family Dynamics and RelationshipsReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Religiosity and Marital Stability Among Black American and White American Couples*

Brown, Edna, Orbuch, Terri L., Bauermeister, Jose A.·2008·Family Relations
DOI 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00493.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract: We examine the effects of subjective and organizational religious participation on marital stability over time for urban Black American couples and White American couples who participated in a longitudinal project. Our findings indicated that the role religiosity plays in the stability of marriage over time varied by gender and race. Black husbands and wives reported that religion was more important to them and that they attended religious services more frequently than White husbands and wives. Greater service attendance was predictive of decreased odds of divorce, only when reported by wives. Interaction effects revealed that the effect was more notable among White wives. Practitioners should consider the diversity between and within couples and the sociohistorical contexts in which marriages are embedded.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00493.x

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Of the 38 methodologically most rigorous marital instability studies, 35 (92%) reported significant relationships between R/S and greater marital stability.

    “Of the 38 methodologically most rigorous studies, 35 (92%) reported significant relationships between R/S and greater marital stability [255–265].”

    From Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications (2012) · cites this paper as [260]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Allison P, 1995, Survival analysis using SAS: A practical approach
  2. Orbuch T., 2006, Handbook of divorce and dissolution of romantic relationships, 481

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Brown, E., Orbuch, T. L., & Bauermeister, J. A.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
Brown, Edna
ORCID
Orbuch, Terri L.
Venue
Family Relations
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-03-31
Volume
57
Issue
2
Pages
186-197
ISSN
  • 0197-6664 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3729
DOI
10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00493.x
OpenAlex
W2015257883
Cited by
157
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 13
FWCI
14.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Family Relations (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
religiosity, marital stability, marriage, divorce, religious service attendance, gender differences, racial differences, religious participation, urban couples

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