The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A REVISION OF THE DYADIC ADJUSTMENT SCALE FOR USE WITH DISTRESSED AND NONDISTRESSED COUPLES: CONSTRUCT HIERARCHY AND MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALES
Abstract
The existing research on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) indicated that there were problems with some of the subscales and individual items. This study was designed to improve the instrument by following the standards of construct hierarchy. Through previous research and the analyses in this study, the subscales were found to contain some items that were homogeneous and others that were more heterogeneous. This problem was corrected by selecting out items that were homogeneous; 7 first‐order scales were created which were combined to creat the 3 second‐order concepts of consensus, satisfaction, and cohesion. With a sample of distressed and nondistressed couples, a series of confirmatory factor analyses was conducted. The factor analyses provided evidence for the construct validity of the new structure of the Revised DAS (RDAS) with the distressed, nondistressed, and total samples of this study, as well as with the sample from Spanier and Thompson's (1982) study. Additional analyses correlating the RDAS with another popular marital instrument provided more evidence for the construct validity of the RDAS. Criterion validity was demonstrated by discriminant analyses results. Both internal consistency and split‐half reliability estimates demonstrated that the RDAS was reliable. The result also supported dividing the RDAS into two alternative forms for use in pre‐ and posttest studies. Summary statistics for the RDAS are presented as are implications for the field of marriage and family therapy.
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
“This questionnaire is usually completed by both members of a dyad and addresses their subjective satisfaction in their relationship.”
From Researching what we practice—The paradigm of systemic family research: Part 2 (2023) · cites this paper as Busby et al., 1995
In the citing paper
“The RDAS has acceptable construct validity and adequate internal consistency. 39”
From Internet-based treatment for provoked vulvodynia: Factors associated with treatment outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“It has acceptable levels of construct validity and adequate internal consistency (Busby et al., 1995; Crane et al., 2000).”
From Internet-based treatment for vulvodynia (EMBLA) – Study protocol for a randomised controlled study (2021) · cites this paper as Busby et al., 1995
Citations
Cites
(1963) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 15,085
Measuring Dyadic Adjustment: New Scales for Assessing the Quality of Marriage and Similar Dyads
Spanier, G. B. (1976) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/350547 · Cited by 7,095
LISREL 7 : a guide to the program and applications
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,787
Short Marital-Adjustment and Prediction Tests: Their Reliability and Validity
Locke, H. J., & Wallace, K. M. (1959) · Marriage and Family Living · doi:10.2307/348022 · Cited by 2,913
Measuring Marital Quality: A Critical Look at the Dependent Variable
Norton, R. W. (1983) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/351302 · Cited by 1,802
Standards for educational and psychological testing
(1985) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e500832009-001 · Cited by 1,493
Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology
Comrey, A. L. (1988) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.56.5.754 · Cited by 1,154
Assessing Intimacy: The Pair Inventory†
Schaefer, M. T., & Olson, D. (1981) · Journal of Marital and Family Therapy · doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.1981.tb01351.x · Cited by 816
Concurrent and Discriminant Validity of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale
Schumm, W. R., Bergen, L. P., Hatch, R. C., Obiorah, F. C., Copeland, J. M., Meens, L. D., & Bugaighis, M. A. (1986) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/352405 · Cited by 727
Multidimensional Assessment of Marital Satisfaction
Snyder, D. K. (1979) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/351481 · Cited by 299
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Lavee Y., 1988, LISREL in family research, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 929
- Spanier G. B., 1975, Toward clarification and investigation of marital adjustment, International Journal of Sociology of the Family, 6, 121
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quality of Life in Long-Term, Disease-Free Survivors of Breast Cancer: a Follow-up Study
Ganz, P. A. (2002) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/94.1.39 · Cited by 1,059
Rowland, J. H. (2000) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.17.1422 · Cited by 584
Ganz, P. A., Kwan, L., Stanton, A. L., Krupnick, J. L., Rowland, J. H., Meyerowitz, B. E., Bower, J. E., & Belin, T. R. (2004) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djh060 · Cited by 505
Sabourin, S., Valois, P., & Lussier, Y. A. (2005) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.15 · Cited by 434
Maternal psychological distress & mental health service use during the COVID-19 pandemic
Cameron, E. E., Joyce, K. M., Delaquis, C. P., Reynolds, K., Protudjer, J. L. P., & Roos, L. E. (2020) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.07.081 · Cited by 413
Metadata
- Authors
- Busby, D. M., Christensen, C., Crane, D. R., & Larson, J. H.
- Affiliations
- Syracuse University (US)
- Brigham Young University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-07
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 289-308
- ISSN
- 0194-472X (ISSN-L)
- 1752-0606
- OpenAlex
- W2130191718
- Cited by
- 985
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 3.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (publishedVersion)
- ScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
- Keywords
- Dyadic Adjustment Scale, marital adjustment, distressed couples, consensus, marital satisfaction, marital cohesion, scale revision, construct validity, criterion validity, reliability statistics
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
