The DOI matches its Crossref record; 196 of the 196 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gender Differences in Marital Satisfaction: A Meta‐analysis
Abstract
The purpose of the present meta‐analysis was to empirically test the widely held assumption that women experience lower marital satisfaction than men. A total of 226 independent samples with a combined sum of 101,110 participants were included in the meta‐analysis. Overall results indicated statistically significant yet very small gender differences in marital satisfaction between wives and husbands, with wives slightly less satisfied than husbands; moderator analyses, however, indicated that this difference was due to the inclusion of clinical samples, with wives in marital therapy 51% less likely to be satisfied with their marital relationship than their husbands. The effect size for nonclinical community‐based samples indicated no significant gender differences among couples in the general population. Additional moderator analyses indicated that there were also no gender differences when the levels of marital satisfaction of husbands and wives in the same relationship (i.e., dyadic data) were compared.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
(2006) · Cited by 3,705
The gender similarities hypothesis.
Hyde, J. S. (2005) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.60.6.581 · Cited by 3,084
Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023
The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, method, and research.
Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3 · Cited by 2,608
Cited by
Relationship Satisfaction Among Infertile Couples: Implications of Gender and Self-Identification
Greil, A. L., Slauson-Blevins, K., McQuillan, J., Lowry, M. H., Burch, A. R., & Shreffler, K. M. (2018) · Journal of Family Issues · doi:10.1177/0192513x17699027 · Cited by 37
Javadivala, Z., Allahverdipour, H., Asghari Jafarabadi, M., Azimi, S., Gilani, N., & Chattu, V. K. (2021) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01719-0 · Cited by 18
Does Internet Connectedness Disconnect Marriage? A Micro Empirical Analysis
Tong, Q., Chu, C.-Y., Zhou, D., & Feng, Y. (2021) · Social Indicators Research · doi:10.1007/s11205-021-02686-8 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Jackson, J. B., Miller, R. B., Oka, M., & Henry, R. G.
- Venue
- Journal of Marriage and Family
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-01-13
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 105-129
- ISSN
- 0022-2445 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3737
- OpenAlex
- W2165189693
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 196
- FWCI
- 32.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gender Differences in Marital Satisfaction: A Meta‐analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/jomf.12077
- The paper
- Jackson, J. B., Miller, R. B., Oka, M., & Henry, R. G. (2014). Gender Differences in Marital Satisfaction: A Meta‐analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12077
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
