ABSTRACT

Introduction: The pandemic caused by COVID-19 has affected the way of life of people, and particularly relationships. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Quality of Relationship of Couple Scale (CRP-ASO) within the context of compulsory social isolation due to COVID-19, in Peru. Methods: The CRP-ASO scale was applied to 499 adults (60% women; M_age = 41.54 years, S_age = 13.48). The internal structure of the instrument was evaluated by exploratory factor analysis (AFE) and confirmatory factor analysis (AFC). Reliability was also estimated by calculating Cronbach’s alpha (α) and McDonald’s omega (ꞷ) coefficients. Results: The item-test correlations indicated that all items should be kept (iHC > .2). According to the EFA (KMO = .956; Bartlett sphericity test p < .01) the emergent factor structure yielded 4 factors, confirmed through the CFA (SRMR = .059; R-CFI = .921; R-TLI = .913; R-RMSEA = .077). The factors were called consensus, complicity-intimacy, satisfaction in the relationship and stability in the relationship, with high indicators of internal consistency. Conclusion: It is concluded that the instrument has satisfactory psychometric properties and can be used in similar samples.

Keywords: Domestic Partners; COVID-19; Psychometrics; Factor Analysis; Reliability and Validity.(fuente: MeSH NLM).

RESUMEN

Introducción: La pandemia causada por el COVID-19 ha afectado la forma de vida de las personas, y particularmente, las relaciones de pareja. El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar las propiedades psicométricas de la Escala de Calidad de Relación de Pareja (CRP-ASO) dentro del contexto de aislamiento social obligatorio a causa de la COVID-19, en Perú. Métodos: La escala CRP-ASO fue aplicada a 499 adultos (60 % mujeres; M_edad = 41.54 años, S_edad = 13.48). La estructura interna del instrumento fue evaluada mediante el análisis factorial exploratorio (AFE) y el análisis factorial confirmatorio (AFC). Asimismo, la confiabilidad fue estimada mediante el cálculo del coeficiente alfa de Cronbach (α) y omega de McDonald (ꞷ). Resultados: Las correlaciones ítem-test indicaron que todos los ítems debían conservarse (iHC > .2). Según el AFE (KMO = .956; test de esfericidad de Bartlett p < .01) la estructura factorial emergente arrojó 4 factores, confirmados a través del AFC (SRMR = .059; R-CFI = .921; R-TLI = .913; R-RMSEA = .077). Los factores se denominaron consenso, complicidad-intimidad, satisfacción en la relación y estabilidad en la relación, con altos indicadores de consistencia interna. Conclusión: Se concluye que el instrumento cuenta con propiedades psicométricas satisfactorias y puede ser utilizado en muestras similares.

Palabras Clave: Parejas de hecho; COVID-19; Psicometría; análisis factorial; confiabilidad y validez.(fuente: DeCS BIREME).

Introduction

The pandemic caused by COVID-19 has impacted people's lives ⁽¹⁾, also affecting couple's relationships. Studies carried out in China at the beginning of the pandemic recorded high levels of anguish in people without a partner ⁽²⁾, high prevalence of anxiety in married people ⁽³⁾, and marital satisfaction as a protective factor against anxiety in parents ⁽⁴⁾. Likewise, a study in Iran indicated that the fear that one of the relationship members would be infected influenced their partner’s mental health ⁽⁵⁾. Thus, depending on the context, confinement impacts the couple’s well-being.

A couple is defined as the bonding unit in which two people consensually establish significant bonds of physical, emotional, and psychological intimacy, and with stability over time ⁽⁶⁾, which in the present study includes married and de facto couples. One of the factors that are related to the well-being of those involved in the relationship is the quality that exists within it ⁽⁷⁾. The quality of the couple's relationship is the degree to which each party shows intimacy, affection, and care ⁽⁸⁾. There are four basic aspects for a couple of relationships to work properly: the willingness to agree, satisfaction, cohesion, and affective expression ⁽⁹⁾.

The literature reveals various approaches to assess the quality of the couple relationship, unidimensionally ⁽¹⁰⁾ and based on four factors, such as the Dyadic Adjustment Scale ⁽⁹⁾, one of the most used instruments, applied for the first time in a North American sample obtained high reliability (global scale, 0.96; satisfaction, 0.94; consensus, 0.90; cohesion, 0.86 and affective expression, 0.73).

In a population similar to the original, the test showed a reliability of 0.91 on the full scale ⁽¹¹⁾, with similar results in Australia, for the full scale (between 0.90 and 0.92) and its dimensions (between 0.76 and 0.94); with the exception of the affective expression scale, with values between 0.53 and 0.69 ⁽¹²⁾.

The instrument was also validated in Italy, showing reliability of 0.93 on the total scale as well as a factorial structure equal to the original version ⁽¹³⁾. Likewise, the reliability of the instrument in a Spanish sample was high (total scale: 0.94, consensus: 0.88, satisfaction: 0.88, cohesion: .85 and affective expression: 0.69); and a four-factor structure ⁽¹⁴⁾.

However, a meta-analysis of the internal consistency of the scale showed that the test and its subscales reported acceptable reliability; except for the affective expression factor ⁽¹⁵⁾. Similar results were reported in a sample of married people, fitted to a 3-dimensional model ⁽¹⁶⁾. The number of items in some of the subscales was modified (consensus, 15 items; satisfaction, 8 items, and cohesion, 5 items) and the affective expression subscale was eliminated; obtaining in the consent factor reliability of 0.87; satisfaction, .84 and cohesion, 0.88. On the other hand, in a study with Spanish people with a stable partner, although the total reliability of the test was high (α =0.92); Problems in the internal structure of this scale were pointed out, given that in the exploratory factorial analysis the consensus explained most of the variance (3.63%) and some items obtained a greater load in a factor other than the original approach ⁽¹⁷⁾. Finally, in a study in Hungary, the omega reliability coefficient was acceptable in the general test: .86, and the consensus dimensions: .60, and cohesion: .57; while it was low for the satisfaction subscales: .22, and affective expression: .36 ⁽¹⁸⁾.

Taking into account that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected married life and there are few instruments that assess the quality of the couple relationship in this context, the purpose of this study is 1) To identify the underlying relationships between the variables measured by the CRP-ASO scale using the Exploratory Factor Analysis, 2) Verify by means of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis the structure that emerges from the Exploratory Factor Analysis, 3) Evidence the convergent validity of the CRP-ASO scale and its dimensions with the complimentary items of happiness and comparative before and during social isolation 4) Determine the internal consistency reliability of the CRP-ASO scale.

METHODS

Design

This is an instrumental design investigation ⁽¹⁹⁾ because it analyzes the psychometric properties of a psychological measurement instrument.

Participants

A non-probabilistic convenience sampling method was used ⁽²⁰⁾. The sample consisted of a total of 499 participants, mostly women (300; 60%), with representatives from almost all regions of Peru. Regarding marital status, 72% reported being married, while 28% reported living with their partner. Likewise, according to the employment status of the respondents, 19% mentioned being unemployed and 49% employed. More detailed information can be seen in Table 1.

Instruments

To develop the instrument used in this study, some items were taken from the dyadic adjustment scale ⁽⁹⁾ and from the satisfaction scale (21 ), proposed in Spanish by Melero ⁽²²⁾, whose items were appropriate to the context of compulsory social isolation. Two items were added, one related to the preventive care of Covid-19 and the other to the virtual education of children.

The instrument developed is an adaptation, which was called the Couple Relationship Quality Scale in the context of Mandatory Social Isolation (CRP-ASO) and has 35 items. 11 items were taken from the "consensus" dimension of the dyadic adjustment scale and items 12 and 13 were added, item 12 is aimed at couples with children, items 15 to 22 were taken from the Hendrick satisfaction scale, being 15, 16, 20 and 22 of inverse qualification. Items 24 to 27 were appropriate from the "cohesion" dimension and items 29 to 32 from the "expression of affection" dimension of the dyadic adjustment scale. Other items are also included that are not part of the Couple Relationship Quality construct in the context of Mandatory Social Isolation: items 14, 23, 28, 33 that aim to differentiate how the dimensions manifest over time, in relation to the period of isolation social compared to the previous stage (better than before, the same as before, worse than before) and items 34 and 35 to assess the perception of happiness in the couple relationship. All these items were used for the convergent validity analysis.

Procedures

Data collection was carried out in the second half of May 2020, when the participants had spent at least 65 days of mandatory social isolation, in Peru. An online form was used and participation was invited through the social networks Facebook and WhatsApp, in addition to the paid advertising service by Facebook, to disseminate the survey nationwide. To move on to subsequent sections, responses to all items were required; therefore, there were no incomplete surveys.

Statistical analysis

The 499 records were randomly divided into two groups, one of 280 cases for the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and the other of 219 participants for the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

The CFA was performed using the statistical software R. The items obtained from the AFE carried out with the first 280 cases were then submitted to the CFA considering the model derived from the factorial structure obtained in the AFE, but this time with 219 cases different from those first. The CFA was performed following the indications given by Rhemtulla, Brosseau-Liard, and Savalei ⁽²³⁾ who maintain that since the data are categorical, by definition, they do not present a normal distribution; therefore, the analysis of these data should be done with robust estimators if they are considered as continuous data. The maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors and a Satorra-Bentler (MLM) scaled test statistic presented in the Lavaan statistical package of R ⁽²⁴⁾ were then chosen. To determine the fit of the model, the recently proposed robust indices CFI, TLI and RMSEA for non-normal data were used ⁽²⁵⁾.

Ethical aspects

Before starting the survey, instructions were provided and the informed consent of the participants was requested, also indicating that they could stop responding whenever they wished, in addition, the confidentiality of the data was guaranteed by requesting an anonymous response, avoiding any form of identification. of the participants.

Results

The descriptive analysis of the items showed that 23.2% of the sample for the AFE and 21.9% for the AFC did not have children, reducing both samples, so item 12 was not considered for further analysis. Before carrying out the EFA, the nature of the variables under study was verified. Adequate item-test correlations were obtained without the analyzed item, also called corrected homogeneity index (iHC >.2), which indicates that it is not necessary to remove any item; Likewise, the asymmetry and kurtosis of the items showed that all of them are within the range of -2 and +2 (see table 2), being acceptable values to consider that the data have an approximately normal distribution ⁽²⁶⁾. therefore, the Pearson product-moment correlation matrix is input for the EFA. The adequacy of the data was verified using the statistical program Jamovi 1.2.22, obtaining a KMO = .956 and a significant Bartlett sphericity test (p < 0.010). Parallel analysis was used as a method for determining the number of factors, the most recommended method for this purpose, while the least residual method was used for factor extraction and oblique oblimin rotation, obtaining 4 factors that explained 69.4% of the variance, with loads greater than .4, being a recommended minimum saturation size (table 3), with the first factor, consensus, explaining the highest percentage of variance (32.33%). The factors obtained correlated with each other with a minimum value of .319 and a maximum of .719 (table 4), higher than .30, so it is considered that the oblique rotation used in the exploratory factor analysis is adequate ⁽²⁷⁾.

The proposed factorial model (Figure 1) based on the MLM robust analysis obtained a χ2 = 743.016 (df = 344; p<.01), which together with the reference model, saturated model or null model (χ2 = 4621.232, df = 378) allowed obtaining the values of the different adjustment statistics presented in table 4, which show the viability of the reference model or proposed model, since the robust indices ⁽²⁵⁾ are adequate (CFI >.9 ; TLI >.9) and RMSEA <.08, according to the indications of Schumacker and Lomax ⁽²⁸⁾.

The factors obtained are translated into 4 dimensions that are defined as follows.

Consensus. It measures the degree of agreement between the members of the couple in important areas of the relationship such as values, education, housework, free time, relationships with family and friends, etc. ⁽⁹⁾ as well as decision-making in the context of confinement.

Complicity/Intimacy. Evaluates the degree to which the couple carries out joint activities and expressions of affection are manifested, generating closeness. It unites the original dimensions of expression of affection and cohesion by Spanier ⁽⁹⁾ adapted to Spanish by Melero ⁽²²⁾.

Satisfaction in the relationship. It allows assessing the degree to which the couple's relationship is perceived as pleasant and pleasant.

Commitment. It refers to the perceived commitment to the continuity of the relationship and emotional control in the face of couple problems.

TheCRP-ASO scale shows adequate internal consistency in each of its dimensions:consensus (Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω= .972), complicity-intimacy (Cronbach's α = .924; McDonald's ω= . 930), relationship satisfaction(Cronbach'sα=.947; McDonald's ω = .947) and commitment (Cronbach's α = .772; McDonald's ω = .777). Regarding convergent validity (Table 6), the dimensions correlated positively, signicantly and with (29)an effect size between typical and relatively large⁽²⁹⁾ with various comparative items overtime:mutual agreement(item14);satisfaction with the couple relationship (item 23); feeling of closeness with the partner (item 28); expression of affection (item 33), perception of happiness in the couple before (item 34) and during compulsory social isolation (item 35).

Discussion

For this study, it was proposed to identify the psychometric properties of the Partner Relationship Quality Scale in the context of mandatory social isolation in Peru, due to the Covid-19 disease.

Through the AFE, it was found that the CRP-ASO scale has 4 dimensions which were called: consensus (12 items), complicity-intimacy (8 items), satisfaction in the relationship (4 items) and commitment (4 items). . These dimensions were analyzed using the CFA, confirming their factorization, therefore, from this perspective, the quality of the couple relationship construct would be multidimensional. This result coincides with what was found by in other studies in which the existence of four dimensions was reported ^(9,13,14,30) and differs from the proposal of two dimensions ⁽¹⁸⁾ and three factors ⁽¹⁶⁾ found in other studies.

An outstanding finding is that the consensus dimension retains the same items of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale adapted by Melero ⁽²²⁾, which denotes the strength of this factor; Likewise, it is the factor that explains the highest percentage of variance of this scale, a result also found by Santos-Iglesias et al. ⁽¹⁷⁾ and Balzarini et al. ⁽³¹⁾. As for the other factors, these underwent changes in their composition of items, which would show that the factorial structure of the scale can vary in various social and cultural contexts, which coincides with ⁽¹⁶⁾. Proof of this is that the Satisfaction dimension, after the analysis, was divided into two factors: relationship satisfaction and commitment.

On the other hand, it stands out that item 32 "During social isolation, do you have sexual relations?", although it is grouped in complicity/intimacy, it obtains .73 in uniqueness, which expresses a certain tendency to be an autonomous item or even to be a dimension in itself. It may also be related to some variations in the response options given in the items (the word “almost” was added to the response options “never” and “every day”).

From the CFA, it is deduced that all the dimensions correlate with each other in a positive or direct and significant way with values from weak to strong ⁽³²⁾. The complicity-intimacy and satisfaction dimensions obtained the highest correlation (r = .72), which shows that the dimensions are part of the same construct, but remain different factors.

Likewise, the dimension of satisfaction in the relationship and commitment has the second-highest correlation (r = .76), which coincides with Balzarini et al. ⁽³¹⁾, who found a correlation between satisfaction and commitment (r = .66), in a study conducted on couples from 57 countries, in the context of the pandemic.

Regarding the dimensions that had originally been called an expression of affection and cohesion, after the AFE and AFC, they came together and gave rise to the dimension that is currently called complicity-intimacy. This is so, probably because this entire section of questions expresses closeness, either through activities together or through physical displays of affection. Given that confinement has increased the physical proximity of the couple, it could happen that these dimensions are feeding back into each other, so that the limits between the two seem to become blurred.

On the other hand, the dimension that was raised as satisfaction in the relationship was divided into two dimensions. The first kept the name of satisfaction, and the second, with the items inverted, was called commitment, since the items that were grouped in this dimension describe the disposition of the couples to maintain the relationship and manage their emotions when problems arise.

The results of the reliability analysis for internal consistency coincide with other authors (9,13-15,30) who found that the dimension with the highest reliability was consensus, as in this study, while the one with the least reliability was an effective expression, this last result being different from what was found in this study (compromise).

Regarding convergent validity, the four dimensions were correlated with the complementary and comparative items over time. Among the most outstanding results, it was found that the complicity–intimacy dimension achieves the highest correlations with almost all the complimentary items, which coincides with other studies on the relationship between intimacy and happiness ^(33,34). Likewise, the item that evaluates happiness during social isolation obtains the highest correlation coefficients with the dimensions of the CRP-ASO scale, with the exception of consensus, which would indicate that couples who had a positive relationship before confinement, during this stage can maintain and even enhance the positive aspects of your relationship. It can also be noted that reports of happiness could be good predictors of the quality of the couple's relationship.

Among the limitations of the study, it can be mentioned that the sample consisted mainly of people who profess a Christian religion, with a higher university education level, with access to the Internet and social networks, and it was also a non-probabilistic sampling. Regarding convergent validity, unitary comparative items were considered instead of validated scales.

In future research, it should be included with much more specificity, the cultural aspects of their own, the changes in the ways of life and relationships imposed by the pandemic, and other effects (such as those of globalization) that influence the redefinition of the concept of quality of the couple relationship. Likewise, it is necessary to evaluate the stability of the factorial structure of the test in other populations and obtain other evidence of validity. Having an abbreviated version of this instrument would be highly recommended for epidemiological or clinical studies.

Conclusion

Finally, the CRP-ASO and its four subscales, developed for use in the Peruvian context in conditions of social isolation, is a reliable instrument that has evidence of internal (construct) and external (convergent) validity and could be useful. in future studies that seek to know the quality of couple relationships.

---

---