The new source: How do I love thee

HOW DO I LOVE THEE?
AN INVESTIGATION OF CHAPMAN’S FIVE LOVE LANGUAGES
by
Ms. Scotti L. Veale







A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy


Capella University
April 2006
© Scotti Veale, 2006





HOW DO I LOVE THEE?
AN INVESTIGATION OF CHAPMAN’S FIVE LOVE LANGUAGES
by
Ms. Scotti L. Veale
has been approved
Month, Year (delete comma)

APPROVED:
LOUIS KAVAR, Ph.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair
JIM MIRABELLA, D.B.A., Committee Member
DANIEL ECKSTIEN, Ph.D., Committee Member



ACCEPTED AND SIGNED:

__________________________________________
LOUIS KAVAR, Ph.D.

__________________________________________
Jody Neuman-Aamlie, Ph.D.
Executive Director, School of Psychology
Abstract
The primary focus of this study was to examine the behavioral and perceptual response of 77 married, cohabitating, heterosexual couples based on their newly acquired knowledge relating to the love expression category identification as defined by Chapman's Love Language Profile. First, the study examined whether the research participants felt that Chapman’s Love Language Profile accurately identified the love expression used by each marital partner. Second, once category membership was identified, the study queried whether love expression category membership knowledge would increase understanding of the specific action behaviors associated with each category type. Additionally, the study examined whether or not a change of emotional state would result from an increased understanding of the action behaviors associated with each love language category. Furthermore, the study focused on how love language expression knowledge would influence behavioral accommodations accordingly in the absence of any identified extrinsic motivation to do so. The study also considered whether an effort to make a behavioral love expression accommodation would be recognized as such, given only a brief description of Chapman’s love language categories. Finally, statistical analyses of the self-reported responses of the research participants were completed to determine if there were gender differences between the participants survey responses.

Dedication
As .words of affirmation. category member, I find myself challenged to adequately express in words my own appreciation for the invaluable support provided me by my family and friends who have contributed so much to this project. It is with great honor that I share this personal accomplishment with such an extraordinary group of people who have themselves provided me with nothing short of their “altruistic love.”
To my parents, who provided words of encouragement.
To Dr. Jim Mirabella who has mentored me through this journey and supported my academic success with the service of his statistical expertise, his support, and his friendship.
To Lt. Col. Jeff Wilson who has willingly provided his time, his fellowship, and his coffee.
To Dr. Ellen Ritter who has provided the gift of acceptance, and who has taught me the true meaning of sisterhood.
To my children, Luke and Christian, and my husband Thomas who have touched my heart and inspired me to strive to become the person that they already believe that I am.
Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge the effort and expertise of my dissertation committee Dr. Louis Kavar, Dr. Jim Mirabella, and Dr. Daniel Eckstein and thank them all for their assistance and support in achieving this academic goal. I additionally could not have completed this project without the help of the West Point library staff whose continuously demonstrated their ability to find the "unfindable." Lastly, I am grateful for the willing participation of the married couples at West Point who so selflessly gave of their time and effort to this project. While finishing the writing for my Doctoral Comprehensive Examination in 2005, I noticed a small and somewhat insignificant tree outside my office window. Although not impressive in stature, the tree had produced leaves each year. By the beginning of my dissertation process, the tree had flowered for the first time paralleling my own personal growth. The day that I finished writing Chapter Five of this dissertation it was raining and cool; the perfect weather for writing I have always thought. On that very day the buds of my .special tree. miraculously opened and offered to me its first leafs of the spring and portraiture of both our transformations. So, thank you Tree.
Table of Contents Acknowledgments iv List of Tables 6 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION What’s Love Got to do With IT? 8 Background of the Study 9 Statement of the Problem 10 Purpose of the Study 11 Research Question 13 Nature of the Study 13 Significance of the Study 14 Definition of Terms 15 Assumptions and Limitations 16 Organization of the Remainder of the Study 18 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Communication 20 In Search Of a New Attitude 22 Cognitive Components: Attention and Perception 22 Affective Component 26 Behavioral Component 27
Love: More than Words 29 Love Communication 31 For Love's Sake Only 32 Gender Difference 34 Lost in Translation 36 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY Research Design 39 Target Population 39 Selection of Participants 40 Research Procedures 42 Phase I 43 Phase II 45 Hypotheses 46 Data Collection 50 Data Analysis 52 CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Description of Participants 56 Data Analyses 57 Summary of Results 71 CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A Matter of Perception 72 Conclusion 84 REFERENCES 88 APPENDISES Appendix A: Participant Consent Form 96 Appendix B: Primary Love Language: Husband 97 Appendix C: Primary Love Language Profile: Wife 99 Appendix D: Author Approval 101 Appendix E: Phase I--Chapman's Five Love Language Category Descriptions 102 Appendix F: Phase II Follow-up Survey 104 Appendix G: Memorandum for Record 107
List of Tables Table 1: Binomial Test for Significance for Hypothesis One 59 Table 2-A: Binomial Test for Significance for Hypothesis Two-A 60 Table 2-B: Chi-Square Test of Independence for Hypothesis Two-B 61 Table 3-A: Binomial Test for Significance for Hypothesis Three-A 63 Table 3-B: Chi-Square Test of Independence for Hypothesis Three B 63 Table 4-A: Binomial Test for Significance for Hypothesis Four-A 65 Table 4-B: Chi-Square Test of Independence for Hypothesis Four-B 66 Table 5-A: Binomial Test for Significance for Hypothesis Five-A 67 Table 5-B: Chi-Square Test of Independence for Hypothesis Five-B 68 Table 6-A: Binomial Test for Significance for Hypothesis Six-A 69 Table 6-B: Chi-Square Test of Independence for Hypothesis Six-B 70
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION If thou must love me. Let it be for nought Except for love’s sake only. Do not say .I love her for her smile—her look—her way Of speaking gently,— for a trick of thought That falls in well with mine, and certes brought A sense of pleasant ease on such a day. — For these things in themselves, Beloved, may Be changed, or change for thee, —and love, so wrought, May be unwrought so. Neither love me for Thine own dear pity’s wiping my cheeks dry, — A creature might forget to weep, who bore Thy comfort long, and lose thy love thereby! But love me for love’s sake, that evermore Thou mayst love on, through love’s eternity. (Barrett Browning, 1954 p. 28) Barrett Browning’s lyrical poetry allows her to convey her desire for love to be offered as a gift that was considered neither a sacrifice nor a burden to the lover. The author’s eloquent words expresses love as the reward for simply loving and the capacity for love to be given without extrinsic motivation or expected reward for such emotional acts. Was Browning speaking of her own desire for altruistic love?
What’s Love Got to do With IT? While there are a number of theories as to what characteristics, factors, and/or circumstances that motivate couples to enter into and continue committed marital relationships, love seems to be a common factor. However, the definition of love and type of love experienced varies and are significantly influenced by the complex physical, cognitive, and response factors associated with one’s perceptual experience of love as a human emotion. A variety of authors support the position that there are many marital enhancement strategies that influence the behavioral, cognitive, and relational patterns between couples (Hahlweg, Markman, Thurmair, Engel, Eckert, 1998; Halford, Sanders, & Behrens, 2001; Schilling, 1999; Schilling, Baucom, Brunett, Allen, & Ragland, 2003; Silliman & Schumm, 2000). Gary Chapman, the author of the popular book, The Five Love Languages: How to Express Heartfelt Commitment to Your Mate, is no exception.
According to Chapman (2004), his Love Language concept is based on endless counseling notes, letters of appreciation, and personal stories that document the marital influence of his love language theory. However, the amount of scientific research examining the influence of knowing one's love expression using Chapman's Five Love Languages is almost nonexistent. Actually, only one study was identified that examined Chapman’s Love Languages. Thatcher (2004) examined the potential relationship between love language categorical membership alignment of married couples and measured levels of marital satisfaction. The study concluded that love language category similarities or differences between husband and wife did not seem to impact marital satisfaction. Thatcher’s conclusion supports this research speculation that it is not the category membership of the participants alone that influences marital interaction, but instead
the knowledge of category membership and its related love expression behavior that promotes a change in the relational and emotional status of marital partners. Overall, few researchers have examined the love styles/expressions between both husband and wife who are involved in a committed marital relationship. The research that is available indicates that .Partners’ having a greater sense of intimacy need satisfaction either partially or fully accounted for the association between less negative attributional responses and greater relationship satisfaction. (Kirby, Baucom, & Peterman, 2005, p.321). Prager and Bahrmester (1998) examined need fulfillment within various circumstances and determined that there is a correlation between fulfillment and satisfaction resulting in increased positive affect and decreased negative affect. Although there is supporting research relating to needs, love expression, and levels of personal and marital satisfaction, the field maintains a limited understanding of the functional capacity of love expression within a marital relationship and the impact that this miscommunication may have on relationship interaction (Davis & Latty-Mann, 1987; Hendrick, Hentrick, & Alder, 1988; Marrow, Clark & Brock, 1995; Prager, 1995). Background of the Study
Contrary to the patterns exhibited by distressed couples, non-distressed couples who routinely engaged in more mutual constructive and clear communication patterns demonstrated superior communication skills overall (Christiansen & Shenk, 1991; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989). Skills such as the ability to develop and maintain a reciprocal, constructive, and solution-oriented approach to problems, as well as the ability to establish and maintain clear communication and emotional expression patterns are essential relational elements needed for couples to manage differences that arise between them without developing relational distress (Buehlman, Gottman
& Katz, 1992; Jacobson & Holtzworth-Munroe, 1986). Across research studies, the specific communication deficits that have been identified as predicting relationship satisfaction lack consistency. Likewise, between authors, there exists some controversy as to the specific communication characteristics or behaviors that promote sustained marital satisfaction (Gottman, Coan, Carrere, & Swanson, 1998). What was agreed upon throughout the research and among authors was that communication in general is a significant factor relating to the degree of marital satisfaction and emotional fulfillment within the marital relationship. Statement of the Problem Although there has been research conducted to determine the effectiveness of a number of different couple therapy models and intervention programs, the quantity and methodological focus of couple treatment programs is somewhat limited. Nevertheless, the authors of one of the most recent meta-analyses of marriage and family therapy interventions, Shadish and Baldwin (2003) concluded: First, marriage and family interventions are clearly efficacious compared to no treatment. Second, those interventions are at least as efficacious as other modalities such as individual therapy, and perhaps more effective in at least some cases. Third, there was little evidence for differential efficacy among the various approaches to marriage and family intervention, particularly if mediating and moderating variables are controlled. (p. 566)
Drawn from many different theoretical perspectives, modern family/couple intervention strategies demonstrate the overlap and integration of treatment techniques. Bray (1995) points out that the expanding field of family psychology is bringing with it the increasing tendency
toward the use of eclectic therapeutic interventions, which contradicts that previously held notion of a .purest. theoretical approach to therapy. Given the movement toward the use of different borrowed intervention techniques, one primary goal within the field of family/couple intervention research is to design research studies to identify the specific techniques that facilitate positive change between marital partners. The growing age of accountability emphasizes the demand for intervention research to determine the therapeutic worth of various intervention approaches as the field of family/couple therapy continues to grow. Given the commitment of those in helping professions to .do no harm. to clients, the APA (2002) code of ethics requires that all work of psychologists should be .based upon established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline. (§ 2.04). According to American Psychological Association (APA) ethics codes, "psychologists take responsible steps to avoid harming their patients or clients...and to minimize harm where it was foreseeable and unavoidable" (APA, 1992, p. 8). Within the AAMFT ethical codes (2001), "marriage and family therapists take steps to ensure the competence of their work and to protect clients from possible harm" (p. 6). Therefore, the importance of research in family/couple intervention techniques was obvious (Welfel, 2001). Without such scientific evidence, family system professions may be utilizing intervention strategies that may have little intervention worth, or that in the worst case may actually cause harm. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine if the knowledge acquired through the accurate identification of love expression using Chapman’s Love Language Profile would prompt couples to make an accommodating behavioral without extrinsic motivation to do so. Additionally, the
study investigated the change impact that the love expression knowledge would have on the perceptual experience of the research participants. Although a variety of couple studies have examined the communication factors that affect marital satisfaction in both a negative and positive fashion, the manner in which couples communicate love and its impact on the behavior demonstrated by couples has received less attention from researchers. This study intends to add to the limited research that currently exists relating specifically to Chapman's Five Love Languages and how the identification of love expression might prompt a behavioral and perceptual change experienced by the individuals within the couple.
By extracting the love language concept from Chapman’s larger marital enrichment program, this study focused on the behavioral and perceptual changes experienced by the research participants based on their newly acquired knowledge relating to the action behaviors as defined within each love expression category. First, the study examined if the research participants felt that Chapman’s Love Language Profile accurately identified the love expression used by each marital partner. Second, once category membership was identified, would love expression category membership knowledge increased understanding of the specific action behaviors associated with each category type. Additionally, the study examined if a change of emotional state resulted from with an increased understanding of the action behaviors associated with each love language category. Furthermore, the study focused on how love language expression knowledge influenced behavioral accommodations accordingly in the absence of any identified extrinsic motivation to do so as well as the recognition of such accommodation effort.
Finally, statistical analyses of the self-reported responses of the research participants were completed to determine if there were gender differences between the participants. Research Question This quantitative study was founded upon the following research questions: Does Chapman's Love Language Profile accurately identifies one's primary love expression style? Will knowing a partner's primary love language result in a better understanding of how love was communicated? Will knowing a spouse's love language prompt an individual to change his or her behavior accordingly in an attempt to selflessly communicate love to a spouse using the primary love language of his or her spouse in the absence of an extrinsic motivational element? Once a love language is identified, will individuals perceive an increased understanding of their spouses’ love expressions? Will one perceive a change in the behavior of his/her spouse in response to one’s known primary love language? Does the knowledge of how a spouse communicates love result in a perceptual change relating to one feeling loved? Will the behavioral and perceptual changes be experienced differently between men and women? Nature of the Study
Soliciting the assistance of military married couples from a New York military educational facility, the study used a two-phase, correlational strategy to examine the relationships that exist between the identification of the primary love language of one's spouse and the resulting change that occurred in not only one's behavior, but also in one's perception as well. The initial identification of each participant's primary love language was determined during Phase I of the study. A follow-up survey was administered to the research participants during
phase II of the study, which commenced two weeks after the initial identification of each partner's love language. The questions on the survey were used to collect participant data directly related to the behavioral and perceptual differences that participants experience after the love language category identification. Additionally, the survey included questions relating to the demographic characteristics of the research participants. Significance of the Study Patton (2002) states that the primary purpose of research is "to generate or test theory and contribute to knowledge for the sake of knowledge" (p. 10). A result of the increased influence for mental health professionals to act in both the capacities as practitioners and scientists, the willingness of these professionals to tracking intervention worth was essential. The importance of scientifically examining and sharing such investigations with other professional in the field requires family system professionals to expand their roles as scientists in an attempt to continue to add to the body of available couple intervention research. Pinsof and Wynne (2000) cautions that the field of family psychology risks becoming marginalized in the larger field of health care if research on the process and impact of family/couple intervention programs and the impact of their individual techniques within the therapeutic process are not strengthened.
Based on the success of this study the results would provide scientific evidence to support the usefulness of Chapman’s Love Language Profile as a tool for identifying love expression. Furthermore, the ability for couples to accurately identify the similarities and differences between the styles of how each partners expresses and identifies love, a partner’s expressive intentions or perceived lack of expression by a partner will be clarified. Additionally, the knowledge of how one interprets love and the evaluation period of the study will provide
partners an opportunity to display altruistic love, further supporting the notion that altruistic love does exist. Overall, the study will provide evidence that the accurate knowledge of love expression will bring to light the emotional needs of each partner. Definition of Terms Variables: Both the behavioral and perceptual differences that research participants' experiences were assessed during the second phase of the proposed research project using a simple survey. As stated previously, the proposed research questions query the existence of a relationship between knowing a spouse's love language and what behavioral and perceptual differences that resulted from such knowledge. Using a two-phase data collection design, the study examined the dependent variables of behavioral and perceptual differences as they relate to the independent variables of sex. Chapman's Five Love Languages: According to Chapman (2004), individuals communicate expressions of love that can be classified into five primary communication categories that he refers to as the Five Love Languages (FLL). After thirty years of marriage counseling, Chapman has concluded that couples communicate recognize emotional love through physical touch, quality time, words of affirmation, gifts, and acts of service (Chapman, 2004) which are the independent variables considered in both research questions. While not all-inclusive, a brief description of the behavior associated with Chapman's Five Love Languages categories are as follows: Words of Affirmation: compliment, verbal encouragement, and verbal statements of love.
Quality Time: face-to-face conversation, mutually enjoyed activities, and uninterrupted time together. Gifts: tangible items as well as the gift of .self.. Acts of Service: selfless deeds, domestic service, and acts of kindness. Physical Touch: holding hands, massage, and sexual intimacy. Assumptions and Limitations Assumptions The proposed study assumes that the nominal variables examined during this study could evaluated categorically and that such scales of measurement complied with the study's exploratory objectives, the underlying theories, as well as the instruments being used. Furthermore, while the validity and reliability of Chapman's Love Language Profile had not been established, the instrument was used only to determine the participants' primary love language. Therefore, it was assumed that results from this instrument would provide an adequate means to provide category membership of each participant. Because of the potential bias concerning the use of volunteers, .the assumption was made that motivation and co-operation were the same. (Robson, 2002, p. 118) for all of the participants.
Furthermore, assumptions can be made about the sample population of military couples. Given the current "don't ask, don't tell" position of the military relating to homosexual relationships, it can be assumed that the married military couples who are living in on-post housing units are heterosexual. Similar to the inclusionary criteria as stipulated in this study, the United States Army requires that soldiers provide to the housing department a list of family members who are occupying the quarters to verify eligibility. Army Regulation 210-50
(Headquarters Department of the Army, 2005) states that married soldiers must be able to support the claim of marriage with legal documentation, that the soldier's spouse be listed as a "dependent" within his or her personnel records, and that both soldier and spouse are cohabiting in the assigned quarters.
Limitations This study proposes to examine the perceptual and behavioral changes that are experienced by the research participants based on a single survey measurement taken during a single period of time. The single measure only provides the participants experience as it is perceived at the time the participants complete the follow-up survey. It is then possible that the participants' responses were influenced by their moods or extraneous events that have occurred shortly prior or during the survey period. While the single measure procedure may result in some research limitations, the single assessment period also limits the threat to internal validity issues such as history, testing, instrumentation, mortality, and maturation (Robson, 2002). Since there will only be a 2-week time period between the administration of the love language profile to determine category association of participants and the admission of the follow-up survey, the results of the research are limited in scope to only the initial perceptual and behavioral changes that occur after the love language identification of both partners. The focus of the study is limited to the examination of the short-term behavioral and perceptual changes of the research participants and would require further study to examine whether changes were maintained over an extended duration.
The greatest threat to both the internal and external validity of research is related to participant selection and the generalization of research findings to the larger population. The
proposed study is no exception, however the participants are expected to be representative of legally married heterosexual couples. Nevertheless, the sampling criteria of the proposed study may limit the applicability of the results of this research to other populations (homosexual couples, distressed couples, dating couples, cohabitating unmarried couples, et cetera). Additional considered limitations include the proposed research sample, which is limited to those military couples who are living in on-post housing. Thus, the sample will not include those military married couples that are living in alternative housing located off the military installation. Organization of the Remainder of the Study Chapter Two will provide a summary of the research findings relating to love expression and how it relates to changes in behavior and perception. Chapter Three will provide details about the methodology that was utilized in this study. Included in the chapter were the psychometric properties of the assessment instruments, the random selection of participants, the data collection procedures, as well as the inclusion of the steps necessary to ensure the confidentiality and rights of all participants. Furthermore, the section will include a detailed description of the statistical analyses that were performed to determine the extent to which participants experience a behavior, and to which perceptions may change. Based on the research questions posed within the study and the resulting hypotheses, Chapter Four will provide the results of the non-parametric statistical procedures that were used to analyze the participants’ responses as they related to the Phase II survey questions.
Lastly, Chapter Five will discuss the result findings as they apply to the research questions, how the research results may compare to previously written literature, and the
potential application of the results to the therapeutic process. The chapter will further address the limitations of the study and conclude with suggestions for future research.
The Appendices, as referenced within the text, are included at the end of the reference section, and include copies of Chapman's Love Language Profiles for both husband and wife, individual extended descriptions of each of the five love language categories as provided to the research participants, the follow-up survey, the letter to potential participants explaining the study, and all required consent forms.
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
It is not commonly reported that couples begin their marriage by describing their relationships as dissatisfying. In fact, most couples report entering their committed marital relationships with optimism, the intention to .live together happily ever after,. and would describe their relationships as very satisfying. However, good intentions are not enough. Couples commonly report a decline in marital satisfaction and/or significant periods of marital distress during the early transitional years of marriage. While all marriages are vulnerable to this trend, the United States Census Bureau (2002) estimates that approximately 40-45% of all first-time marriages will ultimately end in divorce. For those couples who remain together, there is increasing evidence that on average, levels of relationship satisfaction decrease substantially over the first ten years of marriage (Holman, 2001). While there is a broad list of variables that significantly influence marital satisfaction and outcome, couple communication has been the most extensively studied. Ineffective and dysfunctional communication patterns have been suggested to be the primary factors that are most often correlated with marital discord.
Communication
Interpersonal communication is defined as the interaction that occurs between two persons who have a relationship (West & Turner, 2000). Early theories explained communication as a linear process with one individual as the sender and one individual as the receiver of the intended communication; both giving and receiving were considered separate acts of communication (Laswell, 1984). Linear theories were replaced by interactional views of communication, which propose that individuals take turns as communication senders and communication receivers, but are still considered to be committing separate acts (Weiner, 1967).
More recently, the position has been taken that communication is a transactional process. Willmot (1987) suggests that communication is a multidirectional exchange between individuals who function as both speaker and listener, and each simultaneously and continuously sends, receives, and interprets both verbal and non-verbal messages throughout their interaction. Marriage and Family research literature has consistently correlated marital discord with a communication deficit explanation. In fact, the literature repeatedly identified specific interactional patterns or behaviors that across the research are considered to commonly be particularly damaging to marriages. For example, Christiansen and Shenk (1991) state that mutual avoidance of problem discussions and demand/withdrawal communications during problem discussions are common patterns exhibited by distressed couples. Gottman and Krokoff (1989) further identified defensiveness, stubbornness, and refusal to talk as among the three most common communication patterns related to serious long-term relational problems experienced by the couples in their longitudinal study. Behavioral theorists further emphasize that a lack of communication skills directly affects a couple’s ability to solve problems, causing an increased level of relational distress (Gottman & Krokoff, 1989; Wood, 1998).
Marital communication has been found to be a frequent complaint in distressed marriages (Birchler, 1979; Geiss & O'Leary, 1981; Notarius & Markman, 1993). Marital theorists, as well as marital therapists, agree that issues relating to communication are a central feature in marital discord, and are the most damaging relationship problems that couples experience (Geiss & O’Leary, 1981; Baucom & Adams, 1987; Jacobson & Holtzworth-Munroe, 1986; Kelly & Halford, 1995). Considerable research has been conducted on the precise nature of
communication in marriage. It has been suggested that the ability to communicate effectively significantly affects levels of marital satisfaction (Jacobson & Margolin, 1979). In Search Of a New Attitude Brehm, Kassin, and Fein (2002) explain the need for research to add to our understanding of the relationship between our attitudes and our actions. According to Eagly and Chaiken (1995), it is the strength of our attitude either in a positive or negative way that has a dramatic influence on whether action is taken or not by an individual. The more intensely one feels relating to a source of attitude, the higher the chances one’s attitude may result in an action relating directly to that attitude. Supporting the previous authors’ position, Baumeister and Leary (1995) contend that the stronger the attitude, the more predictive it is that a behavioral response will occur. The traditional view of attitude development contends that our positive and negative attitudes, evaluation, and reactions to objects, persons, and/or situations are comprised of not only cognitive and affective components, but behavioral components as well. According to Weiten (2001), the beliefs that people hold about the object of an attitude is the cognitive component, the emotional feeling that is stimulated by the object is the affective component, and the behavioral component relates to the .predispositions to act in certain ways toward an attitude object. (p. 671). These three attitude components—cognition, emotion, and affect—explain the process by which attitude potentially translates into action. Cognitive Components: Attention and Perception Getting Your Attention
The five primary areas of research-related study in the area of attention has focused on process capacity, selective attention, level of arousal, control of attention, consciousness, and cognitive neuroscience (Solso, 2001). While the topic of attention has gained in popularity, it has not always been the case. The topic of attention has varied in its popularity throughout the history of psychology. William James (1890) was among the first who speculated about the number of ideas that could be attended to at any given time. As a result of the behaviorism movement, theoretical speculation relating to the study of attention was eventually deemed inappropriate (Brennan, 2003). Almost one hundred years later, Hirst (1986) proposed that attention was a hidden process and one that was impossible to study using the application of scientific method. It has only been in recent decades that attention has received adequate .attention..
The rising interest given to attention prompted the development of the filter model by Broadbent in the late 1950s (Solso, 2001). His research formed the basis for theories of selective attention hypothesizing that certain sensory input is accepted and further processed within the brain, while some sensory input is not processed. Without further processing, certain input is consequently forgotten. Mangun (1995) proposed that selective attention is based on the ability of various brain structures to select and divert incoming sensory messages that have reached the brain. Evidence suggests that there are sensory gates that control the flow of incoming nerve impulse using the same function as a gate, hence the name "sensory gates." Wood & Cowan (1995) explained this process using what they called the .cocktail party effect.. According to these authors, if you are standing in a group of people at a cocktail party listening to one person, .another person nearby can talk backward and you will not notice their strange speech. (p. 244).
While this example of selective attention is less technical then those offered by the previous authors, the process is easily understood. It is impossible to address the concept of attention without mentioning that it is attention that often so dramatically influences our perception. The preceding discussion proposes that attention is inherently selective and offers some explanation as to the subjectivity of experience between different people. To a great degree, what is processed of the world around us is dependent on what the focus of our selective attention is. This certainly offers some explanation for individual perception as it is possible for different people to experience the same situation and perceive it differently. Perception is Reality According to Brehm, Kassin, and Fein (2002), perception is an identification process by which people attempt to gain understanding of others and themselves. Through the study of perception, one is able to identify specific attributions, which are defined as "any claim about the cause of someone's behavior" (Gray, 2002, p. 498). This type of identification process explains that observers are capable of attributing the cause of the recently viewed behaviors to gain an understanding of the causality of such behavior. Heider (1944) divided attribution into two main categories: one known as personal attribution and the other as situational attribution. Heider furthermore considered attribution to be a three-step process. He explains that personal attribution is an internal process of judging someone's personality based on his or her action by the degree to which one believes the action represents a lasting quality within the person. Situational attribution, then, represents the belief that a person's behavior is a response to a specific situation and is not necessarily present in all circumstances.
Using Heider's basic concept of attributions, Kelley (1973) suggested that our decision to attribute behavior is due to internal or external causes. Kelley additionally believed that our personal judgment as to the observed behavior of another is based on our ability to answer three questions relating to consistency of actions, consensus, and distinctiveness as they related to any observed behavior. Kelley believed that the answers to these questions would lead the observer to gain the necessary information relating to the observed behavior and, as a result, be able to make a logical assumption as to the causality of such behavior. The process of attribution and how it contributes to personal perception certainly cannot be explored without having a general understanding as to personal bias in attribution. Brehm, Kassin, & Fein (2002) contend that "we are limited in our ability to process all relevant information, or we may lack the kinds of training needed to employ fully the principles of attribution theory. More importantly, we often don't make an effort to think carefully about our attributions" (p. 104). This inconsistency of perception, or interpretation lacking objective reflection of information or a logical analysis of it, creates a number of biases such as person bias, situation bias, physical characteristic bias, self-concept bias, cultural bias, socioeconomic bias, motivational bias, et cetera, resulting in actor-observer discrepancy and ultimately in distorted perception.
Appraisal theory contends that our subjective perceptions shape what external phenomena means to each individual due to the interpreted emotion that we attribute to the phenomena (Wood, 2004). It is our self-assigned perception, meaning, or view of an event or situation that prompts such emotional responses as sadness, joy, frustration, love, fear, pleasure, et cetera. It is not reality, then, that filters our experiences, but instead our perception of a
situation that influences our feelings. According to Strongman's (1987) model of emotion, which incorporates many of the previously held explanations of emotion, emotion is a process that can change, expand, and diminish throughout, thus altering our perception, emotional response, and behavioral reaction to both external and internal stimuli. Affective Component Theories of Emotion Different theories of emotion offer different answers to how arousal, behavior, cognition, expression, and feelings are interrelated. The James-Lange's theory (Kalat, 2004) states that emotions follow bodily arousal and come from awareness of such arousal. The response of the body comes first, followed by the identification of it as an emotion. This theory assumes that physiological arousal is both necessary and sufficient for emotions. In other words, a potentially emotional situation elicits a cognitive component of emotion immediately, and directs the auromonic and skeletal responses. The perception of those responses produces the feeling aspect of emotions (Kalat, 2004).
Although some evidence suggests that this theory is on the right track, other evidence indicates that it is not the whole story. For instance, feedback from the periphery is not necessary for emotion because the brain reacts differently to pleasant and unpleasant stimuli within less than a quarter of a second. In addition, people who have no autonomic or muscular responses nevertheless report some emotions, although they are weakened emotions. The feedback from the periphery is sufficient to identify amusement or extreme fear, but the physiological differences among emotions are too small to be useful for identifying mild emotions (Kalat, 2004).
Walter Cannon and Philip Bard (1927, as cited in Coon, 2004) disagreed with the James-Lange theory because they believed that emotions and bodily arousal happen at the same time. They believe an emotional stimulus activates the thalamus in the brain, which in turn alerts the cortex and the hypothalamus for action. The cortex produces our feelings and emotional behavior. The hypothalamus triggers a chain of events that arouse the body. For example, a dangerous looking stimulus simultaneously produces bodily arousal, physiological reaction, and fear (Coon, 2004). Feeling that previous theories have failed to recognize the cognitive responses to emotions, Schachter and Singer (1962) suggested that emotion occurs when people apply a particular label to general physical arousal, which influences our interpretation, and thus influences our response to a given event. The authors referred to this process as the cognitive labeling view of emotions. A contemporary model of emotion combines previous theories and demonstrates the interrelatedness of different emotional components. This most current view states that appraisal gives rise to arousal, behavior, expressions, and emotional feelings. Arousal, behavior, and expressions add to emotional feelings. Emotions influence attitude, which further affects arousal, behavior, expressions, and feelings (Coon, 2004). Thus, the complex cycle of emotion continues. Behavioral Component
Objecting to the definition of psychology as the study of the .mind. or .conscious experience. and further considering introspection as unscientific, John B. Watson challenged the concepts of functionalism through observing the relationship between stimuli and responses in animals. Adopting Ivan Pavlov’s classical conditioning concept, Watson’s behaviorist
perspective applied the concept that a conditioned response is a learned reaction to a particular stimulus and could equally apply to the study of human behavior (Brennan, 2003). Burrhus Frederic Skinner might be one of the most well known behaviorists in modern psychology. Using operant conditioning techniques with rats and pigeons, Skinner concluded that behavior is controlled by the environment and is significantly influenced by the presence of positive reinforcement, by punishment, or by nothing. Skinner stated, .In order to understand human behavior we must take into account what the environment does to an organism before and after it responds. Behavior is shaped and maintained by its consequences. (Skinner, 1971, p. 64). It is the restricted view of behaviorism and its lack of recognition of the impact of cognitive and affective considerations that limits its applicability to the complexities associated with emotional love.
The theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior are two widely used models relating to the beliefs, perceptions, and attitudes. Both the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) are similar in both process and determining characteristics. Expanding on the basic concepts held within TRA, Ajzen (1991) developing an improved theory known as TPB, by which he added the concept of "perceived behavioral control" (Brannon & Feist, 2004, p. 49). According to Ajzen (1991), the TRA model addressed intention, attitude, norms, and motivation and is based on the premise of voluntary behavior. However, the author later determined that an individual's ability to control or determine the "intention" component of the original TRA model was often impossible, resulting in the absence of true individual control limited by external circumstances. Ajzen (1991) concluded that behavior was not always voluntary or controllable, which resulted in the development of the
TPB, and the inclusion of the concept of perception of control as it relates to behavior. According to the concept of perception of control, the more resources and opportunities people believe they have, the stronger their beliefs are that they can control their behavior. According to the modified theory of planned behavior model, in many circumstances, an individual's "perception" of opportunity and potential success is far more influential than reality. This behavior has been referred to as a self-efficacy, and has been proposed by Bandura (1986) to be a determinant in most behaviors. The Languages of Love Love Defined There are a number of theories as to what characteristics, factors, and/or circumstances motivate mate selection, and love seems to be a common factor. However, the definition of love and type of love experience varies and is significantly influenced by the complex physical, cognitive, and response factors associated with one’s perceptual experience of love as a human emotion. As early as the mid-1800s, Elizabeth Barrett Browning (1954) recognized that there were a number of ways to love. She writes,
How do I love thee? Let me count the ways. I love thee to the depth and breadth and height My soul can reach, when feeling out of sight For the ends of Being and ideal Grace. I love thee to the level of everyday's Most quiet need, by sun and candle-light.
I love thee freely, as men strive for Right; I love thee purely, as they turn from Praise. I love thee with a passion put to use In my old griefs, and with my childhood's faith. I love thee with a love I seemed to lose With my lost saints, --- I love thee with the breath, Smiles, tears, of all my life! --- and, if God choose, I shall but love thee better after death. (p. 62) It is Barrett Browning's lyrical poetry that allows her to convey the emotion of love not only in heart-felt eloquent words of the poem itself, but also within the poem as she expresses love as touch (to the breadth and height my soul can reach), as service (to the level of everyday's most quiet need), as a gift (I love thee with a passion…and with my childhood's faith), and with time (of all my life). While the definition of love may be distinctive for each individual, theorists have identified common characteristics that are present in most definitions of .love.. Love as a Style
A number of theories have been developed to explain the different characteristics associated with the love styles and love expression between couples. Although these theorists have given different names to the concept categories, the related love style characteristics are usually common between them. Among most theorists the concept of passion, commitment, and intimacy are commonly identified as facets that exist within a committed romantic relationship (Acker & Davis, 1992; Hendrick & Hendrick, 1989; Sternberg, 1986). Because of numerous studies, Sternberg and his associates have concluded that love is comprised from three main
components that he lists as intimacy, passion, and commitment (Sternberg, 1988). When combined, these components result in eight different love types identified as nonlove, liking, infatuation, empty love, romantic love, compassionate love, fatuous love, and consummate love (Sternberg, 1998; Sternberg & Barnes 1988). Love Communication Chapman (2004) purports that emotional intimacy is expressed in a variety of ways, which he refers to as "the five love languages" (p. 37). According to the author, each individual has a primary love language with which he or she communicates love emotionally to another individual. Although Chapman admits that the ways in which love might be communicated is extensive, he contends that it is possible to categorize intimate expressions of love in to five basic categories that include words of affirmation, quality time, gifts, acts of service, and physical touch, which are described below. Words of Affirmation. While some may say that .a picture is worth a thousand words. for those whose primary love language is Words of Affirmation, a thousand words are hardly enough. These individuals desire and express love though verbal compliments, words of encouragement, and whispers of kindness. Members in this category also find that words expressed in writing land close to their hearts. Shower these partners in verbal affection and they will eagerly return your love in-kind.
Quality Time. Spending time engaged in face-to-face conversation is only one way that the members of this love language category commonly express and identify love. Considered time well spent, these individuals also measure .time. in miles: those long walks, road trips, or events that lead to cherished destinations. Undivided attention, spending time engaged in
mutually enjoyable activities that require interaction, and scheduled weekly activities to spend time together are popular love-communication patterns for these individuals. Those individuals who share this love language category hear the ticking of the clock most loudly. Gifts. Love is truly a .gift. both given and desired by these individuals. This love language is expressed in a variety of generous ways, often presented in brightly colored packages adorned with ribbons and bows. While it might be assumed that the love expressed and recognized by these individuals may be primarily related to material possessions, the gift of Self and personal sacrifice are gifts that are sincerely treasured. Acts of Service. Acts of Service are not only delivered with a smile by these individuals, but are also an expression of love. Service-oriented expressions of love include selfless deeds, domestic service, favors, and acts of kindness. This partner is likely to serve love in the form of a cup of coffee, a clean receptacle bin, a completed errand, or other acts of personal support and/or sacrifice. Reciprocation of service is the way to this individual's heart. Physical Touch. These love language partners primarily express and recognize love that is expressed through non-verbal cues of love-communication. Love touches include, but are not limited to, such physical contact as holding hands, hugging, kissing, snuggling, massage, and sexual intimacy. While these individuals hold the emotion of love in their hearts, they often express and recognize love through the affection of the flesh and other physical intimacy. For Love's Sake Only Altruism
Altruism can be explained from a number of theoretical perspectives. However, there are three prominent theories. Evolutionary psychologists like Dawkins (1989) suggest that humans'
inherent desire to survive is well served by helping behavior resulting in the perpetuation of the "selfish" gene. Sociobiology assumes two types of altruism that are favored by natural selection: devotion to one's relations and reciprocity. According to this theory, desire prompts people to protect and assist their progeny in an effort to promote the continuation of a given genetic line. Additional research proposes that there exists an inherent moral code within some individuals which transcends culture, gender, and/or religion and is described as a genuine altruistic concern for another's welfare demonstrating the existence of "true altruism" (Brehm, Kassin, and Fein, 2002). These theoretical concepts of helping behavior suggest both the existence and the basis for altruistic behavior. One theory may not completely explain altruism and may in fact have more in common with one another than their theoretical orientation proposes. These theories, when combined, complement one another, providing a more complete understanding of such selfless behavior, offering psychological or biological concepts to account for both reciprocal and unconditional altruism.
Altruistic Love
Lee (1976) proposed that there are six styles of love, which include eros, storage, ludus, pragma, mania, and agape. Rice (1990) described five primary love styles, which he explains are associated with the different types of love .feelings.. Paralleling the love styles used by Lee, Rice purports that love style is expressed as romantic love, erotic love, dependent love, friendship love, and altruistic love (Rice 1990). In an attempt to understand the potential existence of selfless behavior based on the intrinsic motivation to please another person, the concept must be contrasted to the original premise that behavior is dependent upon an extraneous
reinforcement. Lee’s agape love and Rice’s altruistic love both describe this unselfish devotion and consideration of one’s partner. Similar to altruism as it is addressed within a social context, altruistic love is described as an unselfish concern for another. Rice (1990) explains that .By nurturing someone else and doing all one can to make the other person happy, the individual finds meaning and satisfaction in his or her own life. (p. 165). Fromm (1956) stresses the importance of what he considers four necessary components within the expression of altruistic love. These elements include care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge. According to Fromm, care is the concern bestowed upon those for whom we claim to have feelings. Responsibility is described by Fromm not as extrinsic obligation, but instead as a voluntary act of response to another’s needs. Respect is considered a form of consideration for an individual within the love relationship and constitutes awareness of the unique qualities that exist within a companion. Finally, Fromm discusses the need for knowledge of one’s partner, allowing for an accurate view of one’s partner not only in the capacity he or she maintains within the relationship, but additionally the needs and desires of the individual. Rice (1990) concludes by saying that .Altruistic love allows the person expressing it to gain satisfaction through caring for another. It allows the receiving person to be cared for and loved for his or her own sake. (p. 166). The applications of care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge to the emotion of love endorse the notion that love is an active behavioral expression motivated by selflessness. Gender Difference
The differences between men and women have been an area of interest for some time as researchers examine the factors that make men and women unique from each other. Areas of
interest have included gender differences in cognitive abilities, intellect, cognitive-process, physical strength, emotion, social behavior, sexuality, and the physiological dimensions. The physiological, chemical, genetic, and hormonal differences between men and women are extensive. While our anatomical differences are usually obvious, more complex and hidden differences exist between and within the structure and function of the brains of both men and women (Fletcher, 2002; Halpern, 2004; Kalat, 2004). Gender differences are also presented in other research that indicates that women tend to be more adept at assessments of language, reading comprehension, spelling, verbal and spatial memory, and fine motor skills, while men excel in mechanical reasoning, spatial perception, and mathematics abilities (Eagly & Wood, 1999; Halpern, 1992; 1997; 2004). Differences were also found in areas of mate selection where, unlike men, women prefer older partners and consider earning potential and character when making mate selections; men prefer younger partners and consider physical attractiveness and domestic skill as desired mate characteristics (Peplau 2003; Rathus, Nevid & Fichner-Rathus, 2002).
The different factors that have been proposed to exist between men and women are not limited to cognitive abilities, biological, and sex-role characteristics alone, but are believed to exist in other areas as well. Canary and Dindia (1998) claim that men and women differ in areas of interaction style, patterns of social support, and the nature of their friendships. Peplau (2002) added to the literature indicating that difference in both positive and negative communication expression exists between genders. Research suggests that comparatively, men are more assertive, competitive, and brave, while women have a tendency to be more nurturing,
cooperative, sympathetic, and social (Eagly & Wood, 1999; Halpen, 2004; Rudman & Goodwin, 2004; Wood & Eagly, 2002). The research relating to the gender and the difference in emotional and empathetic behavior of men and women specifically prompted the inclusion of gender as a variable within this study. Broverman, Vogel, Broverman, Clark, and Rosenkrantz (1994) examined the sex-role stereotypes relating to men and women, and found that women were considered to have enhanced emotional insight resulting in increased potential for interpersonal empathy (Ickes, 1997; Ickes, Gesn, & Graham, 2000; Manstead, 1992; Martin, Fabes, Evans & Wyman, 2000). A meta-analysis was conducted by Ickes, Gesn, and Graham (2000) of studies that had investigated the differences in empathetic perception between genders. The authors reviewed 15 studies in all, which had themselves examined differences between gender and perceptual accuracy. Although varying in methodological approach between studies, six of the fifteen studies reviewed specifically required participants to not only provide their empathetic judgments as they related to a given subject, but additionally to evaluate to what degree they believed that their judgements were correct. The review of the six studies suggested that women tended to have higher empathy identification accuracy scores than did men. Lost in Translation
Chapman (2003; 2004) proposes that every individual sends and receives love using all of the love communication categories. However, each individual has a primary love language that is most often "used" to express love. Additionally the author explains that one most easily recognizes love expression that corresponds to the way in which one expresses love. Chapman explains that there are two factors that often result in the difficulty of partners accurately to
interpret love as expressed by the other. First, "Seldom do husband and wife have the same primary love language, and we become confused when our spouse does not understand what we are communicating" (Chapman, 2004, p. 16). Second, individuals express love in the way that they are able to understand love expression, further complicating the ability for one partner to recognize the love expression of a partner. This leaves both partners especially vulnerable to misinterpretation in cases where the partners do not share a common love language category behavior The potential for such intimate emotional miscommunication, based simply on the lack of communicated information (Wood 1998; Wood 2003; Wood & Inman, 1993), was the basis from which this study was originally conceptualized. Chapman is not alone in his notion that the relational miscommunication of love expression has a potential negative impact on a relationship. This concept is mimicked by Lee (1973) who expresses the logical incidence of naturally occurring relational difficulties between partners who do not share the same love approach. According to Lee, these difficulties are "an important determinant of their interpersonal dynamics and romantic outcomes. (p.80).
Given all of the research on interpersonal communication and its impact on couple interaction (Wood, 1994c; Wood, 1994d), this study hypothesizes that there would be a benefit to identifying and sharing the love language category membership between partners with the purpose of improving the understanding of the intended intimate expressions within the marriage and between the partners (Wood 1998; Wood 2003). So the question was posed: Given specific information relating to the love expression style of a partner, and without the promise of positive reinforcement or reciprocation, would an individual willingly modify his or her behavior to
accommodate a partner’s love expression, prompted only by an intrinsic desire to express love to one’s partner based on the love language knowledge?

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The objective of this qualitative study was to examine the behavioral and perceptual differences that couples experience following the identification of each partner's love language. By extracting the love language concept from Chapman's larger marital enrichment program, the study focused on how love communication specifically influence the behavior and perception of both husbands and wives in the absence of extraneous motivation. Additionally, this study examined how the experiences of both the husbands and wives may differ.
Target Population
The sampling frame for the study was drawn from the list of currently occupied on-post-housing units that are designated as "family" quarters. Those units designated for single or unaccompanied soldiers were excluded from the sampling frame. According to Directorate of Housing and Public Works (DPHW) personnel, there are currently 985 inhabitable family housing units varying in location, style, square footage, year of construction, and available amenities based on rank and number of family members. All available units are currently occupied, resulting in some married couples having to arrange off-post housing accommodations (M. Hinote, September 7, 2005, Personal communication).
Because the participants were drawn from a specific geographic area, which was limited in size and military association, the research findings may not be applicable to all married couples. However, most of the military couples who were solicited for the study have a wide variety of participant characteristics, including variations in geographic, cultural, educational,
and socioeconomic origins that may increase the representation of study results to the general population of married couples. Participants who agreed to be involved in the study, and who completed both phases of the research, were entered into a drawing for one of ten possible participation incentives. The purpose of the drawing was to add an incentive to the couples for their research participation and was considered appropriate and within the guidelines relating to offering research inducements as stipulated by the American Psychological Association (APA) (2003), code 8.06(a). The drawing prizes included Chapman's Love Language enhancement program (VHS) or one of nine of Chapman's Five Love Languages books. Completing the second phase of the study qualified the participant for inclusion in an incentive drawing, which was completed following the data collection phase of the study. The incentive gifts were then delivered to the randomly selected quarters addresses. Selection of Participants Couple volunteer pairs were selected from within the local military community. The Directorate of Housing and Public Works office provided a list of the addresses relating to all on-post quarters occupied by married soldiers and their spouses as they are divided into housing areas (M. Hinote, September 7, 2005, Personal communication). While there are a number of housing areas that are dedicated exclusively to the housing of commissioned officers or enlisted soldiers, the majority of the housing areas have an evenly balanced number of both commissioned and enlisted soldiers, thus providing participant variety. The on-post family housing area list provided the cluster sample from which potential research participants were randomly selected.
Of the 985 married units available on the post, 178 of the units are reserved for commissioned officers and 113 units that are reserved specifically for married enlisted soldiers. In an attempt to include both commissioned and enlisted couples, only housing areas that provide residence to both enlisted and commissioned soldiers, which total 694 units, were included in a random drawing to determine the potential couples to be sampled. Each joint housing area were individually included in a lottery-type drawing, resulting in an equal chance that each joint residential area could be chosen for inclusion in the proposed research project. Joint housing areas continued to be drawn, depending on the number of housing units in each area, until there were a minimum of 100 units available for research solicitation. The determination to solicit a minimum participation number of one-hundred participant couples was based on the effort of the research to collect an adequate survey response, while allowing for the possibility that some solicited couples refused to be included in the proposed research. Additional Criteria of Inclusion Additional criteria of inclusion required that both husband and wife agree to participate, that participation be on a volunteer basis, that the couples be legally married, and that the couples be cohabitating during the entire scheduled study period. Because of the potential bias concerning the use of volunteers, .the assumption was made that motivation and co-operation were the same. (Robson, 2002, p. 118) for all of the participants. Non-Participation During Phase I of the sampling face-to-face contact period, the following standards were used to determine those couples who were considered as non-participants. Non-participation criteria are as follows:
1) Either husband or wife was unwilling or unable to participate in the proposed research. 2) One or both of the solicited individuals would not be available for the duration of the study. 3) Those residences where "no solicitation" signage was posted. 4) Those participants who did not complete both phases of the study. Research Procedures Using the randomly selected quarters areas, potential research participants were solicited in-person by the researcher who inquired as to the married occupants' willingness to volunteer for the proposed research project. Required consent and release forms were obtained from the research participants in accordance with Institutional Review Board (IRB) (Selwitz, Epley, & Erickson, 2005), the American Psychological Association (2003), and the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) (2001) guidelines regarding the use of human participants in research and consensual involvement in an experiment (See Appendix A). The application of these ethical and procedural considerations as they relate to the proposed study was meant to establish accountability of the researcher and furthermore to protect and reduce the risks for participants, and were incorporated into all related aspects of this study. Although the sampling population was drawn from military couples, the research was not conducted through a military organization and did not be related specifically to any experiences unique to military personnel and their families. Given the nature of the proposed study, an additional military IRB approval was not required (See Appendix G).
Standards of confidentiality were applied relating to all records and data according to APA ethical principles and in compliance with IRB regulations. Consent forms, statistical data, and any other documentation that may contain any participant identification have been securely
stored in a locked filing cabinet that is accessible by the researcher only. The research material will be maintained for three years (Selwitz, Epley, & Erickson, 2005), then shredded, and appropriately discarded. Participants were given the opportunity to obtain a full research explanation and experimental results at the conclusion of the study. It should also be noted that participants were free to discontinue the assessment process at any time. Consequently, the incomplete data was excluded from the statistical analysis portion of the study. Because both husband and wife were required to participate in the study as a couple, face-to-face contact of the married residences in the sample housing areas was conducted during the evening hours between 6:30 and 7:30 p.m. during the weekdays, and 11:00 a.m. through 4:00 p.m. on Saturday. Phase I contact with each couple took approximately 20 minutes per couple. As anticipated, it took six weeks for data collection, which included the Love Language Profile identification time during Phase I, the two-week waiting period between phases, and the follow-up survey period needed to collect the of Phase II data. With consideration for the proposed sample size, the dissertation researcher’s limitations as the sole data collector during both phases of the study, and the extensive time required for fact-to-face assessments, only one attempt was made to contact each resident pair within the selected housing areas during Phase I of the study. However, three separate attempts to collect Phase II survey data from the participants were made in an effort to collect complete research data sets. Phase I As stated previously, the proposed study was conducted in two phases.
Phase 1: Chapman's Love Language Profile
During the first phase of the study, participants were asked to self-complete Chapman's Love Language profile. Chapman's love language profile consists of 30 pairs of statements that required the subjects to select one statement from each pair that most accurately portrays their desires. Separate profiles for both husband and wife were used, and contained gender-specific language (See Appendixes B and C). Immediately following the completion of the love language profile, the profiles were hand-scored by the researcher to determine each participant's primary love language using the response coding system provided by Chapman (2004). The results of the love language profiles and category membership were provided to the participants. The participant couples were provided with a brief overview of the love expression behaviors associated with each of the five love language categories (See Appendix E). The primary love language category of both the husband and wife as indicated from the Love Language Profile was labeled accordingly on the same overview sheet and provided to the participant couple to review and share. No other love language/expression enrichment material was provided to the couples. The purpose of providing only a brief love expression category description was done so that the behavioral and perceptual changes experienced by the research participants might be based on the love language category knowledge alone and not influenced by the other aspects off Chapman’s communication enrichment program. Completion of the love language survey took fewer than 20 minutes and was hand-scored in less then five minutes. No other training materials or instructions were provided to the participants regarding Chapman's Five Love Languages. Permission to use the Love Language Profile was obtained from the author (Appendix D).
Chapman's love language profile was not used as a statistically analyzed measure, but instead was used to establish each participant's primary love language category according to Chapman's Love Language Profile assessment. While it was often difficult to establish category membership according to Robson (2002), the nominal variables that were examined in the study allowed for the feasibility of such categorical membership placement. Phase II The second phase of the study commenced two-weeks after the completion of the initial love language profile. Participants were again contacted in person to completing the single follow-up survey. The follow-up survey was comprised of 16 total questions. Ten questions related to the participants demographic information and the remaining six questions directly conveyed the behavioral and perceptual changes that each participant had experienced following the conclusion of the first phase of the research (See Appendix E). Given the uncomplicated nature of the desired respondent information and the ability to collect and record such data using a limited number of questions as they pertain to the study hypotheses, it was possible argue the appropriateness of using a survey data collection strategy during phase II of the study (Leary, 2001; Robson, 2002).
Using a 5-point Likert Scale, the self-administered, follow-up survey will consist of six questions. As stated previously, the proposed research questions query the existence of a relationship between knowing a spouse's love language and the behavioral and perceptual differences that resulted from such knowledge. Additionally, demographic information was collected to assist in identifying the individual characteristics of the research participants. (See Appendix F). This demographic information was utilized as the foundation for the descriptive
statistics within this study and provided the means from which of extraneous variables could be identified that were considered to have influence the findings of the study. Hypotheses As stated previously, the proposed research questions queried if knowing a spouse's love language would result in a behavioral and perceptual in the absence of extraneous motivation or reward to do so. Therefore, the study examined the dependent variables of behavior and perception and their relationship to the independent variables of change. Additional considerations were made relating to difference between participant responses based on gender. This quantitative study was founded upon the following research questions, which determined the distinct hypotheses to be tested. The researcher queried: Will knowing a spouse's love language prompt an individual to change his or her behavior accordingly in an attempt to communicate love of a spouse more effectively? Will both men and women make the same effort to accommodate their spouses’ primary love languages? Once identified, will individuals perceive their spouses' love expressions differently? If so, do they experience a perceptual change relating to feeling loved? Based on these research questions, the following information states the research hypotheses related to each question, as well as identifying the non-parametric statistical procedure that were used to analyze the participants’ responses to the corresponding survey questions, which are also listed below. One: ResQ1: Do participants believe that Chapman's Love Language Profile accurately identified their primary love language category?
Hypothesis Ho1 (null): The proportion of people who believe their love language was accurately portrayed was less than or equal to 50% Hypothesis HA1: The proportion of people who believe their love language was accurately portrayed was greater than 50%. The results of the binomial test are represented in table 1. Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using a nonparametric Binomial Test. Survey Q1: I believe my primary love language category was accurately identified. Two: ResQ2: Will knowing one’s own primary love language result in a better understanding of how one communicates love? Hypothesis Ho2-A (null): One’s understanding of how he or she communicates love will not change after knowing his/her own love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA2-A: One’s understanding of how he or she communicates love was greater after knowing his/her own love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the nonparametric Binomial Test. Hypothesis Ho2-B (null): One's understanding of how he or she communicates love was independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA2-B: One's understanding of how he or she communicates love will not be independent of one's gender. Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the Chi-Square Test of Independence. Survey Q2: I gained a better understanding of how I express love to my spouse Three:
ResQ3: Will knowing a spouse's love language prompt an individual to change his or her behavior accordingly in an attempt to communicate love to a spouse using the primary love language of his or her spouse? Hypothesis Ho3-A (null): One’s efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse will not change after knowing the spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA3-A: One’s efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse were greater after knowing the spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the nonparametric Binomial Test. Hypothesis Ho3-B (null): One's efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse were independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA3-B: One's efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse will not be independent of one's gender. Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the Chi-Square Test of Independence. Survey Q3: I made an effort to express love to my spouse using his or her primary love language. Four: ResQ4: Once identified, do individuals perceive an increased understanding of their spouses’ love expressions? Hypothesis Ho4-A (null): One’s understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions will not change after knowing the spouse's primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile).
Hypothesis HA4-A One’s understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions was greater after knowing the spouse's primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the nonparametric Binomial Test. Hypothesis Ho4-B (null): One's understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions was independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA4-B: One's understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions will not be independent of one's gender. Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the Chi-Square Test of Independence. Survey Q4: My understanding of how my spouse expresses love to me has increased. Five: ResQ5: Will one perceive a change in the behavior of his/her spouse in response to one’s known primary love language? Hypothesis Ho5-A (null): One will not perceive a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love using one’s newly discovered primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA5-A: One will perceive a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love using one’s newly discovered primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the nonparametric Binomial Test. Hypothesis Ho5-B (null): One's perception of a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love was independent of one's gender.
Hypothesis HA5-B: One's perception of a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love will not be independent of one's gender. Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the Chi-Square Test of Independence. Survey Q5: My spouse changed his/her behavior to express love using my primary love language. Six: ResQ6: Does the knowledge of how a spouse communicates love result in a perceptual change relating to one feeling loved? Hypothesis Ho6-A (null): One will not feel more loved after knowing and understanding his/her spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA6-A: One will feel more loved after knowing and understanding his/her spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the nonparametric Binomial Test. Hypothesis Ho6-B (null): One's feeling more loved after knowing his/her spouse’s primary love language was independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA6-B: One's feeling more loved after knowing his/her spouse’s primary love language will not be independent of one's gender. Analysis: This hypothesis was tested using the Chi-Square Test of Independence. Survey Q6: I feel more loved now that I understand how my spouse expresses love. Data Collection
Statistical analysis of the research data was completed during the second phase of the study.
Descriptive Analysis: Demographic information collected during the second phase of the study—included as part of the follow-up survey—was collected from participants to determine population characteristics such as age, gender, primary love language category association, number of children, ages of children, years married, et cetera. Inferential Analysis: The Chi-square, a non-parametric test, was used to identify the relationship between the explanatory and outcome variables of the proposed study and was deemed appropriate given the categorical nature of the collected data (Shavelson, 1996). The explanatory variables as stated previously included gender differences as they related to the outcome variables, which included the examination of both behavioral and perceptual changes. Fitzgerald, Dimitrov, and Rumrill (2001) state that .nonparametric statistics are a viable and increasingly common way for researchers to test relationships among variables when the necessary conditions or assumptions required for parametric statistics are not met. (p. 291). While some may question the power of nonparametric statistics comparably to parametric tests, others argue that non-parametric tests are appropriate when assumptions about normal distribution in the population cannot be met, as was the case in this study (Jaeger, 1993; Welkowitz, Ewen, & Cohen, 1982).
Because the survey used in this study were developed using a 5-point Likert scale, Gibbons (1993) contends that .such data are not appropriate for analysis by classical techniques because the numbers are comparable only in terms of relative magnitude, not actual magnitude. (p. 1). Additionally, for data obtained from using a Likert scale, any .assumption of a normal distribution cannot possibly be justified. (Gibbons, 1993, p. 2), nor can a normal distribution be
assumed when the groups are not randomly assigned, as in this study. Therefore, it was assumed that this study not only meets the requirements for use of such statistical methods, but also that nonparametric statistics provide a valid means of addressing the research questions in this study (Shavelson, 1996). Data Analysis Chi-square Test for Independence and the Binomial Test analyses were completed using the Power Analysis and Sample (PASS) software (Hintze, 2004). Robson (2002) explains that the use of the Chi-square Test of Independence is an appropriate statistical procedure to analyze those survey questions that have been developed to examine the survey response differences that may exist for husbands and wives as they relate to this specific study. The PASS software also allowed for the data to be analyzed in six separate 2x2 contingency table, which measured the relationship between two variables: in this case participant sex and survey question response. The main independent variable category membership for the proposed study was determined by the participants’ sexes (husbands or wives). The exploratory (dependent) variable were determined by the participants' reported perceptual and behavioral differences following the Love Language Profile assessment, which were completed during the first phase of the study. Using a five-point Likert scale, the response options in relation to the survey questions will range between "Strongly Agree," "Agree," "Neither Agree Nor Disagree," "Disagree," and "Strongly Disagree."
Participant responses of .Neither Agree Nor Disagree,. "Disagree," or "Strongly Disagree" were categorized as a "negative" response indicating that the participant did not experience a positive difference relating to the corresponding variable addressed by the specific
survey questions. Likewise, the "Strongly Agree" and "Agree" response were interrupted as an indication that the participants did experience-- or perceive experiencing-- a positive response to a specific question posed in the follow-up survey. These responses were categorized as a .positive. participant response for the statistical analysis. The independent variable category membership of either husband or wife in addition to the dependent variable membership of a positive or neutral/negative responses were used to create the individual Chi-square 2x2 contingency tables. Additionally, a Binomial Test was used to analyze the overall responses to five of the survey questions in order to examine the total responses of the research participants independently from their sex category membership. Field Test A field test was conducted to evaluate the research protocols and procedures relating to the data collection, analyses, recording, reporting, and management prior the actual research period. Phase I: Chapman's Love Language Profile and Participant Consent
While Chapman (2004) himself may be in possession of documentation that supports the soundness of his love language categories, neither he nor anyone else was able to provide any scientific evidence that supported such claims. Furthermore, Chapman's Love Language Profile was only used to establish categorical membership of the research participants and was not statistically analyzed. Nevertheless, the researcher's committee was asked tol examine the love expression category profiles in order to scrutinize the profile's capacity to accurately and reliably determine category membership. Additionally, one committee member and an independent reviewer, who was determined to fit the target population as described in the study (married
adult), were solicited to review and assess the appropriateness of the research participant package as it would be received by the actual research participants. Participant packages included a research participation information sheet, the consent form, the Love Language Profile, and extended Love Language Profile descriptions. Phase II: Survey Questionnaire Because the Phase II survey questionnaire was unique to this study, the field test process provided an opportunity to evaluate the content of the specific questions that were asked during the second phase of the study. To do this, committee members, as well as an independent reviewer with a PhD in psychology, were solicited for the purpose of reviewing a draft of the questionnaire to ensure that the questions are clear, that they specifically related to the objectives of the study, and that the participant responses would provide useful information as it related to the research hypotheses. Expected Findings
The proposed study expected to provide data that supported the premise that once the love language of a spouse was identified, one would be prompted to modify his/her behavior to accommodate the spouse's love language in a manner that would be recognized by the spouse as such. Without the expectation of an extraneous reward or expectancy of reciprocation, the willingness of one to modify his or her behavior would demonstrate unselfish love and the altruistic desire to fulfill the emotional needs of one’s spouse. Furthermore, it was estimated that knowing the love expression of a spouse would result in the increased understanding and clarification that spouse’s love expression and communication style. Moreover, it was proposed that the accurate interpretation of love communication as intended by one's spouse, would result
in the increased feeling of being loved by one's spouse. This researcher proposed that the statistical analyses of the data would provide the evidence needed to demonstrate that both a behavior and perception change was experienced by the participants following the accurate identification of love language expression as categorized using Chapman’s Love Language Profile. It was hypothesized that the behavioral and perceptual difference for husbands and wives may not be the same. This study not only expected to add to the limited literature relating to Chapman's Love Languages, but also hoped to prompt interest and further study in the examination of love expression and how the clarification of love styles might impact the processes by which couples communicate emotions.
CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
To understand the love communication within marital relationships better, this study focused on how husbands and wives experienced behavioral and perceptual changes following the identification of each partner's love language, and whether husbands and wives experienced these changes differently. The following chapter provides the results of the study, based on data obtained from this two-phase correctional inquiry of married, heterosexual, military couples.
Description of Participants
The sampling frame for the study were drawn from within the local military community, from a list of 694 currently occupied on-post housing units that are designated as family quarters. From the possible addresses, a random drawing was conducted to determine the 100 couples to be solicited for participation.
Phases I survey packets were provided to those couples who had been selected for participation during the sample drawing. Phase I survey packages included consent forms, descriptions of the proposed study, assessment schedules, a list of ethical considerations, and the Love Language profile. A total of 100 couple consent packets were distributed to the potential participants. Of the 100 survey packages distributed, ten Phase I packages were not returned and three packages were returned but later eliminated because of incomplete survey information. The Phase I response rate resulted in the distribution of 87 Phase II follow-up surveys. Again, the response rates for the Phase II surveys were impressive: only four surveys were not returned, and only six surveys were returned but were incomplete and thus unusable. A total of 77 complete couple data sets were collected. Both Phase I and Phase II data obtained from the 77 complete
data sets were then entered into an Excel spreadsheet in accordance with a survey-response coding system developed by the investigator. Data Analyses Descriptive Analysis Demographic information was collected during Phase II of the study and provided a description of the unique participant characteristics of both husbands and wives. Overall, participant couples reported having been married for an average of 10.7 years and having had 1.76 children. The data also showed that 76.62% of both gender groups were between the ages of 26-40, with the highest category membership of that group belonging to those husbands and wives who were between the ages of 31 and 35 years of age. Only 2.60% of the participants were between the ages of 19-25, and the remaining 20.13% were 41 years of age or older. There were similar limited representation in the ethnic group category membership, with 79.87% of the 154 research participants indicating .white. ethnic membership, only 20.13% of the participants representing other ethnic groups. The demographic information also indicated that the 128 of the 154 individual participants were well educated, with 83.12% of all the respondents reporting having at least an Associate’s Degree. Of those 128 participants with college degrees, 15 had Associate’s Degrees, 40 with a Bachelor’s Degree, 63 with a Master’s Degree, and 10 reporting an advanced graduate degree. While 19 of the 154 total participants reported having some college, only seven respondents stated having a high school diploma or equivalent.
The employment status of the research participants were very much as expected, with 65 of the 77 male participants reporting themselves as active-duty military members; 52 claiming
commissioned category membership, 13 claiming enlisted membership, and 12 categorizing themselves as civilians. Contrasting the category membership of the men, the employment category memberships of the females were much different. Only five females stated that they were affiliated directly with military service. The remaining 72 women reporting themselves as civilians, of whom 43 stated that they were either part-time or fully-employed, and 29 females reporting their category affiliation as homemakers. Inferential Analysis Using PASS statistical analysis software, the independent variable category membership of either husband or wife, in addition to the dependent variable membership of a .positive. or .neutral/negative. responses were analyzed according to each survey question response. This information was then used to create five individual Chi-square 2x2 contingency tables for survey questions two through six. Additionally, a Binomial Test was used to analyze the overall responses to each of the six of the survey questions in order to examine the total responses of the research participants independently of their sex category membership. Based on the hypotheses posed in this study, the Chi-Square and Binomial statistical analyses of the participants’ responses are represented in the following tables. One ResQ1. Do participants believe that Chapman's Love Language Profile accurately identified their primary love language category? Hypothesis Ho1 (null). The proportion of people who believe their love language was accurately portrayed was less than or equal to 50%
Hypothesis HA1. The proportion of people who believe their love language was accurately portrayed was greater than 50%. The dependent variable were measured by counting the number of positive vs. neutral / negative responses to survey question 1, which queries .I believe my primary love language category were accurately identified.. The result of the binomial test is represented in table 1. Table 1 Binomial Test for Significance ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type N Observed Prop. Test Prop. Assymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ________________________________________________________________________ Positive 139 .90 .50 .000a Neutral/Negative 15 .10 Totals 154 1.00 _______________________________________________________________________ a. Based on Z Approximation _______________________________________________________________________ With a p-value of .0000, which was less than .05, the null hypothesis was rejected and it can be concluded that the people overwhelmingly feel their love language was accurately portrayed by the Chapman's Love Language Survey. Two ResQ2. Will knowing one’s own primary love language result in a better understanding of how one communicates love?
Hypothesis Ho2-A (null). One’s understanding of how he or she communicates love will not change after knowing his/her own love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA2-A. One’s understanding of how he or she communicates love will be greater after knowing his/her own love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). The dependent variable were measured by counting the number of positive vs. neutral / negative responses to survey question 2, which reads, .I gained a better understanding of how I express love to my spouse.. The result of the binomial test is represented in table 2A. Table 2-A Binomial Test for Significance ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type N Observed Prop. Test Prop. Assymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ________________________________________________________________________ Positive 121 .79 .50 .000a Neutral/Negative 33 .21 Totals 154 1.00 _______________________________________________________________________ a. Based on Z Approximation _______________________________________________________________________
With a p-value of .0000, which was less than .05, the null hypothesis was rejected and it can be concluded that the people generally feel they understand how to communicate better with their spouse after learning their love language. Hypothesis Ho2-B (null). One's understanding of how he or she communicates love will be independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA2-B. One's understanding of how he or she communicates love will not be independent of one's gender. The results of the Chi-Square Test of Independence are represented in table 2B. Table 2-B Chi-Square Test of Independence ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type Positive Neutral/Negative Totals ________________________________________________________________________ Men 59 18 77 Women 62 15 77 Totals 121 33 154 ________________________________________________________________________
Degrees of freedom: 1 Chi-square = 0.347107438016529 For significance at the .05 level, chi-square should be greater than or equal to 3.84. The distribution was not significant.
p was less than or equal to 1. ________________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that one’s level of understanding of how love is communicated varies by one’s gender. Three ResQ3. Will knowing a spouse's love language prompt an individual to change his or her behavior accordingly in an attempt to communicate love to a spouse using the primary love language of his or her spouse? Hypothesis Ho3-A (null). One’s efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse will not change after knowing the spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA3-A. One’s efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse will be greater after knowing the spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). The dependent variable were measured by counting the number of positive vs. neutral / negative responses to survey question 3, which reads, .I made an effort to express love to my spouse using his or her primary love language.. The result of the binomial test is represented in table 3A. Table 3-A Binomial Test for Significance ________________________________________________________________________
Response Type N Observed Prop. Test Prop. Assymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ________________________________________________________________________ Positive 76 .49 Neutral/Negative 78 .51 .50 .64a Totals 154 1.00 _______________________________________________________________________ a. Based on Z Approximation _______________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that one will modify his or her behavior to accommodate one's spouse's love language. Hypothesis Ho3-B (null). One's efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse will be independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA3-B. One's efforts to communicate love to his/her spouse will not be independent of one's gender. The results of the Chi Square Test of Independence was represented in table 3B. Table 3-B Chi-Square Test of Independence ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type Positive Neutral/Negative Totals ________________________________________________________________________ Men 41 36 77
Women 35 42 77 Totals 76 78 154 ________________________________________________________________________ Degrees of freedom: 1 Chi-square = 0.935222672064777 For significance at the .05 level, chi-square should be greater than or equal to 3.84. The distribution was not significant. p was less than or equal to 1. ________________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that one's willingness to modify his or her behavior to accommodate a spouse’s love language varies according to one’s gender. Four ResQ4. Once identified, do individuals perceive an increased understanding of their spouses’ love expressions? Hypothesis Ho4-A (null). One’s understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions will not change after knowing the spouse's primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA4-A. One’s understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions will be greater after knowing the spouse's primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile).
The dependent variable were measured by counting the number of positive vs. neutral / negative responses to survey question 4, which reads, .My understanding of how my spouse expresses love to me has increased.. The result of the binomial test is represented in table 4A. Table 4-A Binomial Test for Significance ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type N Observed Prop. Test Prop. Assymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ________________________________________________________________________ Positive 107 .69 .50 .000a Neutral/Negative 47 .31 Totals 154 1.00 _______________________________________________________________________ a. Based on Z Approximation _______________________________________________________________________ With a p-value of .0000, which was less than .05, the null hypothesis was rejected and it can be concluded that the people generally feel they gained a better understanding of how their spouse expresses love using Chapman's Love Language expression typologies. Hypothesis Ho4-B (null). One's understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions will be independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA4-B. One's understanding of his/her spouse’s love expressions will not be independent of one's gender. The results of the Chi Square Test of Independence is represented in table 4B.
Table 4-B Chi-Square Test of Independence _______________________________________________________________________ Response Type Positive Neutral/Negative Totals ________________________________________________________________________ Men 54 23 77 Women 53 24 77 Totals 107 47 154 ________________________________________________________________________ Degrees of freedom: 1 Chi-square = 0.0306223901372042 For significance at the .05 level, chi-square should be greater than or equal to 3.84. The distribution was not significant. p was less than or equal to 1. ________________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that one’s understanding of how their spouse communicates love varies according to one’s gender. Five ResQ5. Will one perceive a change in the behavior of his/her spouse in response to one’s known primary love language?
Hypothesis Ho5-A (null). One will not perceive a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love using one’s newly discovered primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA5-A. One will perceive a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love using one’s newly discovered primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). The dependent variable were measured by counting the number of positive vs. neutral / negative responses to survey question 5, which reads, .My spouse changed his/her behavior to express love using my primary love language.. The result of the binomial test is represented in table 5A. Table 5-A
Binomial Test for Significance
________________________________________________________________________ Response Type N Observed Prop. Test Prop. Assymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ________________________________________________________________________ Positive 46 .30 Neutral/Negative 108 .70 .50 .000a Totals 154 1.00 _______________________________________________________________________ a. Based on Z Approximation
With a p-value of .0000, which was less than .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected and it can be concluded that the people generally feel their spouses did not make a behavioral modifications to accommodate their love language. Hypothesis Ho5-B (null). One's perception of a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love will be independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA5-B. One's perception of a change in his/her spouse’s behavior to communicate love will not be independent of one's gender. The results of the Chi Square Test of Independence is represented in table 5B. Table 5-B Chi-Square Test of Independence ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type Positive Neutral/Negative Totals ________________________________________________________________________ Men 27 50 77 Women 19 58 77 Totals 46 108 154 ________________________________________________________________________ Degrees of freedom: 1 Chi-square = 1.98389694041868 For significance at the .05 level, chi-square should be greater than or equal to 3.84. The distribution was not significant. p was less than or equal to 0.20.
________________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that one’s perception of their spouse making a behavioral change to accommodate one's love language varied by one’s gender. Six ResQ6. Does the knowledge of how a spouse communicates love result in a perceptual change relating to one feeling loved? Hypothesis Ho6-A (null). One will not feel more loved after knowing and understanding his/her spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). Hypothesis HA6-A. One will feel more loved after knowing and understanding his/her spouse’s primary love language (as derived from Chapman’s Love Language Profile). The dependent variable were measured by counting the number of positive vs. neutral / negative responses to survey question 6, which reads, .I feel more loved now that I understand how my spouse expresses love.. The result of the binomial test is represented in table 6A. Table 6-A Binomial Test for Significance ________________________________________________________________________ Response Type N Observed Prop. Test Prop. Assymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ________________________________________________________________________ Positive 60 .39 Neutral/Negative 94 .61 .50 .992a Totals 154 1.00
_______________________________________________________________________ a. Based on Z Approximation _______________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that understanding how one's spouse expresses love increase feelings of being loved. Hypothesis Ho6-B (null). One's feeling more loved after knowing his/her spouse’s primary love language will be independent of one's gender. Hypothesis HA6-B. One's feeling more loved after knowing his/her spouse’s primary love language will not be independent of one's gender. The results of the Chi Square Test of Independence is represented in table 6B. Table 6-B Chi-Square Test of Independence _______________________________________________________________________ Response Type Positive Neutral/Negative Totals ________________________________________________________________________ Men 34 43 77 Women 26 51 77 Totals 60 94 154 ________________________________________________________________________
Degrees of freedom: 1 Chi-square = 1.74751773049645 For significance at the .05 level, chi-square should be greater than or equal to 3.84.
The distribution was not significant. p was less than or equal to 0.20. ________________________________________________________________________ With a p-value that exceeds .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that gender differences exist relating to the change of feeling loved following the identification of how a spouse expresses love. Summary of Results The results from the statistical analysis of this data indicated that statistical significance was not achieved as it related to any of the five associated survey questions, which were analyzed using the Chi-Square Test of Independence. Consequently, gender did not appear to influence differently either the behavior or perceptual experience for the male and female research participants. Therefore, the five null hypotheses that were analyzed using the Chi-Square test to examine the existence of gender differences could not be rejected.
The overall participant response was much different. Using a Binominal Test to examine overall participant responses, the results indicated significance for four of the six analyzed survey questions. While there appears to be little difference in the nature of the survey responses given by the participant gender groups comparably, the overall total response data was very interesting. The analysis showed that in general the respondents did agree that Chapman's Love Language profile correctly identify their love language category and that this knowledge improved their understanding of both their own love expression as well as the love expression of their spouse. Without question, the research data is notable and warrants further discussion in Chapter 5.
CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The intention of this chapter is to explore the results and conclusions that resulted from this study. Additionally, this chapter will provide recommendations for future research based on the review and analysis of the collected data. The primary focus of this study was to examine the behavioral and perceptual response of 77 married, cohabitating, heterosexual couples based on their newly acquired knowledge relating to the love expression category identification as defined by Chapman's Love Language Profile.
First, the study examined whether the research participants felt that Chapman’s Love Language Profile accurately identified the love expression used by each marital partner. Second, once category membership was identified, the study queried whether love expression category membership knowledge would increase understanding of the specific action behaviors associated with each category type. Additionally, the study examined whether or not a change of emotional state would result from with an increased understanding of the action behaviors associated with each love language category. Furthermore, the study focused on how love language expression knowledge would influence behavioral accommodations accordingly in the absence of any identified extrinsic motivation to do so. The study also considered whether an effort to make a behavioral love expression accommodation would be recognized as such, given only a brief description of Chapman’s love language categories. Finally, statistical analyses of the self-reported responses of the research participants were completed to determine if there were gender differences between the participants survey responses.
A Matter of Perception
Chapman (2003; 2004) proposes that every individual sends and receives love using all of the love communication categories. However, each individual has a primary love language and that is most often "used" to express love. Additionally the author explains that one most easily recognizes love expression that corresponds to the way in which one expresses love. Based on these claims, the perceptual changes of the participants were examined based on the following: (a) the accuracy of category membership identification as identified by Chapman’s Love Language Profile (ResQ1), (b) the potential of such knowledge to increase understanding of the love expression of oneself (ResQ2), (c) the potential of such knowledge to increase understanding of love expression of one’s spouse (ResQ4), and (d) to determine if the newly acquired love expression knowledge would influence one’s feeling of being loved (ResQ6).
Category Accuracy
ResQ1. Did participants believe that Chapman's Love Language Profile accurately identified their primary love language category?
Although Chapman’s Love Language category membership was only used to determine the love expression category membership for this study, the lack of empirical support for the validity of the love language categories made it necessary to first determine if the research participants felt that their love language category identification was accurate. The research participants were asked to respond to the following survey question: (1) .I believe my primary love language category were accurately identified.. The combined participant responses indicated that the research participants overwhelmingly felt that the Chapman’s Love Language Survey accurately portrayed their love language. Out of the 154 responses, 139 (90%) participants either strongly agreed or agreed that their category membership was accurate. Of the
remaining 15 (10%) neutral/negative responses, nine participants neither agreed nor disagreed with the accuracy of their category membership and only six disagreed or strongly disagreed with the category accuracy. Increased Love Expression Understanding After establishing that the love language category identification of the participants was accurate, the study investigated the potential for such information to increase understanding and awareness of love expression used both by the participants themselves and the expression used by their spouses. Consequently, the following two research questions were posed. ResQ2. Once identified, did individuals perceive an increased understanding of their own love expressions? ResQ4. Once identified, did individuals perceive an increased understanding of their spouses’ love expressions? The potential for intimate emotional miscommunication, based simply on the lack of communicated information, was the basis on which this study was originally conceptualized. Chapman is not alone in his notion that the relational miscommunication of love expression has a potential negative impact on a relationship. This concept is mimicked by Lee (1973) who expresses the logical incidence of naturally occurring relational difficulties between partners who do not share the same love approach. According to Lee, these difficulties are "an important determinant of their interpersonal dynamics and romantic outcomes. (p.80).
Chapman explains that there are two factors that often result in the difficulty of partners accurately to interpret love as expressed by the other. First, "Seldom do husband and wife have the same primary love language, and we become confused when our spouse does not understand
what we are communicating" (Chapman, 2004, p. 16). And second, individuals express love in the way that they are able to understand love expression, further complicating the ability of one partner to recognize the love expression of the other. This leaves both partners especially vulnerable to misinterpretation in cases in which the partners do not share a common love language category behavior. Prompted by these statements, the following questions were included on the follow-up survey that was administered during Phase II of the study: (2) .I gained a better understanding of how I express love to my spouse. and (4) .I gained a better understanding of how my spouse expresses love to me.. As was anticipated, the result of the data analysis indicated that the love language knowledge increased the participant’s understanding of his or her own love expression. One hundred and twenty-one (79%) of the 154 total participant responses indicated that the participants either strongly agreed or agreed that the love expression category identification increased their own self-awareness of the way in which they express love to their spouses. Twenty-six of the remaining 33 responses provided neutral answers, and only seven (5%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that they did not gain a better understanding of their own love expression styles.
The participants responded in a similar manner when asked about an increase in their understanding of their spouses’ love expressions according to the love language category identifications. Only eight (5%) participants disagreed or strongly disagreed that the love expression knowledge increased their understanding of their spouse. Thirty-nine (25%) of the 154 participants indicated a neutral response. Moreover, the majority of the respondents either
agreed or strongly agreed that the knowledge did, in fact, increase their understanding of their spouses’ love expressions.
Perception of Being Loved
ResQ6. Does the knowledge of how a spouse communicates love result in a perceptual change relating to one feeling loved? Although the analysis of the responses to survey questions one, two, and four showed statistical significance, the participants’ responses to the question .I feel more loved now that I understand how my spouse expresses love. (ResQ6) did not. There was an unequal split between the participant responses, with the majority of participants reporting a neutral/negative response to the survey question. Of the 154 participant responses, 60 (30%) of the respondents reported strong or general agreement with the statement. Of the remaining 94 responses, 75 (80%) indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed, and 19 (20%) indicated that they disagreed/strongly disagreed with the statement. The data suggested that understanding how one’s spouse expresses love did not necessarily increase one’s own feelings of being loved.
Will a Little Dab Do Ya?
Research questions three and five focused on the behavioral changes that the participants experienced as a result of the love language category membership knowledge, which they acquired during Phase I of this study. In an attempt to identify the behavioral changes of the participants, the following research questions were posed.
Behavioral Accommodations
ResQ3. Would knowing a spouse's love language prompt an individual to change his or her behavior accordingly in an attempt to communicate love to a spouse using the primary love language of his or her spouse without extrinsic motivation to do so? After a two-week waiting period following the acquisition of the love language category knowledge, the willingness of the participants to make a behavioral accommodation to express love using the love language recognized by one's spouse was examined. The participants were asked to rate their behavioral change as it related to the following follow-up survey question: .I modified my own behavior to accommodate my spouses love language.. The participant responses were almost split exactly with 76 (49%) of the 154 participants indicating that they strongly agreed or agreed that they did modify their behavior to accommodate their spouse’s love language category membership. The neutral/negative responses totaled 78 (51%). Consequently, data suggested that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that one would modify his or her behavior to accommodate the love language of one’s spouse. With or Without Notice ResQ5. Would one perceive a change in the behavior of his/her spouse in response to one’s known primary love language?
Again, the neutral/negative responses provided by the research participants were higher than the positive responses when asked about behavioral changes. Only 46 (30%) of the participants stated that they strongly agreed or agreed with question five on the follow-up survey, which read .My spouse has changed his/her behavior to accommodate my love language.. The majority of the participant responses totaling 108 (70%) were within the neutral/negative
category, with 32 (29%) of those responses being disagree or strongly disagree and 76 (70%) within the neither agree nor disagree response category. Again, the data indicating that the participants were not able to identify a behavioral accommodation made by one’s spouse.
The Separation Between Neutral and Negative
The analysis of the research data did provide some support the usefulness of Chapman’s Love Language Profile in accurately identifying love expression. Furthermore, the participant responses suggested that the accurate identification of love language expression increased understanding of one’s own love expression behavior and that of one’s spouse. Although three of the six hypotheses could not be supported, the lack of statistical significance does not imply insolvent research data relating to those three specific research questions. Instead, the categorical membership of the participants’ responses (positive and neutral/negative) prompted the researcher to look more closely at the responses of the participants within the neutral/negative category specifically. Although not producing statistical significance when analyzed, an interesting trend did emerge from the data. ResQ3 Would knowing a spouse's love language prompt an individual to change his or her behavior accordingly in an attempt to communicate love to a spouse using the primary love language of his or her spouse without extrinsic motivation to do so?
As stated previously, of the 154 research participants, 76 (49%) reported that they strongly agreed or agreed with the stated survey question, .I modified my own behavior to accommodate my spouse’s love language.. What was interesting was that although 78 of the participants reported a neutral/negative response to the question, 55 (70%) of those
neutral/negative responses were true neutral responses (neither agree nor disagree), while only 23(30%) were true negatives (disagree or strongly disagree). ResQ5 Would one perceive a change in the behavior of his/her spouse in response to one’s known primary love language? The participants reported similar responses when asked, .My spouse has changed his/her behavior to accommodate my love language.. The data category totals showed that 108 participants registered a neutral/negative category response. Again, the majority of those participants responded in a neutral fashion. The data showed that 76 (70%) of the 108 neutral/negative responses were actually true neutral responses and only 32 (30%) of the remaining category answers were true negatives. ResQ6 Does the knowledge of how a spouse communicates love result in a perceptual change relating to one feeling loved? The neutral/negative participant responses were similar on this question as well. Of the 154 participant responses, 60 (39%) respondents reported strong agreement or agreement with the survey statement .I feel more loved now that I understand how my spouse expresses love.. The responses were unevenly split again, with only 19 (20%) of the 94 total negative/neutral responses actually being associated with the true negative (disagree or strongly disagree) category. The remaining 74 (78%) of the responses that were categorized for statistical analysis as a neutral/negative response were, in fact, true neutral (neither agree nor disagree) responses.
Observations and Suggestions for Future Research
Action and Attitude Many psychologists have been surprised by the circumstances under which positive and passionate attitudes did not result in an action or behavior. Eagly (1992) contends that researchers have identified .many conditions under which attitudes are substantial predictors of behavior. further supporting the notion that attitude does influence behavior. The lack of consistency between attitude and action has been attributed to such variation as attitude strength and situational constraints (Ajzen’s, 1991; Prager, 1995). Like attitude strength and emotion, situational constraints are contributing factors relating to attitude and behavior. Ajzen (1991) maintains that attitudes interact with situational norms to shape people's intentions, which then determine their behaviors. As it relates to the examination of marriage and love expression addressed in this study, the situational constraint is the lack of accurate information about how one’s partner expresses and recognizes love, despite the assumption that there would be love expressed within the constructs of a committed marital relationship. Both situational constraints (lack of accurate love expression/interpretation information) and attitude strength (has love expression in the past been interpreted as such?) have a direct bearing on the potential one’s attitude and therefore directly influences one’s willingness to take action as a result of his/her attitude. Consequently, our attitudes orient us to the social world and prepare us to act or to choose not to act in certain ways (Davis & Rusbult, 2001; Olson & Zanna, 1993).
Supporting the conclusions drawn from this research that knowledge many not be enough to influence action, Brehm, Kassin, & Fein (2002) state that "we are limited in our ability to
process all relevant information, or we may lack the kinds of training needed to employ fully the principles of attribution theory. More importantly, we often don't make an effort to think carefully about our attributions" (p. 104). Chapman purports that by understanding one's partner's love language, it is possible to increase the opportunity to express emotional love in a language that is perceived as a love expression (Chapman, 2003). By accurately identifying the communication dialect of emotional love that is recognized as such, a clear love communication pattern can develop, allowing for the fulfillment of emotional needs between partners. Chapman (2004) further states that it is this mutual identification and understanding of the different love languages between partners that result in the promotion of positive reciprocal love expressions, thus increasing the perception of emotional need fulfillment for each partner By focusing on a single intervention strategy aspect taken from a larger relationship enrichment program in an attempt to examine how specific interventions impact marital interaction, the impact of the entire program on relational interaction between couples is lost. Although this study has supported Chapman’s Love Language Profile as a useful tool for identifying love expression, and that such knowledge increases the understanding and awareness of the behavioral expressions associated with each Love Language category, the examination of Chapman’s larger enrichment program warrants investigation. Training is the Key
Fortunately, there are a variety of well-designed and tested couple skill-training programs that are similar to Chapman’s larger Love Language enrichment program. These programs include but are not limited to Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills (PAIRS; Demaria & Hannah, 2002), Minnesota Couples Communication Program (MCCP; Miller,
Nunnally, & Wackman, 1975), and Relationship Enhancement Program (RE; Gueney, 1987, 1997). The Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP; Markman, Blumberg, & Stanley, 1989; Markman, Stanley, & Blumberg, 2001) was not only found to be among the list of programs, but the program additionally appeared to be supported by extensive research by its authors. While programs such as PAIRS, MCCP, RE, and PREP may vary slightly, they are all skill-based and share the educational goal of assisting couples in recognizing the importance of effective communication and becoming familiar with the specific techniques to improve the efficiency and clarity of communication between partners.
Although each program varies in design and specific technique, evidence shows that the programs are effective (Christensen & Heavey, 1999; Dyer & Halford, 1998; Markman, 1981; Markman, 1984; Sayers, Kohn, & Heavey, 1998). A number of studies have examined the efficacy of relationship enhancement programs, and the results suggest that skill-based relationship education programs are effective with a variety of populations (Hahlweg, Markman, Thurmair, Engel, Eckert, 1998; Halford, Sanders, & Behrens, 2001; Schilling, 1999; Schilling, Baucom, Brunett, Allen, & Ragland, 2003; Silliman & Schumm, 2000). In longitudinal studies these programs have repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be effective in improving communication skills, significantly altering couples’ communication patterns with both genders, and increasing positive and reciprocal communication patterns. These programs generally result in measurable improvements relating to marital satisfaction maintained over a period of years (Hahlweg et al. 1998; Halford, Sanders, & Behrens, 2001; Markman et al. 1993; Schilling, 1999; Schilling, Baucom, Brunett, Allen, & Ragland, 2003). In research on the developmental course of couple relationships, communication behaviors have been found to be one of the best
longitudinal predictors of relationship satisfaction among young or premarital couples (Markman, 1984, 1991; Markman & Hahlweg, 1993). Moreover, program participants report their experience as being highly valuable, satisfying, and successful (Halford, et al., 2001; Stanley, 2001). While research on many of the relationship education programs continues to be limited, research to evaluate the effectiveness of such programs is ongoing (Stanley, Markman, & Whitton, 2002) and this author proposes that Chapman’s program be included in such evaluations. This author is not suggesting that skill-based programs should replace more traditional marital therapy, or that educational programs are appropriate for all couples, however, the value of such skill-based couple education programs is clearly supported by scientific research (Sprenkle, 2002). This author does propose that consideration be given to the future study of the potential capacity for Chapman’s love expression strategies, and his larger enrichment program, to produce viable options for couples whose goals are to establish reciprocal, constructive, and effective communication patterns. Training in the application of such communication strategies seems to be the essential element in whether a change in marital interaction occurs. The relation between effective communication and marital satisfaction is reciprocally influential; one dynamic influences the other (Noller & Feeney, 1998). Therefore, by improving communication skills between partners, it is believed that an increasing level of marital satisfaction will ensue. Given the impact of communication of marital interaction and the ability for the Love Language Profile to effectively identify love expression category membership according to the research participants, further examination of Chapman’s Love Language identification and its capacity to influence behavior and perception between couples should be pursued in future research.
Conclusion Given the abundance of research on interpersonal communication and its impact on couple interaction as provided in previous chapters, this study hypothesized that there would be a benefit to identifying and sharing the love language category membership between partners with the purpose of improving the understanding of the intended intimate expressions within the marriage and between the partners. Not surprising to the researcher was the limited population of research participants involved in the study. As anticipated the majority of the participants were white, middle class, educated, heterosexual couples, in their early thirties, with military affiliation. This "commissioned cookie cutter couple" is most accurately described as a specialized population, which limits the applicability of the research findings to other populations. An examination of Chapman's Love Language profile and its ability to accurately identify the love expression categories of other more diverse populations is an area of future research that warrants further investigation. The participant response when examined according to gender was much different from the combined response totals of both husbands and wives relating to the survey questions. The results from the statistical analysis of this data indicated that statistical significance was not achieved as it related to any of the five associated survey questions. Although gender differences may exist in a variety of areas, the result of this study indicated that gender differences were negligible and did not appear to influence the behavior or perceptual experience of the participants. While the research participants did experience changes following their love language category identification, they experienced the changes equally.
However, the analysis of the research data for this study did suggest that in general the respondents did agree that Chapman's Love Language profile correctly identify their love language category (ResQ1), that this knowledge did improve their understanding of their own love expression behavior (ResQ2), and that the knowledge gained from the category identification profile increased the understanding of how their spouse expresses love (ResQ4). The lacking statistical evidence to demonstrate that a couple knowing the love expressions of each partner would be translated into behavioral accommodations (ResQ3 and ResQ5) or that knowing the love expression behavior of one’s partner would result in one’s feeling more loved (ResQ6) may be a result of attribution biases not previously considered within this study, but which warrant consideration in the future examination.
An observed examination by the researcher of the overall neutral/negative participant responses indicated the majority of the responses within the neutral/negative category were, in fact, neutral responses. It is the conclusion of the researcher that the participant responses suggest less that the responses to the survey questions were .negative.. The neutral responses of the participants suggest that they were undecided between the true positive and true negative responses. What is interesting is that research questions three, five, and six were all based on knowing the behavior associated with the love language categories. This researcher contends that there may be an association between the participants’ limited ability to make a more absolute judgment relating to love expression behaviors and the limited love language category information provided to the participant couples during Phase I of the study. In short, limited participant knowledge and understanding of the love languages results in the participants’ limited
abilities to judge whether or not their love expressions effectively respond to their spouses’ needs and desires. This author suggests that future efforts be made to examine Chapman’s larger Love Language enrichment training program. The basic rule of self-reliance applies, .Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.. This concept of self-reliance applies to the conclusion drawn from this research study: .Give a couple love expression knowledge, and they love for a day. Teach a couple apply such communication strategies and they will share love within their relationship for a lifetime.. Altruism Found This researcher was surprised by the lack of willingness for the research couples to make behavioral accommodation to express love in a manner recognized as love by one's partner. Given this lack of evidence supporting the love expression accommodation made by the couples, this author considered the possibility that the lack of accommodation data might be due to an absence of intrinsic motivation to demonstrate caring behavior by the couples. Because the couples themselves had not pursued the love language strategies provided within the study, and given an assumed lack of marital distress (which was not assessed during the study) the couples neither had an extrinsic motivation (marital distress) nor intrinsic motivation (if it is not broken don't fix it) to change the behavior associated with their perceived functional emotional expression. The research findings suggest that the existence of altruistic caring was lacking and this deficiency is believed by the researcher to be the result of lacking intrinsic motivation of the participants to utilize the newly acquired love expression knowledge for the sake of love alone.
However, in the process of examining additional factors that might potentially be related to the lacking display of the participants' motivation to make behavioral accommodations, intrinsic or other, a surprising observation was made by this researcher. There had been a demonstration of altruistic care, but not in the direction that was originally anticipated by the researcher. The couples had made a behavioral change and had demonstrated an intrinsic motivation to be caring, but the behavioral and emotional effort that was observed was directed toward the researcher and/or the research project itself. Only a second survey would be able to provide information related to what motivated the research couples to give of their time and effort to assist a total stranger in completing a complicated and arduous task. Ironically, altruism was not found within the research data, but instead was found within the research process itself.

REFERENCES Acker, M., & Davis, M. H. (1992). Intimacy, passion and commitment in adult romantic relationship: A test of the triangular theory of love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationship, 9, 21-51. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy (2001). AAMFT Code of Ethics. Retrieved June 15, 2002 from, http://www.aamft.org/ethics
American Psychological Association (2003). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved July 7, 2003, from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html. Bandura, A (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: Social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Barrett Browning, E. (1954). Elizabeth Barrett Browning poems: Sonnets from the Portuguese. New York: Doubleday Books. Baucom, D. H., & Adams, A. N. (1987). Assessing communication in marital interaction. In K. D. O'Leary (Ed.), Assessment of marital discord: An integration for research and clinical practice (pp. 139-181). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529. Birchler, G. R. (1979). Communication skills in married couples. In A. S. Bellack, & M. Hersen (Eds.), Research and practice in social skills training (pp. 273-315). New York: Plenum Press. Brannon, L. & Feist, J. (2004). Health psychology: An introduction to behavior and health (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Bray, J. H. (1995). Family assessment: Current issues in evaluating families. Family Relations, 44(4), 469 – 478. Brehm, S. S., Kassin S. M., & Fein, S. (2002). Social psychology (4th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Brennan, J. F. (2003). History and systems of psychology (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Boverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. (1994). Sex-role stereotypes: A current reappraisal. In B. Puka (Ed.), Moral development: A compendium (Vol. 6, pp. 191-210). New York: Garland.
Buehlman, K. T., Gottman, J. M., & Katz, L. F. (1992). How a couple views their past predicts their future: Predicting divorce from an oral history interview. Journal of Family Psychology, 5, 295-318. Canary, D. J., & Dindia, K. (Eds.) (1998). Sex differences and similarities in communication: Critical essays and empriical investigation of sex and gender in interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Chapman, G. (2003). The Five Love Languages viewer guide: How to express heartfelt communication to your mate. Nashville, TN: LifeWay Press. Chapman, G. (2004). The Five Love Languages: How to express heartfelt communication to your mate. Chicago: Northfield Publishing. Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1999). Intervention for couples. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 165-190. Christensen, A., & Shenk, J. L. (1991). Communication, conflict, and psychological distance in nondistressed, clinic, and divorcing couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 458-463. Coon, D. (2004). Introduction to psychology: gateways to mind and behavior (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Davis, J. L, & Rusbult, C. E. (2001). Attitude alignment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 65-84. Davis, K. E., & Latty-Mann, H. (1987). Love styles and relationship quality: A contribution of validation. Journal of Social and Persona Relationships, 4, 409-428. Dawkins, R. (1989). The selfish gene (2nd ed.). In S. S. Brehm, S. M. Kassin, and S. Fein (2002) Social Psychology (5th ed.) New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Demaria, R., & Hannah, M. (2002). Building intimate relationships: Bridging treatment, education and enrichment through the PAIRS Program. New York: Brunner Routledge. Dyer, C., & Halford, W. K. (1998). Prevention and relationship problems: Retrospect and prospect. Behavior Change, 15, 107-125. Eagly, A. H. (1992). Uneven progress: Social psychology and the study of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 693-710. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1995). Attitude strength, attitude structure, and resistance to change. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 413-432). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolving dispositions verses social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408- 423. Fitzgerald, S., Dimitrov, D., & Rumrill, P. (2001). The basics of nonparametric statistics. Work, 16, 287 – 292. Fletcher, G. J. O. (2002). The new science of intimate relationships. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.. Fromm, E. (1956). The art of loving. New York: Harper. Geiss, S. K., & O'Leary, D. (1981). Therapist ratings of frequency and severity of marital problems: Implications for research. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 7, 515-520. Gibbons, J. D. (1993). Nonparametric statistics: An introduction. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Gottman, J. M., & Krokoff, L. J. (1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 47-52. Gottman, J. M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., & Swanson, C. (1998). Predicting marital happiness and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 5-55. Gray, P. (2002). Psychology (4th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers Gueney, B. G. (1987). Relationship enhancement manual. Bethesda, MD: Ideal. Guerney, B. G. (1997). Relationship enhancement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hahlweg, K., Markman, H. J., Thurmaier, F., Engl, J., & Eckert, V. (1998). Prevention of marital distress: Results of a German prospective-longitudinal study. Journal of Family Psychology, 12, 543-556. Halford, W. K., Sanders, M. R., & Behrens, B. C. (2001). Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples: Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 750-768. Halpern D. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erbaum. Halpern D. (1997). Sex differences in intelligence: Implications for education. American Psychologist, 52, 1091-1102. Halpern, D. (2004). A cognitive-process taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 135-139. Headquarters Department of the Army. (2005). Army Regulation 210-50: Installations housing management. Washington, DC: Department of the Army.
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological Review, 51, 358-374. Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. (1989). Research on love: Does it measure up? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 784-794. Hendrick, S. S., Hendrick, C., & Alder, N. L. (1988). Romantic relationships: Love, satisfaction , and staying together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 980-988. Hintze, J. (2004). Power Analysis and Sample (PASS). Kaysville, UT: NCSS. Hirst, W. (1986). The psychology of attention. In J. E. LeDoux & W. Hirst (Eds.), Mind and brain. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Holman, T. B. (2001). Premarital prediction of marital quality or break up: Research theory and practice. New York: Kluwer Markman, H. J. (1981). Prediction of marital distress: A 5-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 760-762. Iches. W. (1997). Empathic accuracy. New York: Guilford Press. Ickes, W., Buysse, A., Pham, H., Rivers, K., Erickson, J. R., Hancock, M., Kelleher, J., & Gesn, P. R. (2000). On the difficulty of distinguishing .good. and .poor. perceivers: A social relations analysis of empathic accuracy data. Personal Relationships, 219-234. Ickes, W., Gesn, P. R., & Graham, T. (2000). Gender differences in empathic accuracy: Differential ability or differential motivation? Personal Relationships, 7, 95-109. Jacobson, N. S., & Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (1986). Marital therapy: A social learning cognitive perspective. In N. S. Jacobson & A. S. Gurman (Eds.), Clinical handbook of marital therapy (pp. 29-70). New York: Guilford Press. Jacobson, N. S., & Margolin, G. (1979). Marital therapy: Strategies based on social learning and behavioral exchange principles. New York: Brunner/Mazel. Jaegar, R. M. (1993). Statistics: A spectator sport (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology, 2 volumes. New York: Henry Holt. Kalat, J. W. (2004). Biological psychology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Kelley, H. H. (1973). The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28, 107-128.
Kelly, A. B. & Halford, W. K. (1995). The generalization of cognitive-behavioral marital therapy in behavioral, cognitive and physiological domains. Behavioral and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23, 381-398. Kirby. J. S., Baucom, D. H., & Peterman, M. A. (2005). An investigation of unmet intimacy needs in marital relationships. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31, 313-325. Laswell, H. (1984). The structure and function of communication in society. In J. T. Wood (Ed.), Interpersonal communication: Everyday encounters (4th ed.). New York: Wadsworth/Thomson. Leary, M. R. (2001). Introduction to behavioral research methods (3rd ed.). Boston : Allyn and Bacon. Lee, J. A. (1973). The colors of love: An exploration of the ways of loving. Don Mills, Ontario, Canada. New Press. Lee, J. A. (1976). The colors of love. New York: Bantam. Mangun, G. R. (1995). Neural mechanisms of visual selective attention. Psychophysiology, 32, 4-18. Manstead, A. (1992). Gender differences in emotion. In A. Gale & M. W. Eysenck (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences: Biological perspectives (pp. 355-387). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Markman, H. J. (1984). The longitudinal study of couples' interaction: Implications for understanding and predicting the development of marital distress. In N. Jacobson & K. Hahlweg (Eds.), Marital interaction: Analysis and modification (pp. 233-261). London: Academic Press. Markman, H. J., & Hahlweg, K., (1993). The prediction and prevention of marital distress: An international perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 13, 29-43. Markman, H. J., Blumberg, S. L., & Stanley, S. M. (1989). Prevention and Relationship EnhancementProgram, PREP: Leader's manual. Denver, CO: Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program. Markman, H. J., Renick, M. J., Floyd, F. J., Stanley, S. M., & Clements, M. (1993). Preventing marital distress through communication and conflict management training: A 4- and 5-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61 (1), 70-77. Markman, H. J., Stanley, S. M., & Blumberg, S. L. (2001). Fighting for your marriage: New and revised. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Martin, C., Fabes, R., Evans, S., & Wyman, H. (2000). Social cognition on the playground: Children's beliefs about playing with girls versus boys and their relations to sex segregated play. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 751-771. Miller, S., Nunnally, E., & Wackman, D. (1975). Minnesota Couples Communication Program (MCCP): Premarital and marital groups. In Olson, D.H. (Ed.), Treating relationships (pp. 21-40). Lake Mills, IA: Graphic. Morrow, G. D., Clark, E. M., & Brock, K. E. (1995). Individual and partner love styles: Implications for the quality of romantic involvements. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 363-387. Noller, P., & Feeney, J. A. (1998). Communication in early marriage: Responses to conflict, nonverbal accuracy, and conversational patterns. In Bradbury, T. N. (Ed.), The development course of marital dysfunction (pp. 11-43). New York: Cambridge University Press. Notarius, C., & Markman, H. J. (1993). We can work it out: Making sense of marital conflict. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons. Olson, D. H., Fournier, D. G., & Druckman, J. M. (1987). Counselor's manual for PREPARE/ENRICH (Rev. ed.). Minneapolis, MN: PREPARE/ENRIC Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Peplau, L. A. (2002). Roles and gender. In H. H. Kelley, E. Bersheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T. L. Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L. A. Peplau, & D. R. Peterson (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 220-264). Clinton Corners, NY: Percheron Press. Peplau, L. A. (2003). Human sexualtiy: How do men and women differ? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 37-40. Pinsof, W. M., & Wynne, L.C. (2000) Toward Progress Research: Closing the gap between family therapy practice and research. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 26, 1-8. Prager, K. J. (1995). The psychology of intimacy. New York: Guilford Press. Prager, K. J., & Bahrmester, D. (1998). Intimacy and need fulfillment in couple relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 435-469. Rathus, S. A., Nevid, J. S., & Fichner-Rathus, L. (2002). Human Sexualtiy: In a world of diversity (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Rice, F. P. (1990). Intimate relationships, marriage, and family. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Robson, C. (2002). Real world research (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publisher Ltd. Rudman, L. A., & Goodwin, S. A. (2004). Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men? Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, 87, 494-509. Sayers, S. L., Kohn, C. S., & Heavey, C. (1998). Prevention of marital dysfunction: Behavioral approaches and beyond. Clinical Psychology Review, 18, 713-744. Schacter, S., & Singer, J. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review, 63, 379-399. Schilling, E. A. (1999). Prevention of marital distress: A follow-up investigation of a modified version of the Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60, 3578. Schilling, E. A., Baucom, D. H., Brunett, C. K., Allen, E. S., & Ragland, L. (2003). Altering the course of marriage: The effect of PREP communication skills acquisition on couples' risk of becoming martially distressed. Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 41-53.
Selwitz, A., Epley, N., & Erickson, J. (2005). Basic institutional review board (IRB) regulations and review process. In CITI Course in the Protection of Human Research Subjects. Retrieved July 9, 2005 from, https://www.citiprogram.org. Shadish, W. R., & Baldwin, S. A. (2003). Meta-analysis of MFT interventions. Journal of Marital and Family therapy, 29, 547-570. Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Statistical reasoning for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Silliman, B., & Schumm, W. R. (2000). Marriage preparation programs: A literature review. Family Journal-Counseling & Therapy for Couples & Families, 8, 133-142. Skinnner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Bantam. Solso, R. L. (2001). Cognitive Psychology (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon Sprenkle, D. H. (2002). Effectiveness research in marriage and family therapy. Alexandria, VA: American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Stanley, S. M. (2001). Making the case for premarital training. Family Relations, 50, 272-280. Stanley, S. M., Markman, H. J., & Whitton, S. (2002). Communication, conflict, and commitment: Insights on the foundation of relationship success form a national survey. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119-135. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Triangulating love. In R. J. Sternberg & M. L. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 119-138). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Cupid’s arrow: The course of love through time. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Sternberg, R. J., & Barnes, M. L. (1988) (Eds.). The psychology of love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Strongman, K. T. (1987). The psychology of emotion. New York: Wiley. Thatcher, D. E. (2004). The interaction between love language and marital alignment on marital satisfaction for selected married individuals. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65 (11), 6093B. (UMI No. 3152566).
United States Census Bureau (2002). Number, timing, and duration of marriages and divorce: 1996. Retrieved May 8, 2005, from http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p70-80.pdf. Weiner, N. (1967). The human use of human beings. New York: Avon. Weiten, W. (2001). Psychology themes and variations (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Welfel, E. R. (2001). Ethics in counseling and psychotherapy: Standards, research, and emerging issues. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Welkowitz, J., Ewen, R. B., & Cohen, J. (1982). Introductory statistics for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers. West, R. & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introduction to communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company. Willmot, P. (1987). Friendship networks and support systems. London: Policy Studies Institute. Wood, J. T. (1994c). Gender, communication, and culture. In L. Samovar & R. Potter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Wood, J. T. (1994d). Who cares? Women care, and culture. Carbondale: University of Southern Illinois Press. Wood, J. T. (1998). But I thought you meant: Misunderstandings in human communication. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. Wood, J. T. (2003). Gender lives: Communication, gender, and culture (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Wood, J. T. (2004). Interpersonal communication: Everyday encounters (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Wood, J. T., & Inman, C. C. (1993). In a different mode: Masculine styles of communicating closeness. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 279-295. Wood, N. L. & Cowan, N. (1995). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 124, 243-262. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A corss-cultural analysis of behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699-727.
Appendix A Participant Consent Form CAPELLA UNIVERSITY 222 South Ninth Street, 20th Floor Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-3389 Participant Consent Form Investigator Dissertation Committee Chair Scotti Veale Dr. Louis Kavar 511-B Alexander Place 209 Roup Avenue West Point, NY 10996 Pittsburgh, PA 15206 845-446-6443 412-916-3284 Institutional Review Board 800-987-2282 ext. 215 I, _____________________________________ , agree to participate in a study titled "How do I love thee? An investigation of Chapman's Five Love Languages" being conducted by Scotti Veale as part of her dissertation project with the Harold Abel School of Psychology, Capella University, Minneapolis, MN. INTRODUCTION: I understand that this study will be examining any relationships that may exist between love language category identification, and how such knowledge might impact the behavior and perception of being loved for married couples. I have been informed that the study will be conducted in two phases. During phase I, I will be asked to complete a love language profile questionnaire consisting of 30 questions, which should take less than 20 minutes to complete and will be immediately scored to identify my primary love language. Phase II will consist of a 16-question follow-up survey that will include questions relating to demographic information and six questions that will specifically evaluate any behavioral and perceptual changes that I may have experienced following the identification of both my primary love language and that of my spouse. I understand that inclusionary criteria exists for participants of this study and require that both husband and wife agree to participate in the proposed study, that participants are legally married, and that the couples have been cohabitating throughout the study period. POTENTIAL RISKS AND BENEFITS: I understand that participating in this study means that I will be asked to complete one Love Language Profile and a follow-up survey questionnaire, both of which pose little to no risk. Benefits from participating in this study may include increasing my understanding how love is expressed differently between my spouse and myself, and provide the opportunity for me to reflect on the role my understanding of my spouses love expression has on my marital relationship. [I/you] can contact Scotti Veale, Dr. Louis Kavar, or the IRB office at the numbers indicated above if need be.
COMPENSATION: I understand that by completing both phases of the research, I will qualify for inclusion in the participant incentive drawing. The incentive gifts will include Chapman's Love Language enhancement program (VHS) or one of nine of Chapman's Five Love Languages books. I am aware that the incentive drawing will not be conducted until the data collection phase of the study is completed, at which time the ten winners will be notified of their selection. STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY All information collected and used for this study was strictly confidential unless disclosure is required by law. In order to protect my privacy, I understand that I will be assigned and known only by that number and that I should not put my name or any other type of personally identifying information on any materials other than this consent form. All of the forms used during the study will be stored in a locked filing cabinet for three years following the study period at which time it will be destroyed and appropriately disposed. VOLUNTARY NATURE OF STUDY: I understand that participation in this study is entirely voluntarily and that I am free to refuse to participate or withdraw from the study at any time without adverse affects or loss of benefits, and that if I withdraw, my data will be destroyed. STATEMENT OF CONSENT: I have read this consent form (or it has been read to me) and I fully understand the contents of this document and voluntarily agree to participate. All of my questions concerning this research have been answered. If I have any questions in the future about this study, they will be answered by the investigator listed above or his/her supervisors. A copy of this form has been given to me. ___________________________________________ ________________ Participant Date ______________________________________________ Investigator
Appendix B Primary Love Language: Husband The following profile consists of 30 pairs of statements that will assist in determining your primary love language. From each pair of statements, please select the single statement that best represents the behavior or action that you most desire from your spouse. While both statements may be appealing to you, please select only the statement in each pair that was most appealing. Your primary love language will be determined following your completing the profile.
1. My wife's love notes make me feel good. O A
I love my wife's hugs. O E 2. I like to be alone with my wife. O B
I feel loved when my wife helps me do yard work. O D 3. Receiving special gifts from my wife makes me happy. O C
I enjoy long trips with my wife. O B 4. I feel loved when my wife does my laundry. O D
I like it when my wife touches me. O E 5. I feel loved when my wife puts her arm around me. O E
I know my wife loves me because she surprises me with gifts. O C 6. I like to go most anywhere with my wife. O B
I like to hold my wife's hand. O E 7. I value the gifts my wife gives to me. O C
I love to hear my wife say that she loves me. O A 8. I like my wife to sit close to me. O E
My wife tells me that I look good, and I like that. O A 9. Spending time with my wife makes me happy O B
Even the smallest gift from my wife was important to me. O C 10. I feel loved when my wife tells me that she was proud of me. O A
When my wife cooks a meal for me, I know that she loves me. O D 11. No matter what we do, I love doing things with my wife. O B
Supportive comments from my wife make me feel good. O A 12. Little things my wife does for me mean, more to me than what she says. O D
I love to hug my wife. O E 13. My wife's praise means a lot to me. O A
It means a lot to me that my wife gives me gifts I really like. O C 14. Just being around my wife makes me feel good. O B
I love it when my wife rubs my back. O E
15. My wife's reactions to my accomplishments are so encouraging. O A
It means a lot to me when my wife helps with something I know she hates. O D 16. I never get tired of my wife's kisses. O E I love that my wife shows real interest in things that I do. O B 17. I can count on my wife to help me with projects. O D I still get excited when opening a gift from my wife. O C 18. I love my wife to compliment my appearance. O A I love that my wife listens to my ideas and doesn't rush to judge or criticize. O B 19. I can't help but touch my wife when she's close by. O E My wife sometimes runs errands for me, and I appreciate that. O D 20. My wife deserves an award for all the things she does to help me. O D I'm sometimes amazed at how thoughtful my wife's gifts to me are. O C 21. I love having my wife's undivided attention. O B Keeping the house clean was an important act of service. O D 22. I look forward to seeing what my wife gives me for my birthday. O C I never get tired of hearing my wife tell me that I am important to her. O A 23. My wife lets me know she loves me by giving me gifts. O C My wife shows her love by helping me catch up o projects around the house. O D 24. My wife doesn't interrupt me when I am talking, and I like that. O B I never get tired of receiving gifts from my wife. O C 25. My wife can tell when I am tired, and she's good about asking how she can help. O D
It doesn't matter where we go, I just like going places with my wife. O B 26. I love having sex with my wife. O E I love surprise gifts from my wife. O C 27. My wife's encouraging words give me confidence. O A I love to watch movies with my wife. O B 28. I couldn't ask for any better gifts than the ones my wife gives me. O C I just can't keep my and off my wife. O E 29. It means a lot to me when my wife helps me despite having other things to do. O D It makes me feel really good when my wife tells me that he appreciates me. O A 30. I love hugging and kissing my wife after we've been apart for a while. O E I love to hear my wife tell me that he missed me. O A
Appendix C Primary Love Language Profile: Wife The following profile consists of 30 pairs of statements that will assist in determining your primary love language. From each pair of statements, please select the single statement that best represents the behavior or action that you most desire from your spouse. While both statements may be appealing to you, please select only the statement in each pair that was most appealing. Your primary love language will be determined following your completing the profile.




1. Sweet notes from my husband make me feel good.
O A



I love my husband's hugs.
O E



2. I like to be alone with my husband.
O B



I feel loved when my husband washes my car.
O D



3. Special gifts from my husband make me happy.
O C



I enjoy long trips with my husband.
O B



4. I feel loved when my husband helps me with laundry.
O D



I like it when my husband touches me.
O E



5. I feel loved when my husband puts his arms around me.
O E



I feel loved when my husband surprises me with gifts.
O C



6. I like to go most anywhere with my husband.
O B



I like to hold my husband's hand.
O E



7. I value the gifts my husband gives to me.
O C



I love to hear my husband say that he loves me.
O A



8. I like my husband to sit close to me.
O E



I like it when my husband tells me that I look good.
O A



9. Spending time with my husband makes me happy.
O B



The smallest gift from my husband was important.
O C



10. I feel loved when my husband tells me that he was proud of me.
O A



When my husband helps clean up after a meal, I know that he loves me.
O D



11. No matter what we do, I love doing things with my husband.
O B



Supportive comments from my husband make me feel good.
O A



12. Little things my husband does for me means more to me than what he says.
O D



I love to hug my husband.
O E



13. My husband's praise means a lot to me.
O A



It means a lot to me that my husband gives me gifts I really like.
O C



14. Just being around my husband makes me feel good.
O B



I love it when my husband gives me a massage.
O E



15. My husband's reactions to my accomplishments are so encouraging.
O A



It means a lot to me when my husband helps with something I know he hates.
O D



16. I never get tired of my husband's kisses.
O E



I love that my husband shows real interest in things that I do.
O B




17. I can count on my husband to help me with projects.
O D



I still get excited when opening a gift from my husband.
O C



18. I love my husband to compliment my appearance.
O A



I love that my husband listens to me and respects my ideas.
O B



19. I can't help but touch my husband when he's close by.
O E



My husband sometimes runs errands for me, and I appreciate that.
O D



20. My husband deserves an award for all the things he does to help me.
O D



I'm sometimes amazed at how thoughtful my husband's gifts to me are.
O C



21. I love having my husband's undivided attention.
O B



I love that my husband helps me clean the house.
O D



22. I look forward to seeing what my husband gives me for my birthday.
O C



I never get tired of hearing my husband tell me that I am important to him.
O A



23. My husband lets me know he love me by giving me gifts.
O C



My husband shows his love by helping me without me having to ask.
O D



24. My husband doesn't interrupt me when I am talking, and I like that.
O B



I never get tired of receiving gifts from my husband.
O C



25. My husband was good about asking how he can help me when I'm tired.
O D



It doesn't matter where we go, I just like going places with my husband.
O B



26. I love cuddling with my husband.
O E



I love surprise gifts from my husband.
O D



27. My husband's encouraging words give me confidence.
O A



I love to watch movies with my husband.
O B



28. I couldn't ask for any better gifts than the ones my husband gives me.
O C



I love it that my husband can't keep his hands off me.
O E



29. It means a lot to me when my husband helps me despite being busy.
O D



It makes me feel really good when my husband tells me that he appreciates me.
O A



30. I love hugging and kissing my husband after we've been apart for a while.
O E



I love to hear my husband tell me that he missed me.
O A

A:________ B:________ C:________ D:________ E:_______
A= Words B= Time C= Gifts D= Service E= Touch
Appendix D
Author Approval

From :
Pam Pugh <pamela.pugh@moody.edu>

Sent :
Monday, November 21, 2005 2:51 PM

To :
scottiveale@hotmail.com

Subject :
love language profiles



Dear Scotti,
Thanks for writing to us about your dissertation.
You have permission for this one-time use (i.e., the profiles are not to be reproduced apart from this work) of the profiles from The Five Love Languages for inclusion in your doctrinal dissertation on family systems.
We wish you well as you continue and complete your work and invite you to send a copy of the final product to my attention at the address below if you would like to do so.
Regards,
Pam Pugh
--
*****************
Pam Pugh
General Project Editor
Moody Publishers
820 N. LaSalle Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60610-3284
Phone:312-329-2118
Fax: 312-329-4157
E-mail: Pamela.Pugh@moody.edu
Website: http://www.moodypublishers.org/




Appendix E Phase I Chapman's Five Love Language Category Descriptions Participant Information Sheet According to Chapman (2004), individuals communicate and recognize expressions of love that can be classified into five primary communication categories that he refers to as the Five Love Languages (FLL). Chapman has concluded that couples communicate emotional love through physical touch, quality time, words of affirmation, gifts, and acts of service. Now that you have completed the Love Language profile, this information sheet will provide you with a description of each love language category. While Chapman's Five Love Language categories are described below, the descriptions are in no way all-inclusive. However, the descriptions will provide you and your spouse with a general understanding of how individuals in each category express and recognize love. Again, thank you for your participation! Words of Affirmation: While some may say that "a picture was worth a thousand words" for those whose primary love language was Words of Affirmation, a thousand words are hardly enough. These individuals desire and express love though verbal compliments, words of encouragement, and whispers of kindness. Members in this category also find that words expressed in writing land close to their hearts. Shower these partners in verbal affection and they will eagerly return your love in-kind. Quality Time: Spending time engaged in face-to-face conversation was only one way that the members of this love language category commonly express and identify love. Considered time well spent, these individuals also measure "time" in miles: those long walks, road trips, or events that lead to cherished destinations. Undivided attention, spending time engaged in mutually enjoyable activities that require interaction, and scheduled weekly activities to spend time together are popular love-communication patterns for these individuals. Those individuals who share this love language category hear the ticking of the clock most loudly. Gifts: Love was truly a "gift" both given and desired by these individuals. This love language is expressed in a variety of generous ways often presented in brightly colored packages adorned with ribbons and bows. While it might be assumed that the love expressed and recognized by these individuals may be primarily related to material possessions, the gift of Self and personal sacrifice are gifts that are sincerely treasured. Acts of Service:
Acts of Service are not only delivered with a smile by these individuals, but are also an expression of love. Service-oriented expressions of love include selfless deeds, domestic service, favors, and acts of kindness. This partner was likely to serve love in the form of a cup of coffee, a
clean receptacle bin, a completed errand, or other acts of personal support and/or sacrifice. Reciprocation of service was the way to this individual's heart. Physical Touch: These love language partners primarily express and recognize love that was express through non-verbal cues of love-communication. Love touches include, but are not limited to, such physical contact as holding hands, hugging, kissing, snuggling, massage, and sexual intimacy. While these individuals hold the emotion of love in their hearts, they often express and recognize love through the affection of the flesh and other physical intimacy.
Appendix F Phase II "How do I love thee? An investigation of Chapman's Five Love Languages" Demographic Questionnaire & Follow-up Survey Investigator Dissertation Committee Chair Scotti Veale Dr. Louis Kavar 511-B Alexander Place 209 Roup Avenue West Point, NY 10996 Pittsburgh, PA 15206 845-446-6443 412-916-3284 Thank you so much for agreeing to be a part of this study. Please complete all of the questions in both the demographic section and the follow-up survey section. There was no right or wrong answers and your answering the questions honestly will add to the value of the study data. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me. All information that you provide will be kept entirely confidential. To help with that effort, your participant number assigned to you during Phase I of this study were the only identifying information anywhere on the form. Thank you again for participating!! Demographic Information Participant Number ___________________ Are you: Male . Female . Your age based on your last birthday: -19. 20-25. 26-30. 31-35 . 36-40. 41-45. 46-50. 51-55. 56-60. 61-65. Ethnic Group Membership: White . African-American . Asian . Hispanic/Latin . Native American . Other:_________ Are you: Active Duty Enlisted . Active Duty Commissioned . Civilian .
Mark your primary love language as determined during Phase I using the Love Language Profile: Quality Time . Words of Affirmation . Gifts . Acts of Service . Physical Touch . Number of years in current marriage as of the date of this survey: ________YRS Number and ages of children at the time of the study. Child 1 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Child 2 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Child 3 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Child 4 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Child 5 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Child 6 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Child 7 Age:___________ Is this child currently living in the family home? YES NO Your Educational Level: . Some High School . High School Graduate or Equivalent (GED) . Some College but no degree . Associate Degree . Bachelor Degree . MS Degree . Advanced Graduate or Professional Degree: Specify __________________ . Other : Specify:_________________________ Your Current Employment Status: . Unemployed . Full-time employment . home business . outside home . military . Part-time employment . home business . outside home . Homemaker . Full-time Student . full-time . part-time On a scale from 1-5 (1 most important-5 least important), rank the order of importance the five love languages have for you. ______ Quality time ______ Physical touch ______ Words of affirmation ______ Gifts ______ Acts of service
Follow-up Survey Questions Please place an X in the box that most accurately represents your experience following the identification of both you and your spouse’s primary love languages. 1) I believe my primary love language category was identified accurately. Strongly Agree. Agree. Neither Agree Nor Disagree. Disagree. Strongly Disagree. 2) I gained a better understanding of how I express love to my spouse. Strongly Agree. Agree. Neither Agree Nor Disagree. Disagree. Strongly Disagree. 3) I modified my own behavior to accommodate my spouse's love language. Strongly Agree. Agree. Neither Agree Nor Disagree. Disagree. Strongly Disagree. 4) I gained a better understanding of how my spouse expresses love to me. Strongly Agree. Agree. Neither Agree Nor Disagree. Disagree. Strongly Disagree. 5) My spouse has changed his/her behavior to accommodate my love language. Strongly Agree. Agree. Neither Agree Nor Disagree. Disagree. Strongly Disagree. 6) I feel more loved now that I understand how my spouse expresses love. Strongly Agree. Agree. Neither Agree Nor Disagree. Disagree. Strongly Disagree.
Appendix G