Applied Research in Quality of Life

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 299–317 | Cite as

Couple Types, Ethnicity and Marital Satisfaction in Malaysia

  • Hasrina Mustafa
  • Marshina Juliza Mohd Hasim
  • Norizah Aripin
  • Hamidah Abdul Hamid


The objective of this paper is to identify couple types and investigate the effects of couples types and ethnicity on marital satisfaction in Malaysia. A nation-wide survey involving one thousand married respondents was conducted. Using Fitzpatrick’s (1988) typology, four types of marriages were identified through cluster analysis, which included Traditional, Independent, Separate and Mixed couples. The main effect of couple types, ethnicity and effects of their interaction were found to have contributed significantly towards marital satisfaction. Malay respondents were most satisfied as Traditionals, while Chinese and Indian respondents were most satisfied as Independents. Results are discussed with reference to the current socio-cultural context of Malaysia.


Couple types Ethnicity Marital satisfaction 


  1. Ahmad, A. (1996). Work-family conflict among married professional women in Malaysia. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(5), 663–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, W. D., & Olson, D. H. (2001). Five types of African-American marriages. Journal of Marital and Family, 27(3), 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Cuber, J. F., & Harroff, P. (1965). The significant Americans: A study of sexual behaviour among the affluent. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
  5. Dickson, F. C. (1997). Aging and marriage: Understanding long-term after life marriage. In W. K. Halford & H. J. Markman (Eds.), Clinical handbook of marriages and couples interventions (pp. 255–269). New Jersey: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Estrada, R. I. (2010). An examination of love and marital satisfaction in long-term marriages. Dissertation Abstract International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 70(12-B), 7898.Google Scholar
  7. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Between husbands and wives: Communication in marriage. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Ritchie, L. D. (1994). Communication schematas within the family: multiple perspectives on family interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 275–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Givertz, M., Segrin, C., & Hanzal, A. (2009). The association between satisfaction and commitment differs across marital couple types. Communication Research, 36(4), 561–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gnilka, A. S. (2008). A study of the development of long-term marriages lasting 25 years or more. Dissertation Abstract International Section A: Humanities and Scial Sciences, 68(10-A), 4212.Google Scholar
  11. Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce? Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  12. Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: behavior, physiology and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guerrero, L. K., & Eloy, S. V. (1992). Relational satisfaction and jealousy across marital types. Communication Reports, 5(1), 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  15. Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relational satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hofstede, G. (1991). Culture and organization: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Holman, T. B., & Jarvis, M. O. (2003). Hostile, volatile, avoiding, and validating couples-conflict types: an investigation of Gottman’s couple-conflict types. Personal Relationships, 10, 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Honeycutt, J. M. (1999). Typological differences in predicting marital happiness from oral history behaviors and imagined interactions. Communication Monographs, 66, 276–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Priceton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kelley, D. L. (1999). Relational expectancy fulfillment as an explanatory variable for distinguishing couple types. Human Communication Research, 25(3), 420–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keshavarz, S., & Baharudin, R. (2009). Parenting style in the collectivist culture of Malaysia. European Journal of Social Sciences, 10(1), 66–73.Google Scholar
  22. Knutson, T., Hwang, J., & Deng, B. (2000). Perception and management of conflict. Intercultural Communication Studies, 5(2), 10–31.Google Scholar
  23. Lageson, V. A. (2008). A cyberfeminist utopia? Perceptions of gender and computer science among Malaysian women computer science students and faculty. Science Technology Human Values, 33(1), 005–027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lawrence, E., Pederson, A., Bunde, M., Barry, R. A., Brock, R. L., Fazio, E., Mulryan, L., Hunt, S., Madsen, L., & Dzankovic, S. (2008). Objective rating of relational skills across multiple domains as predictors of marital satisfaction trajectories. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(3), 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mat, R., & Omar, R. (2002). Demographic trends in Malaysia with a special focus on women. Paper presented in the 20th Population Census Conference, Ulaaanbaatar, Mongolia, 19–21 June 2002.Google Scholar
  26. McCabe, M. P. (2006). Satisfaction in marriage and committed heterosexual relationships: past, present and future. Annual Review of Sex Research, 17, 39–57.Google Scholar
  27. Mellstrom, U. (2009). The intersection of gender, race and cultural boundaries, or why is computer science in Malaysia dominated by women. Social Studies of Science, 39(6), 885–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Merritt, A. (2000). Culture in the cockpit: Do Hofstede’s dimensions replicate? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(3), 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development (2007). Measuring and monitoring gender equality: Malaysias gender gap index. [Cited on 29th May 2011] Available from url:
  30. Monthly Statistical Bulletin Malaysia, April 2011, Department of Statistics Malaysia. [Cited on 29th May 2011] Available from url:
  31. Murugan, B. (2009). Relational maintenance strategies in marriages. Unpublished Master Thesis, Universiti Sains Malaysia.Google Scholar
  32. Saabin, N. (2002). Mengendalikan Hubungan Suami Isteri [Managing relationship between husband and wives]. Kuala Lumpur: PTS Millennia Sdn. Bhd.Google Scholar
  33. Ng, K. M., Loy, J. T. C., Gudmunson, C. G., & Cheong, W. (2009). Gender differences in marital and life satisfaction among Chinese Malaysians. Sex Roles, 60, 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Noller, P., & Hiscock, H. (1989). Fitzpatrick’s typology: an Australian replication. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Noor, N. M. (1999). Roles and women’s well being: some preliminary findings from Malaysia. Sex Roles, 41(3/4), 123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noor, N. M. (2006). Work, family and women’s well being in Malaysia. Striving for a balance. Kuala Lumpur: IIUM Press.Google Scholar
  37. Olson, D., & Fowers, B. (1993). Five types of marriage: an empirical tyology based on ENRICH. Family Journal: Counselling and Theraphy for Couples and Families, 1, 196–207.Google Scholar
  38. Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows (Version 12). Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  39. Robinson, L. C., & Blanton, P. W. (1993). Marital strengths in enduring marriages. Family Relations, 42(1), 38–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sano, D. L. (2002). Attitude similarity and marital satisfaction in long-term African-American and Caucasian marriages. Dissertation Abstract International Section A: Humanities and Social Science, 62(8-A), 2895.Google Scholar
  41. Simanski, J. A. W. (1996). Long–term marriage conflict and longevity strategies over the life span: a qualitative study. Dissertation Abstract International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 57(6-A), 2618.Google Scholar
  42. Snyder, D. K., & Smith, G. T. (1986). Classification of marital relationships: An empirical approach. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 137–146.Google Scholar
  43. The Fourth Malaysia Plan. [Cited on 29th May 2011] Available from url:
  44. West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2006). Understanding interpersonal communication: Making choice in changing times. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  45. Worthington, E. L., & Buston, B. G. (1986). The marriage relationship during the transition to parenthood: a review and a model. Journal of Family Issues, 7, 443–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yum, Y., & Li, H. Z. (2007). Associations among attachment styles, maintenance strategies, and relational quality across cultures. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 36(2), 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yum, Y., & Canary, D. J. (2009). Cultural differences in equity theory predictions of relational maintenance strategies. Human Communication Research, 35, 384–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zainal, N. Z. (2008). Depressive symptoms in middle-aged women in Peninsular Malaysia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Health, 20(4), 360–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hasrina Mustafa
    • 1
  • Marshina Juliza Mohd Hasim
    • 1
  • Norizah Aripin
    • 1
  • Hamidah Abdul Hamid
    • 1
  1. 1.School of CommunicationUniversiti Sains MalaysiaPenangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations