After the Decision: Compliance-Gaining in Marital Interaction

  • Mary Anne Fitzpatrick


Marriage can be conceived of as a continuous confrontation between participants with conflicting—though not always opposing—interests. Within this framework, the focus of attention becomes the ways in which marital dyads negotiate the issues that arise from their joint participation in the institution of marriage and the family (Sprey, 1979). As a communication researcher, I am interested in how these conflicting interests are managed through talk.


Marital Satisfaction Communication Behavior Married People Couple Type Idealize Style 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Berger, C (1985). Social power and interpersonal communication. In M. Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.) Handbook of interpersonal communication ( 439–499 ). Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Bernard, J. (1972). The future of marriage. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
  3. Bishop, Y. M., Feinberg, S. E., & Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete multivariate analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, M. B. (1983). Frequency tables. In W. J. Dixon (Ed.), BMDP statistical software (pp. 143–206 ). Berkeley, CA: Regents of California.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dillard, J. P., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1984). The short and long term outcomes of compliance gaining in marital interaction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  7. Duck, S. (1980). Personal relationship research in the eighties: Towards an understanding of complex human sociality. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 44, 114–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ericson, P. M., & Rogers, E. L. (1973). New procedures for analyzing relational communication. Family Process, 12, 245–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fisher, R. & Ury, W. (1983). Getting to yes. New York; Penguin.Google Scholar
  10. Falbo, T & Peplau, L. A. (1980). Power strategies in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 618–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1976). A typological approach to communication in relationships. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  12. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1981). Directions for interpersonal communication research. In G. I. Friedrich (Ed.), Education in the 80’s: Speech communication (pp. 73–81 ). National Education Association: Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
  13. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1984). A typological approach to marital interaction: Recent theory and research. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 18, pp. 1–47 ). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Best, P. (1979). Dyadic adjustment in traditional, independent, and separate relationships: A validation study. Communication Monographs, 46, 167–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fitzpatrick, M. A., Fallis, S., & Vance, L. (1982). Multifunctional coding of conflict resolution strategies in marital dyads. Family Relations, 31, 611–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Indvik, J. (1982). The instrumental and expressive domains of marital communication. Human Communication Research, 8, 195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fitzpatrick, M. A., Vance, L. E., & Witteman, H. (1984). Interpersonal communication in the casual interaction of marital partners. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 3, 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Folger, J. & Poole, M. S. (1984). Communication and conflict. Glen view, IL.: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
  19. Frost, J. H., & Wilmot, W. W. (1978). Interpersonal conflict. Dubuque, Iowa: W. C. Brown.Google Scholar
  20. Giles, H. & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1985). Personal, group and couple identities: Towards a relational context for the study of language attitudes and linguistic forms. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.) Meaning, form and use in context: Linquistic applications ( 1–25 ). Washington, DC: Georget own University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gottman, J. M. (1979). Marital interaction. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Guetzkow, H. (1950). Unitizing and categorizing problems in coding qualitative data. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 6, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. French, J. & Raven, B. (1960). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.) Group dynamics ( 607–623 ). New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  24. Hess, G. & Handel, G. (1959). Family worlds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kennedy, J. J. (1983). Analyzing qualitative data. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  26. Kipnis, D., Castell, P., Gergen, M., & Mauch, D. (1976). Metamorphic effects of power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 127–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knoke, D., & Burke, P. J. (1980). Log-linear models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Marwell, G., & Schmitt, D. R. (1967). Dimensions of compliance–gaining behaviors: An empirical analysis. Sociometry, 30, 350–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Scanzoni, L. & Scanzoni, J. (1976). Men and women and change. New York: Mc Graw Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Schenck-Hamlin, W. J., Wiseman, R. L., & Georgacarakos, G. N. (1982). A model of the properties of compliance-gaining strategies. Communication Quarterly, 30, 92–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Seibold, D., Cantrill, & Meyers, R. A. (1985). Communication and interpersonal influence. In M. L. Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.) Handbook of interpersonal communication ( 551–614 ). Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Sillars, A. L., Pike, G. H., Jones, T. S., & Redman, K. (1983). Communication and conflict in marriage. In R. N. Bostrom & B. H. Westley (Eds.), Communication yearbook 7 (pp. 414–431 ). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Sprey, J. (1979). Conflict theory and the study of marriage and the family. In W. L. Burr, R. Hill, F. D. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family (volume 2, pp. 130–159 ).Google Scholar
  34. Swafford, M. (1980). Three parametric techniques for contingency table analysis: A non-technical commentary. American Sociological Review, 45, 664–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williamson, R. & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1985). Two approaches to marital interaction: Relational control paterns in marital types. Communication Monographs, 52, 236–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
  37. Witteman, H., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1984). Unpublished Codebook, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center for Communication Research.Google Scholar
  38. Witteman, H., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1986). Compliance-gaining in marital interaction. Communication Monographs, 53, 130–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary Anne Fitzpatrick

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations