Journal of Sex Research

ISSN: 0022-4499 (Print) 1559-8519 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/hjsr20

Sexual satisfaction in premarital relationships:

Associations with satisfaction, love, commitment,
and stability

Susan Sprecher

To cite this article: Susan Sprecher (2002) Sexual satisfaction in premarital relationships:
Associations with satisfaction, love, commitment, and stability, Journal of Sex Research, 39:3,
190-196, DOI: 10.1080/00224490209552141

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552141

Published online: 11 Jan 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2972

View related articles

Citing articles: 61 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hjsr20
 Sexual Satisfaction in Premarital Relationships: Associations With
Satisfaction, Love, Commitment, and Stability
Susan Sprecher
Illinois State University

This investigation focused on how sexual satisfaction is associated with relationship quality and stability in premarital
couples. With data collected at multiple times over several years from a sample of heterosexual couples (who were all dat-
ing at Time 1), I examined how sexual satisfaction was associated with relationship satisfaction, love, commitment, and sta-
bility. At each wave of the study, sexual satisfaction was associated positively with relationship satisfaction, love, and com-
mitment for both men and women. In addition, change in sexual satisfaction between Time 1 and Time 2 was associated with
change over the same period in relationship satisfaction, love, and commitment. Furthermore, some evidence was found that
sexual satisfaction was associated with relationship stability. Overall, sexual satisfaction had stronger links with relation-
ship quality for men than for women.

American culture gives emphasis to sexual expression
in marriage. For example, people are expected to base their
choice of a marriage partner on sexual attraction. In addi-
tion, sexual satisfaction is considered to be a barometer for
the quality of marriage. Indeed, research shows that how
married individuals feel about the sex in their relationship
is related to how they feel about their entire relationship
(e.g., Henderson-King & Veroff, 1994). Less is known,
however, about the connection between sexual satisfaction
and relationship quality in premarital relationships, despite
the fact that most couples who eventually marry begin
their sexual activity prior to marriage. In addition, there is
little information about how change in sexual satisfaction
is associated with change in relationship quality, in either
marital or premarital relationships. The purpose of this
investigation was to examine how sexual satisfaction,
including its change over time, is associated with the rela-
tionship quality and stability of premarital relationships.
Social Exchange Theory and Sexuality
The social exchange perspective provides a lens through
which we can examine why sexual satisfaction might be
associated positively with general relationship quality (for a
discussion of exchange theory applications to sexuality, see
Sprecher, 1998). To some degree, sexual satisfaction repre-
sents a favorable balance of rewards and costs in the sexual
aspect of the relationship. For example, according to
Lawrance and Byers' (1992, 1995) Interpersonal Model of
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 62nd Annual Conference
for the National Council on Family Relations, Nov. 10-13, 2000, Minneapolis,
MN. The author would like to thank Scott Christopher and two anonymous
reviewers for comments on an earlier version of this paper. The data collection
for this longitudinal study was funded by several small grants from Illinois State
University and the paper was written during a research sabbatical granted the
author from Illinois State University.
Address correspondence to Susan Sprecher, Department of Sociology and
Anthropology, Illinois State University, Normal,. IL 61790-4660; e-mail:
Sprecher@ilstu.edu.
Sexual Satisfaction, sexual satisfaction is increased to the
degree that within the sexual relationship, rewards are high,
costs are low, the difference between rewards and costs com-
pares favorably with a comparison level, and there is equali-
ty between partners in the exchange of rewards and costs
(see also Byers, Demmons, & Lawrance, 1998). A rewarding
sexual relationship can then lead to overall relationship qual-
ity (satisfaction, love, and commitment). In general, the more
rewards in an important area of the relationship (e.g., the sex-
ual relationship), the more the overall relationship quality. In
addition, the more equitable the exchange in the relationship,
including in sexual behaviors and feelings, the more likely
the partners are to be satisfied with the relationship (e.g.,
Hatfield, Greenberger, Traupmann, & Lambert, 1982;
Hatfield, Utne, & Traupmann, 1979).
The Association Between Sexual Satisfaction and
Relationship Quality
Several studies have shown an association between sexual
satisfaction and overall relationship satisfaction in marriage.
More specifically, husbands and wives who say they are
sexually satisfied in their marriage are also likely to report
high levels of overall satisfaction with their relationship
(e.g., Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983; Cupach & Comstock,
1990; Edwards & Booth, 1994; Henderson-King & Veroff,
1994). The few studies that have examined this association
in dating relationships have also found a link between sexu-
al satisfaction and relationship satisfaction (Byers et al.,
1998; Davies, Katz, & Jackson, 1999). Sexual satisfaction
and related subjective measures of sexuality (e.g., sexual
intimacy) also have been found to be associated positively
with other indicators of relationship quality, including love
(Aron & Henkemeyer, 1995; Grote & Frieze, 1998;
Sprecher & Regan, 1998; Yela, 2000) and commitment or
the likelihood that the relationship will last (Pinney,
Gerrard, & Denney, 1987; Sprecher, Metts, Burleson,
Hatfield, & Thompson, 1995; Waite & Joyner, 2001). For a

The Journal of Sex Research Volume 39, Number 3, August 2002: pp. 190-196 190
Sprecher
more thorough review of this literature, see Christopher and
Sprecher (2000) and Sprecher and Regan (2000).
Most of the research demonstrating the association
between sexual satisfaction and relationship quality has
been cross-sectional. In one exception, Henderson-King
and Veroff (1994) analyzed data from the Early Years of
Marriage Project (see Veroff, Douvan, & Hatchett, 1995,
for more detail), and found positive associations between
sexual satisfaction (joy and excitement during sex,
absence of upset with sex) and measures of relationship
quality during both the first and third years of the couples'
marriage. They also conducted cross-lagged correlations,
which indicated no significant differences in strength
between the correlations of measures of sexual feelings at
Year 1 with measures of relationship quality at Year 3 and
the correlations of measures of relationship quality at Year
1 with measures of sexual feelings at Year 3. Another lon-
gitudinal study that included measures of both sexual sat-
isfaction and marital satisfaction at multiple times is The
Longitudinal Study of Marital Instability. With their data,
Edwards and Booth (1994) examined the association
between change in sexual happiness and change in marital
well-being by correlating change scores; in other words,
they correlated scores created from the difference between
Wave 1 (1980) and Wave 3 (1988) sexual satisfaction with
scores created from the difference between Wave 1 and
Wave 3 marital satisfaction. These correlations were posi-
tive and significant, leading the researchers to conclude,
"Although we cannot sort out the causal direction of these
changes, it is clear that changes in sexual behavior are gen-
erally related to changes in psychological well-being and
marital quality" (Edwards & Booth, 1994, p. 247).
Overall, though, almost no longitudinal studies have been
conducted that include measures of both sexual satisfac-
tion and relationship quality at two or more times, and to
my knowledge, no such longitudinal research has been
conducted with premarital couples.
Sexual Satisfaction as a Predictor of Relationship
Stability vs. Instability
A related issue to address is whether sexual satisfaction
contributes to relationship longevity. Does satisfying sex
help sustain a relationship? Two of the above longitudinal
studies have relevant data. Oggins, Leber, and Veroff
(1993), using data from the Early Years of Marriage pro-
ject, reported that measures of sexual satisfaction at Year 1
predicted (negatively) marital dissolution by the fourth year
of marriage (also see Veroff et al., 1995). Furthermore,
Edwards and Booth (1994) reported that a decline in sexu-
al satisfaction between 1980 and 1983 was associated with
the probability of divorce by 1988. White and Keith (1990),
using a national sample of married individuals first inter-
viewed in 1980 and again in 1983, reported that a measure
of sexual problems (dissatisfaction) at Time 1 was associ-
ated positively with the likelihood of divorce by Time 2.
Although no longitudinal study has been conducted that
examines whether sexual satisfaction predicts premarital
191
relationship breakups, the associations of more objective
aspects of sexuality and premarital relationship stability
have been studied. In the Boston Dating Couples Study,
Hill, Rubin, and Peplau (1976) found that whether or not the
dating couple was sexually intimate at the time of the initial
contact had no effect on the status of the relationship two
years later. Furthermore, no difference was found in rela-
tionship stability between the couples who had sex early in
their relationship and couples who had sex later (Peplau,
Rubin, & Hill, 1977). However, in a 3-month longitudinal
study of dating individuals, Simpson (1987) found that
whether or not the couple had engaged in sexual intercourse
had a significant and positive effect on relationship stabili-
ty. The significant effect for sexual involvement was found
even when other variables (e.g., satisfaction, closeness,
length of relationship) were controlled. Furthermore,
Felmlee, Sprecher, and Bassin (1990) found that an index
representing sexual intimacy was a positive predictor of the
stability of premarital relationships, although it was not sig-
nificant when included in a model with several other pre-
dictors. Additional longitudinal research is needed with pre-
marital couples to examine whether sexual satisfaction is
predictive of relationship stability.
Purposes of This Investigation
This study combines cross-sectional analyses with longi-
tudinal analyses conducted with a sample of romantic cou-
ples (all dating at Time 1), who were surveyed multiple
times, for the purpose of extending our understanding of
the role of sexual satisfaction in contributing to the quali-
ty and stability of the relationship. I present two research
hypotheses and two research questions:
1. Research Hypothesis 1 (RH1): Sexual satisfaction is associated
positively with relationship satisfaction, love, and commitment.
2. Research Hypothesis 2 (RH2): Changes in sexual satisfaction
are associated with changes in relationship satisfaction, love, and
commitment.
3. Research Question 1(RQ1): Does sexual satisfaction at Time 1
predict an increase in relationship quality (satisfaction, love, and
commitment) by Time 2; and/or does relationship quality (satis-
faction, love, and commitment) at Time 1 predict an increase in
sexual satisfaction by Time 2?
4. Research Question 2 (RQ2): Is sexual satisfaction a predictor
of later relationship stability?
I examine the above associations for men and women
separately because considerable prior research (e.g.,
Baumeister, Catanese, & Vohs, 2001) suggests that sex
may be more important or at least have different meanings
to men than to women.
METHOD
Overview of the Data
The data are from a longitudinal study conducted at a
Midwestern university with a sample of romantic couples.
192
The original sample consisted of both partners of 101 dat-
ing couples who completed a self-administered question-
naire in the Fall of 1988. Follow-ups were conducted in
the Spring and Summer of 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992.
The sample size decreased with each wave primarily
because couples who experienced their relationship termi-
nate ended their participation in the study. By Wave 5,
59% (n = 60) of the couples had ended their relationship.
Participants
The sample at Time 1 consisted of 101 dating couples (202
individuals), most of whom were students at a large
Midwestern university. The participants were volunteers
who were recruited through announcements in classes,
advertisements in the student newspaper, and posters
placed around campus. The average age of the participants
at Time 1 was approximately 20 years (20.3[5D = 2.51] for
men and 19.75[SD = 1.37] for women). Most of the sam-
ple was White (97.5%) and of the middle or upper-middle
class (86.6%). The mean number of months the couples
had been dating at Time 1 was 18.6[5D = 13.73]; the range
was 1 month to 55 months.
Procedure
At Time 1, participants who responded to the announcement
of the study completed a self-administered questionnaire in
a university office. The partners completed the question-
naire at the same time but independently of each other.
At each of the four follow-ups (Times 2-5), participants
who were still attending the university or living in the
vicinity came to the researcher's office to complete anoth-
er questionnaire (partners from couples who broke up
arrived at different times). Participants who had moved
away were mailed the questionnaire, with a stamped, self-
addressed return envelope. Among the couples whose rela-
tionship remained intact over the entire study (n = 41),
there was very little nonresponse.1
Measurement
All participants at Time 1 and all participants in the fol-
low-ups whose relationships were intact completed a
lengthy questionnaire about various aspects of their rela-
tionship. The variables analyzed in this study were mea-
sured in the following ways (each scale or index was rep-
resented by the mean of the items).
Sexual satisfaction. A two-item index was formed to
measure sexual satisfaction. One item was the global ques-
tion, "How sexually satisfying is the relationship to you?" (1
= not at all to 7 = very). A similar global question has been
used in several other studies on sex (e.g., Blumstein &
Schwartz, 1983; Edwards & Booth, 1994; Greeley, 1991).
The second item, which appeared in a different section of
the questionnaire, asked how unrewarding or rewarding the
partner's contributions were in the area of sex (meeting
1
Six participants from five different relationships could not participate in one
of the waves and one couple (2 participants) were missing at two waves.
Sexual Satisfaction
needs and preferences) on a 1 (very unrewarding) to 7 (very
rewarding) response scale. Cronbach's alpha was relatively
high for a 2-item measure (.82 for men and .70 for women
at Time 1, and ranged from .77 to .93 at the follow-ups).
Relationship quality measures. The Hendrick
Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS; 1988) was used to
assess satisfaction in the relationship. Example items of
this 7-item scale are "In general, how satisfied are.you
with your relationship?" and "To what extent has your
relationship met your original expectations?" A 5-point
response scale followed each item (anchors varied
depending on the item, but a higher score always indicat-
ed greater satisfaction). Cronbach's alpha at Time 1 was
.81 for men and .75 for women, and ranged from .65 to
.87 at the follow-ups.
The Braiker and Kelley (1979) love scale was used to
measure love. The original version consisted of 10 items
that assessed feelings of belonging, closeness, and attach-
ment (examples: "To what extent do you love at this
stage?" and "To what extent do you feel that your rela-
tionship is special compared with others you have been
in?"). However, a sexual intimacy item was deleted from
this scale because of possible measurement overlap with
the sexual satisfaction item. The responses to the items
ranged from 1 (not at all) to 7 (a great deal). Cronbach's
alpha for the 9-item version of the love scale at Time 1 was
.88 for men and .82 for women, and ranged from .71 to .93
at the follow-ups.
Five items were included to measure relationship com-
mitment. Four of these items were from the commitment
scale developed by Lund (1985) and included "How like-
ly is it that your relationship will be permanent?" and
"How likely are you to pursue another relationship or sin-
gle life in the future?" Each of these items was followed by
a 7-point response scale, ranging from 1 (very unlikely) to
7 (very likely). The final item was the general question,
"How committed are you to your partner?" (1 = not at all
committed to 7 = very committed). Cronbach's Alpha at
Time 1 was .89 for men and .78 for women, and ranged
from .52 to .97 at the follow-ups.
RESULTS
Descriptive Information on the Sexual Satisfaction
Index
Overall, the participants reported being sexually satisfied
in their relationship. For example, the mean to the 2-item
sexual satisfaction index was 6.06 (SD =1.16) for men and
6.34 (SD = .79) for women (on a 7-point scale) at Time 1.
At each wave of the study, women's sexual satisfaction
was higher than men's, and this difference was significant
(p < .05) at every wave except Wave 3. A trend was found
for sexual satisfaction to decrease over the five waves of
the study. A repeated measures MANOVA conducted with
the respondents (n = 35 men and 36 women) who stayed
in their relationship throughout the study and participated
at every wave indicated a linear decrease in sexual satis-
Sprecher
faction scores over the waves of the study; this decrease
was significant (p < .05) for men and borderline significant
(p = .06) for women.
The partners' sexual satisfaction scores were moderate-
ly correlated (r was .37 [p < .001] at Time 1 and ranged
from .30 to .46 [all/? < .01] at the follow-ups).2
Association of Sexual Satisfaction with Relationship
Quality
I had hypothesized (RH1) that sexual satisfaction would be
associated positively with relationship satisfaction, love,
and commitment. As the results in Table 1 indicate, the
participants' sexual satisfaction was correlated positively
and significantly with their relationship satisfaction, love
for partner, and commitment to the relationship, at each
wave of the study (the only nonsignificant correlation was
between sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction
for women at Time 5, and this correlation was borderline
significant; p < .10). Overall, the correlations were moder-
ate to strong in strength (the mean r was = .45), although
the correlations were generally stronger for men than for
women (mean r was .54 for men and .37 for women). The
men's correlations were compared to women's correla-
tions by means of the z test. The correlations were signifi-
cantly different between the genders at both Time 1 and
Time 2 (and for satisfaction at Time 5). In sum, the results
indicate that sexual satisfaction is associated with vari-
ables referring to the general quality of the relationship,
the associations exist for all three indicators of relationship
quality (satisfaction, love, and commitment), the associa-
tions remain quite consistent over time, and the associa-
tions are stronger for men than for women.3
Association of Change in Sexual Satisfaction With
Change in Relationship Quality
Next, I tested RH2, which states that change in sexual satis-
2 explain unique variance in any of the relationship quality
As a comparison, the inter-partner correlations were .26 (p = .01) for rela-
tionship satisfaction, .47 (p < .001) for love, and .54 (p < .001) for commitment.
3
Because data were collected from both partners, it was also possible to
examine how one's sexual satisfaction was associated with partner's relationship
satisfaction, love, and commitment. This was explored with Time 1 data. Men's
sexual satisfaction was modestly associated with their partner's love (r = .22, p <
.05), satisfaction (r = .17, p < .10), and commitment (r = .25, p < .05). Women's
sexual satisfaction was positively correlated with their partners' love (r = .20, p <
.05), although unrelated to their satisfaction (r = .09, ns), and commitment (r =
.16, ns).
Table 1. Associations of Sexual Satisfaction With Relationship Satisfaction, Love, and Commitment at Five Waves of
Longitudinal Study
Men
Satisfaction Love
Time 1 .54*** .52***
Time 2 .64*** g4***
Time 3 .54*** .34**
Time 4 .66*** .60***
Time 5 .68*** .53**
* p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.
193
faction over time is associated with change in relationship
satisfaction, love, and commitment. Similar to the analyses
conducted by Edwards and Booth (1994), the difference
score between Wave 1 and Wave 2 sexual satisfaction scores
was correlated with the difference scores between these two
waves for relationship satisfaction, love, and commitment.
These correlations of difference scores are presented in the
first row of Table 2. For both men and women, these corre-
lations were positive and significant, indicating that increas-
es in sexual satisfaction between Time 1 and Time 2 are asso-
ciated with increases in relationship satisfaction, love, and
commitment between the same waves. Although the sample
size diminished over time, similar change scores were calcu-
lated for the periods from Time 2 to Time 3, Time 3 to Time
4, and Time 4 to Time 5. Changes in sexual satisfaction were
generally not related to changes in the relationship quality
variables at the follow-ups for women, but for men, these
correlations were significant with the exception of those
between Time 4 and Time 5.
Does Sexual Satisfaction Contribute to a Change in
Relationship Quality?
Next, I examined whether there was any evidence for a
causal relationship, of either direction, between sexual sat-
isfaction and each relationship quality variable (RQ1).
More specifically, regressions (for men and women sepa-
rately) were first conducted in which the Time 2 score of
relationship satisfaction, love, or commitment, one at a
time, was regressed on the Time 1 score of sexual satisfac-
tion, controlling for the Time 1 score of relationship satis-
faction, love, or commitment, respectively. In these regres-
sions, relationship satisfaction at Time 1 was a significant
predictor of relationship satisfaction at Time 2 (6 months
later), commitment at Time 1 was a significant predictor of
commitment at Time 2, and love at Time 1 was a significant
predictor of love at Time 2 (ßs ranged from .45 to .66, all p
< .001). However, sexual satisfaction at Time 1 did not
variables at Time 2, controlling for the respective relation-
ship quality measure at Time 1 (ßs ranged from -.07 to .10,
all ns). The percent of variance accounted for by the vari-
ables in these analyses ranged from 24% to 42%.
In a second set of regressions conducted to examine the
reverse causal direction, sexual satisfaction at Time 1 was
found to be a significant predictor of sexual satisfaction at
Women
Commitment Satisfaction Love Commitment
.46*** .24* .31** .22*
.57*** .30** .33** .27*
.28* .38** .26* .34**
.50*** .63*** .56*** 54***
55*** .30 .45** .35*
194
Table 2. Associations of Change in Sexual Satisfaction With Change in Relationship Satisfaction, Love, and Commitment
Over Five Waves of Longitudinal Study
Men
Satisfaction Love
Change from Time 1 to Time 2 .46*** .50***
Change from Time 2 to Time 3 .33* .24*
Change from Time 3 to Time 4 .45** .52***
Change from Time 4 to Time 5 .05 .09
* p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.
Time 2 for both men and women (ßs ranged from .39 to
.58, p < .01). However, the relationship quality measure
(relationship satisfaction, love, commitment) at Time 1 did
not explain unique variance in sexual satisfaction at Time
2, controlling for sexual satisfaction at Time l(ßs ranged
from .00 to .15). The percent of variance accounted for by
the variables in these analyses ranged from 29% to 34%.
Thus, no evidence was found to indicate that sexual satis-
faction leads to change in relationship quality, or, con-
versely, that relationship quality leads to change in sexual
satisfaction.
Does Sexual Satisfaction Predict Later Relationship
Breakups?
The next issue examined with the longitudinal data is
whether sexual satisfaction was associated with relation-
ship stability versus termination over time. I first com-
pared the couples who broke up by Time 2 (n = 17) with
those couples who stayed together {n = 84) on sexual sat-
isfaction measured at Time 1. Both the male partner's sex-
ual satisfaction score and the female partner's sexual satis-
faction score (at Time 1) were significantly higher in the
couples who remained together over the 6 month period
than in the couples who broke up (male satisfaction:
6.\1[SD = 1.01] vs. 5.44[SD = 1.59], /(98) = 2.43, p < .05;
female satisfaction: 6.43[5D = .74] vs. 5.91[SD = .93],
f(97) = 2.22, p < .05). A follow-up one-way ANOVA was
conducted to determine the amount of variance in relation-
ship status at Time 2 accounted for by sexual satisfaction
at Time 1. For men, the r\2 was .06; for women, it was .05.
To determine the robustness of these findings, I next
compared the couples who broke up between Time 2 and
Time 3 (n = 22) with those couples who stayed together {n
= 62) on sexual satisfaction measured at Time 2. Male sex-
ual satisfaction was higher among the couples who stayed
together than among those who broke up (6.03 [SD =1.16]
vs. 5.33[5D = 1.98], f(78) = 1.96, p = .05; rf was .05).
Female sexual satisfaction was also higher among those
who stayed together than among those who broke up,
although the difference was only marginally significant
(6.31[SD = .80] vs. 5.88 [SD = 1.06], /(78) = 1.94,/? = .06;
r\2 was .05).4
4
However, when I compared those who broke up at any point during the
study (n = 60) with those who remained together throughout the study (n = 41)
on sexual satisfaction and sexual desire at Time 1, no significant differences were
found between the two groups. However, it would be unlikely that relationship
variables would predict relationship outcomes almost 5 years later.
Sexual Satisfaction
Women
Commitment Satisfaction Love Commitment
.43*** .42*** .27* .30**
.26* -.06 .05 .08
43** .20 .12 .12
.16 .39* .06 .01
I also examined whether sexual satisfaction explained
any unique variance in dissolution beyond what might be
explained by a general measure of relationship quality. To
explore this, logistic regression was conducted for each
gender, in which Time 2 relationship status (together vs.
broken-up) was regressed on Time 1 sexual satisfaction
and Time 1 relationship satisfaction. For men, relationship
satisfaction at Time 1 had no effect on the likelihood of
breaking up by Time 2 (the odds ratio, or exp(B) was 1.20;
Wald test was not significant); however, sexual satisfac-
tion had a negative effect on dissolution (the odds ratio, or
exp(B) was .60; Wald test was significant, p < .05). For
women, just the opposite results were found: General rela-
tionship satisfaction had a negative effect on dissolution
by Time 2 (the odds ratio, or exp(B) was .15; Wald test was
significant, p < .01); however, sexual satisfaction had no
effect (the odds ratio, or exp(B) was .64; Wald test was not
significant).
DISCUSSION
The results of this study indicate that sexual satisfaction is
linked to relationship satisfaction, love, and commitment,
for both men and women. Those participants who were
most sexually satisfied were those who tended to report
high levels of relationship satisfaction, love, and commit-
ment. In addition, change in sexual satisfaction was asso-
ciated with change, in the same direction, in relationship
satisfaction, love, and commitment, although especially
between Waves 1 and 2. While prior research had docu-
mented an association between sexual satisfaction and
relationship quality (e.g., relationship satisfaction) pri-
marily in married and other committed couples (e.g.,
Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983), this study demonstrated
that sexual satisfaction is also linked to satisfaction, love,
and commitment in dating couples, including at different
times in the development of their relationship.
Furthermore, the associations did not reduce in strength
over time. While it may not seem surprising that satisfac-
tion in a specific area of the relationship (sex) is associat-
ed with overall relationship satisfaction, the associations
found between sexual satisfaction and love and commit-
ment indicate that sexual satisfaction also has implica-
tions for how partners feel about each other and how com-
mitted they are to staying in the relationship. These results
are consistent with the exchange perspective (e.g.,
Rusbult, 1983; Sprecher, 1998), which argues that posi-
tive and balanced sexual exchanges are associated with
Sprecher
love, satisfaction, and the desire to stay committed to the
relationship.
However, no evidence was found that sexual satisfac-
tion scores at one time predicted change in relationship
satisfaction, love, and commitment over time (i.e.,
between Times 1 and 2), or that relationship satisfaction,
love, and commitment at one time predicted change over
time (i.e., between Times 1 and 2) in sexual satisfaction.
Thus, it cannot be stated, unequivocally, that people
increase their love, satisfaction, or commitment in the rela-
tionship because they first experience sexual satisfaction,
or vice versa. However, sexual satisfaction and relation-
ship quality may influence each other almost simultane-
ously, which cannot be determined from these data. As
noted many years ago by Henderson-King and Veroff
(1994), "The relationship between sex and affection, in
particular, would seem so reciprocal that the question of
causation appears futile" (p. 521). In addition, and as noted
elsewhere (see Sprecher, 1999), the scale scores of satis-
faction, love, and commitment in this longitudinal study
reached ceiling effects early in the study (at Time 1),
which limits the amount of change over time in these vari-
ables that can be explained by another variable.
Another issue examined with the longitudinal data was
whether sexual satisfaction predicted the likelihood of
relationship dissolution over time. The partners in couples
who stayed together between Times 1 and 2 had higher
sexual satisfaction scores (at Time 1) than partners in cou-
ples who broke up. Although the difference between the
two groups on sexual satisfaction was significant, it was
not large in magnitude, probably because most of the cou-
ples (including those who eventually broke up) experi-
enced relatively high levels of sexual satisfaction. These
results extend previous studies on sexuality in premarital
relationships (Felmlee et al., 1990; Simpson, 1987), which
found that level of sexual involvement was a positive pre-
dictor of relationship stability.
Although sexual satisfaction was associated with rela-
tionship satisfaction, love, and commitment in the con-
temporaneous analyses for both genders, the associations
were generally stronger for men than for women. I would
speculate that men are more likely than women to use the
quality of their sexual relationship as a barometer for the
quality of the entire relationship. The logistic regression
results in which sexual satisfaction and relationship satis-
faction (at Time 1) were compared in their relative ability
to predict breakup status by Time 2 also demonstrated the
greater importance of sex to men than to women. Sexual
satisfaction (but not relationship satisfaction) was nega-
tively associated with the likelihood of a breakup for men,
whereas relationship satisfaction was the significant pre-
dictor for women.
There were several strengths to this study, including
data collected over time and from both members of cou-
ples. Very little prior research has examined sexual satis-
faction and other subjective measures of sexuality at mul-
tiple times in the relationship, particularly in premarital
195
relationships. A limitation was the homogeneous sample,
which consisted primarily of college-educated young
adults. Further longitudinal research, including with daily
diaries, is needed to examine how daily and weekly
changes in sexual satisfaction are associated with overall
relationship quality.
REFERENCES
Aron, A., & Henkemeyer, L. (1995). Marital satisfaction and passionate love.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 139-146.
Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender
difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual dis-
tinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 5, 242-273.
Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1983). American couples. New York: William
Morrow.
Braiker, H. B., & Kelley, H. H. (1979). Conflict in the development of close
relationships. In R. L. Burgess & T. L. Huston (Eds.), Social exchange in
developing relationships (pp. 135-168). New York: Academic Press.
Byers, E. S., Demmons, S., & Lawrance, K. (1998). Sexual satisfaction with-
in dating relationships: A test of the interpersonal exchange model of sex-
ual satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15,
257-267.
Christopher, F. S., & Sprecher, S. (2000). Sexuality in marriage, dating, and
other relationships: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 62, 999-1017.
Cupach, W. R., & Comstock, J. (1990). Satisfaction with sexual communi-
cation in marriage. Links to sexual satisfaction and dyadic adjustment.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 179-186.
Davies, S., Katz, J., & Jackson, J. L. (1999). Sexual desire discrepancies:
Effects on sexual and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual dating cou-
ples. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 553-567.
Edwards, J. N., & Booth, A. (1994). Sexuality, marriage, and well-being: The
middle years. In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), Sexuality across the life course (pp.
233-259). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Felmlee, D., Sprecher, S., & Bassin, E. (1990). The dissolution of intimate
relationships: A hazard model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 13-30.
Greeley, A. M. (1991). Faithful attraction: Discovering intimacy, love, and
fidelity in American marriage. New York: Doherty.
Grote, N. K., & Frieze, I. H. (1998). Remembrance of things past:
Perceptions of marital love from its beginnings to the present. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 91-109.
Hatfield, E., Greenberger, D., Traupmann, J., & Lambert, P. (1982). Equity
and sexual satisfaction in recently married couples. The Journal of Sex
Research, 17, 18-32.
Hatfield, E., Utne, M. K., & Traupmann, J. (1979). Equity theory and inti-
mate relationships. In R. L. Burgess & T. L. Huston (Eds.), Social
exchange in developing relationships (pp. 91-171). New York: Springer-
Verlag.
Henderson-King, D. H., & Veroff, J. (1994). Sexual satisfaction and marital
well-being in the first years of marriages. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 11, 509-534.
Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 93-98.
Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1976). Breakups before marriage: The
end of 103 affairs. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 147-168.
Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1992). Development of the interpersonal
exchange model of sexual satisfaction in long-term relationships. The
Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 1, 123-128.
Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1995). Sexual satisfaction in long-term het-
erosexual relationships: The interpersonal exchange model of sexual sat-
isfaction. Personal Relationships, 2, 267-285.
Lund, M. (1985). The development of investment and commitment scales for
predicting continuity of personal relationships. Journal of Social
Psychology, 22, 101-112.
Oggins, J., Leber, D., & Veroff, J. (1993). Race and gender differences in
Black and White newlyweds' perceptions of sexual and marital relation-
ships. The Journal of Sex Research, 30, 152-160.
Peplau, L. A., Rubin, Z., & Hill, C. T. (1977). Sexual intimacy in dating rela-
tionships. Journal of Social Issues, 33, 86-109.
196
Pinney, E. M., Gerrard, M., & Denney, N. W. (1987). The Pinney sexual sat-
isfaction inventory. The Journal of Sex Research, 23, 233-251.
Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The
development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in het-
erosexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
45, 101-117.
Simpson, J. A. (1987). The dissolution of romantic relationships: Factors
involved in relationship stability and emotional distress. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 683-692.
Sprecher, S. (1998). Social exchange theories and sexuality. The Journal of
Sex Research, 35, 32-43.
Sprecher, S. (1999). "I love you more today than yesterday": Romantic part-
ners' perceptions of changes in love and related affect over time. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 46-53.
Sprecher, S., Metts, S., Burleson, B., Hatfield, E., & Thompson, A. (1995).
Domains of expressive interaction in intimate relationships: Associations
with satisfaction and commitment. Family Relations, 44, 203-210.
Sexual Satisfaction
Sprecher, S., & Regan, P. C. (1998). Passionate and companionate love in
courting and young married couples. Sociological Inquiry, 68, 163-185.
Sprecher, S., & Regan, P. C. (2000). Sexuality in a relational context. In C.
Hendrick & S. S. Hendrick (Eds.), Close relationships: A sourcebook (pp.
217-227). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Veroff, J., Douvan, E., & Hatchett, S. J. (1995). Marital instability: A social
and behavioral study of the early years. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Waite, L. J., & Joyner, K. (2001). Emotional satisfaction and physical plea-
sure in sexual unions: Time horizon, sexual behavior, and sexual exclu-
sivity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 247-264.
White, L., & Keith, B. (1990). The effect of shift work on the quality and sta-
bility of marital relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 453-462.
Yela, C. (2000). Predictors of and factors related to loving and sexual satis-
faction for men and women. European Review of Applied Psychology, 50,
235-243.
Manuscript accepted February 18, 2002