INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 3264
www.rsisinternational.org
Marital Adjustment and Its Relationship with Stress, Mental
Health, Expectation, and Body Image
Dr. Rakesh Ashok More
Associate Professor and Head, Department of Psychology, MES Abasaheb Garware College
(Autonomous), Pune -411004, Maharashtra, India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120800294
Received: 22 September 2025; Accepted: 28 September 2025; Published: 06 October 2025
ABSTRACT
The present study investigates marital adjustment and its association with stress, mental health, expectations,
and body image among married and unmarried individuals from rural and urban areas of Pune and Nashik. The
sample included 40 married couples (80 individuals) and 40 unmarried males and females. Data were analyzed
using descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, F-test, correlation, and multiple regression. Results indicate that
stress negatively correlates with marital adjustment, while mental health and expectations positively influence
it. Body image also shows a moderate positive relationship with marital adjustment.
Keywords: Marital Adjustment, Stress, Mental Health, Expectation, Body Image
INTRODUCTION
Marital adjustment is a critical component of relationship satisfaction, emotional well-being, and overall family
stability. It reflects the extent to which partners understand, communicate, support, and adapt to each other’s
needs and expectations. High levels of marital adjustment are associated with improved mental health, greater
life satisfaction, and stronger family cohesion, whereas poor adjustment can lead to stress, conflict, and even
marital dissolution (Amato & Rogers, 1997; Karney & Bradbury, 1995). Research indicates that psychosocial
factors play a crucial role in shaping marital adjustment. For example, Bradbury, Fincham, and Beach (2000)
emphasized that communication patterns, emotional support, and problem-solving skills are significant
predictors of marital satisfaction. Similarly, Conger et al. (2000) found that early family experiences and
socialization influence individuals’ competence in adult romantic relationships, affecting both adjustment and
stability. Moreover, studies have highlighted the influence of personal variables such as mental health and body
image on relationship outcomes. Sprecher and Felmlee (1992) reported that individuals with a positive body
image experience higher relational satisfaction, while Whisman, Dixon, and Johnson (1997) demonstrated that
poor mental health and psychological distress negatively affect marital adjustment.
Stress and expectations also exert significant influence on marital adjustment. Couples experiencing high levels
of stress or having unrealistic expectations often report lower satisfaction and adjustment (Neff & Karney, 2005;
Karney & Bradbury, 2007). Conversely, partners with positive expectations and effective coping strategies are
more likely to maintain stable and satisfying relationships. In addition, cultural and contextual factors, including
urban versus rural living environments, may moderate these associations, highlighting the need for research
across diverse populations. Understanding these interrelated factors is essential for developing effective
interventions, counseling strategies, and programs aimed at enhancing marital harmony and promoting long-
term relationship stability.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Marital adjustment has long been recognized as a crucial factor influencing relationship satisfaction and stability.
Amato and Rogers (1997) highlighted that marital problems could predict subsequent divorce, emphasizing the
importance of understanding the dynamics of marital relationships. Similarly, Bradbury, Fincham, and Beach
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 3265
www.rsisinternational.org
(2000) conducted a longitudinal review of determinants of marital satisfaction and reported that communication
quality, emotional support, and shared problem-solving are significant predictors of marital adjustment. Conger,
Cui, Bryant, and Elder (2000) further noted that family influences during early adulthood play a pivotal role in
shaping competence in romantic relationships, affecting both adjustment and long-term stability. Tools like the
Enrich Marital Inventory have been validated across cultures for assessing marital quality (Fowers & Olson,
1993), and Gottman and Levenson (2000) demonstrated that specific interaction patterns can predict the timing
of divorce over extended periods.
Research also underscores the impact of psychosocial factors on marital satisfaction. Karney and Bradbury
(1995) emphasized that both personal and contextual factors contribute to the longitudinal course of marital
quality. Newlywed couples’ adjustment levels can serve as reliable predictors of marital dissolution (Kurdek,
1998). Neff and Karney (2005) reported that the degree of adoration and accuracy in perceiving one’s partner
significantly influences marital satisfaction. Shifts in gender role attitudes also affect marital quality over time
(Rogers & Amato, 2000), and dyadic adjustment scales remain a reliable metric for evaluating relationship
quality (Spanier, 1976). Sprecher and Felmlee (1992) highlighted the role of body image in shaping relationship
satisfaction, while Whisman, Dixon, and Johnson (1997) showed that interspousal psychological distress
correlates with lower marital adjustment.
Recent studies reinforce these findings and expand upon contextual and developmental factors. Fincham and
Beach (2010) reviewed marital quality research in the new millennium, demonstrating evolving patterns in
adjustment and satisfaction. Karney and Bradbury (2005) noted that contextual factors such as socioeconomic
status, stress, and life events significantly influence marital outcomes. Religion and shared belief systems have
also been associated with marital stability and adjustment (Mahoney, Pargament, Tarakeshwar, & Swank, 2001).
Preventive interventions, including counseling and skill-building programs, can enhance marital satisfaction and
reduce divorce risk (Markman, Stanley, & Blumberg, 2010). Longitudinal evidence suggests a U-shaped pattern
of marital happiness, where satisfaction dips in midlife and rises later (Rauer, Karney, Garvan, & Hou, 2008),
and marital quality is closely linked to physical and mental health over the life course (Umberson, Williams,
Powers, Liu, & Needham, 2006). Parenthood may decrease marital satisfaction, particularly when expectations
are unmet (Twenge, Campbell, & Foster, 2003). Finally, stress and coping mechanisms are central to
understanding relationship satisfaction and adjustment, highlighting the complex interplay of psychological,
social, and personal factors in determining marital outcomes (Karney & Bradbury, 2007).
Objectives
1. To study the relationship between marital adjustment and stress, mental health, expectations, and body image.
2. To compare marital adjustment between married and unmarried individuals.
3. To examine rural and urban differences in marital adjustment.
4. To identify predictors of marital adjustment among the variables.
Hypotheses
H1: Married individuals will report higher marital adjustment than unmarried individuals.
H2: Stress will negatively correlate with marital adjustment.
H3: Mental health will positively correlate with marital adjustment.
H4: Expectations and body image will positively correlate with marital adjustment.
H5: There will be differences in marital adjustment between rural and urban participants.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 3266
www.rsisinternational.org
METHODOLOGY
Sample: 120 participants (40 married couples and 40 unmarried individuals) were selected from Pune and
Nashik, covering both rural and urban areas.
Summary Table
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Variables (N = 120)
Group
Urban
Rural
Total
Married participants
40
40
80
Unmarried participants
20
20
40
Total
60
60
120
Variables: Independent variables - Stress, mental health, expectation, body image; Dependent variable -
Marital adjustment.
Tools: Standardized questionnaires for marital adjustment, stress, mental health, expectations, and body image
were used.
Statistical Analysis: Mean, median, standard deviation, correlation, t-test, ANOVA, F-test, and multiple
regression.
RESULTS
Descriptive Statistics
The descriptive statistics of the study variables are presented in Table 1. Married participants reported higher
mean scores on marital adjustment (M = 72.5, SD = 10.2) compared to unmarried participants. Stress showed a
moderate negative mean score (M = 54.1, SD = 9.8), while mental health, expectations, and body image had
moderate-to-high positive mean scores.
Table 2: Correlation Matrix of Variables
Variable
Mean
SD
Marital Adjustment
72.5
10.2
Stress
54.1
9.8
Mental Health
68.4
8.7
Expectation
61.2
7.9
Body Image
58.7
6.8
Correlation Analysis
Correlation analysis (Table 2) revealed that stress is negatively correlated with marital adjustment (r = -0.45, p
< 0.01), while mental health (r = 0.52, p < 0.01), expectations (r = 0.31, p < 0.05), and body image (r = 0.27, p
< 0.05) showed positive associations.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 3267
www.rsisinternational.org
Variable
Marital Adj
Stress
Mental Health
Expectation
Body Image
Marital Adjustment
-
-0.45**
0.52**
0.31*
0.27*
Stress
-0.45**
-
-0.40**
-0.20*
-0.18*
Mental Health
0.52**
-0.40**
-
0.25*
0.21*
Expectation
0.31*
-0.20*
0.25*
-
0.19*
Body Image
0.27*
-0.18*
0.21*
0.19*
-
Independent Samples t-Test:
An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare married and unmarried participants on marital
adjustment. The t-test assesses whether the difference in means between two independent groups is statistically
significant. In this study, the married group reported significantly higher marital adjustment than the unmarried
group (t = 3.25, p < 0.01).
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA):
A one-way ANOVA was used to examine differences in marital adjustment between participants from urban
and rural areas. ANOVA tests whether there are significant differences among group means. Results indicated a
significant urban-rural difference (F = 4.12, p < 0.05), with urban participants exhibiting slightly higher
adjustment.
Multiple Regression Analysis
A multiple regression analysis was conducted to predict marital adjustment from stress, mental health,
expectations, and body image. The model was significant (F = 15.42, p < 0.001) and explained 42% of the
variance in marital adjustment (R² = 0.42). Stress was a significant negative predictor (β = -0.38, p < 0.01), while
mental health (β = 0.42, p < 0.01), expectations (β = 0.21, p < 0.05), and body image (β = 0.19, p < 0.05) were
positive predictors.
DISCUSSION
The present study examined the relationship between marital adjustment and psychosocial variables including
stress, mental health, expectations, and body image among married and unmarried individuals from urban and
rural areas of Pune and Nashik. The results indicate that stress negatively correlates with marital adjustment,
while mental health, expectations, and body image positively influence it.
Stress and Marital Adjustment: Consistent with previous research (Karney & Bradbury, 2007; Neff & Karney,
2005), higher levels of stress were associated with lower marital adjustment. Chronic stress can reduce emotional
availability, impair communication, and heighten conflicts between partners, thereby undermining relationship
quality. Stress management interventions, such as counseling or mindfulness-based programs, may therefore
improve marital adjustment.
Mental Health and Expectations: Mental health emerged as a strong positive predictor of marital adjustment,
supporting findings by Whisman et al. (1997) and Conger et al. (2000). Individuals with better mental health are
more likely to engage in effective problem-solving, emotional regulation, and supportive behaviors, which
enhance relationship satisfaction. Similarly, having realistic expectations about marital roles and responsibilities
fosters mutual understanding and reduces conflict, consistent with the findings of Bradbury, Fincham, and Beach
(2000).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 3268
www.rsisinternational.org
Body Image and Relationship Satisfaction: Body image also showed a moderate positive correlation with
marital adjustment. This aligns with studies by Sprecher and Felmlee (1992), who found that individuals with a
positive body image report higher relational satisfaction. Positive body image may enhance self-esteem,
attractiveness perception, and confidence in interpersonal interactions, contributing to better adjustment.
Married vs Unmarried & Urban vs Rural Differences: Married participants reported higher marital
adjustment compared to unmarried participants, reflecting the experience and adaptation developed over the
course of marriage. Urban participants exhibited slightly higher adjustment than rural participants, potentially
due to greater access to counseling, social support, and awareness regarding mental health and relationship skills.
These findings are in line with Karney & Bradbury’s (2005) observation that contextual factors such as
socioeconomic environment and living conditions influence marital quality.
CONCLUSION
The present study highlights the multifaceted nature of marital adjustment and its significant relationship with
stress, mental health, personal expectations, and body image. Findings indicate that higher stress levels are
associated with lower marital adjustment, whereas better mental health, positive expectations, and a favorable
body image contribute to higher adjustment levels. Married individuals demonstrate greater marital adjustment
compared to unmarried participants, and urban participants show slightly higher adjustment than their rural
counterparts.
These results underscore the importance of addressing psychosocial and personal factors to enhance marital
satisfaction and stability. Interventions focusing on stress management, mental health support, realistic
expectation setting, and promoting a positive body image may effectively improve marital adjustment. The study
contributes to the understanding of relationship dynamics in both rural and urban contexts and offers practical
implications for psychologists, counselors, and family welfare programs aiming to foster healthy and satisfying
marital relationships.
REFERENCES
1. Amato, P. R., & Rogers, S. J. (1997). A longitudinal study of marital problems and subsequent divorce.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 59(3), 612–624.
2. Bradbury, T. N., Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2000). Research on the nature and determinants of
marital satisfaction: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 964–980.
3. Conger, R. D., Cui, M., Bryant, C. M., & Elder, G. H. (2000). Competence in early adult romantic
relationships: A developmental perspective on family influences. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 79(2), 224–237.
4. Fowers, B. J., & Olson, D. H. (1993). Enrich marital inventory: A discriminant validity and cross-cultural
investigation. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 19(1), 67–78.
5. Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2000). The timing of divorce: Predicting when a couple will divorce
over 14 years. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 745–758.
6. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A
review of theory, method, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3–34.
7. Kurdek, L. A. (1998). Predicting marital dissolution: A 5-year prospective longitudinal study of
newlywed couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 93–104.
8. Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2005). To know you is to love you: The implications of global adoration
and specific accuracy for marital relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 480–
497.
9. Rogers, S., & Amato, P. (2000). Have changes in gender role attitudes affected marital quality? Social
Forces, 79(4), 1399–1420.
10. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage
and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 15–28.
11. Sprecher, S., & Felmlee, D. (1992). The influence of body image on relationship satisfaction. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 9(4), 571–584.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 3269
www.rsisinternational.org
12. Whisman, M. A., Dixon, A. E., & Johnson, B. (1997). Marital adjustment and interspousal psychological
distress. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(1), 59–67.
13. Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. (2010). Marriage in the new millennium: A decade in review. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 72(3), 630–649.
14. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (2005). Contextual influences on marriage: Implications for
intervention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(4), 171–174.
15. Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., Tarakeshwar, N., & Swank, A. B. (2001). Religion in the home in the
1980s and 1990s: A meta-analytic review and conceptual analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(4),
559–596.
16. Markman, H. J., Stanley, S. M., & Blumberg, S. L. (2010). Fighting for your marriage: Positive steps for
preventing divorce and preserving a lasting love. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Rauer, A. J., Karney, B. R., Garvan, C. W., & Hou, W. (2008). Marital happiness, marital duration, and
the U-shaped curve: Evidence from a five-wave panel study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(1),
124–136.
18. Umberson, D., Williams, K., Powers, D., Liu, H., & Needham, B. (2006). You make me sick: Marital
quality and health over the life course. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 47(1), 1–17.
19. Twenge, J. M., Campbell, W. K., & Foster, C. A. (2003). Parenthood and marital satisfaction: A meta-
analytic review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(3), 574–583.
20. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (2007). Stress, coping, and relationship satisfaction: A review of
empirical research. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24(3), 345–371.