Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1

Introduction
Marriage is relationship that endures, cross situations and condition because marital

compatibility is affected by the personality characteristics that the two people bring to their
marriage. A good relationship between a husband and a wife makes for a happy home. In
general, marriages between two people with the same personality type have the potential to
clash. Each personality type has unique needs and reacts to situations in a different way. Marital
satisfaction defined as a construction including a variety of dimension that included quality of
communication, leisure interactions, cohesiveness on matters relevant to the relationship (e.g.,
child rearing and finances), and family history of distress. Snyder (1979, 1983; in Sousou,2004).
This study will focus on the relationship between Husbands personality and Marital
satisfaction among Islamic family. Big five personality traits emerged as significantly associated
with marital satisfaction though significant between-trait will observe among Islamic husband. In
Psychology, the Big Five personality traits are five board or dimensions of personality that are
used to describe human personality. The Big five personality traits are Extraversion (your level
of sociability and enthusiasm), Agreeableness (your level of friendliness and kindness),
Conscientiousness (your level of organization and work ethic), Neuroticism (your level of
calmness and tranquility) and Openness (your level of creativity and curiosity).
This study aim to determine the relationship between Husbands personality and Marital
satisfaction among Islamic family in Semenyih, Hulu Langat, Selangor. Factors investigated in
this study are personal factors (age, education and income) and family characteristic (family
structure). In addition, the relationship between personal and family factors with husbands
personality and marital satisfaction will be determined. There are four research questions to be
addressed in this present study including the respondents personality, the level of marital
satisfaction among the respondent, the personal factors that have significantly related to
respondent personality and marital satisfaction and lastly is does personality related to
respondents marital satisfaction.
Generally, total cases of divorces in Malaysia increase gradually by year to year. Total
cases of divorces that were reported during 2010 were 41,778 cases. Those cases had increase by

43,137 cases for the next year and rose again in year 2012 about 47,779 cases. The new record
was reported by Jabatan Kehakiman Syariah Malaysia for the year 2013 about those cases were
581,505 cases. The state recorded the highest divorce application were Selangor, Johor, Kelantan
and Wilayah Persekutuan. While the state recorded the lowest divorce application were Perlis,
Melaka and Sarawak.
There are some significant from this study including give the guideline for each to get an
improvement of emotional well-being to get happiness in their family. Also get a good marital
satisfaction involvement and better mental health outcomes, including greater self-esteem, better
adaptation to bereavement, a lower incidence of depression and anxiety, a lower likelihood of
alcohol and drug abuse, and greater life satisfaction and happiness in general. Besides, this study
give guideline to the community for reduces the statistic divorce in Malaysia. From this study,
community will get ready with a good way to solve a divorces family and give guideline for each
family to get a good life and a good satisfaction.
There are few gaps in past study which are redresses these limitations with the aid of a
suitable sample size, standardized measures and statistical methods that adjust for shared
variance within dyads to enable simultaneous estimation of phenomena reported by men and
women (between-dyad analyses) and husbands and wives (within-dyad analyses).

From past studies, According to McCrae (1991), the five-factor model (FFM) consists of
five aspect of personality (called Big Five): neuroticism, extroversion, conscientiousness,
openness to experience, and agreeableness. The typology was developed by Torgersen (1995, in
Vollrath & Torgersen, 2000) and was built on three fundamental personality factors from the
core of several basic systems (Eynsenck, 1994), those factors being neuroticism or negative
affectivity, extroversion or positive affectivity, and conscientiousness. Some marital research had
investigated the veracity of the old adage, birds of a feather flock together with the aim of
understanding whether personality similarities of spouse are correlated with and perhaps
predictive of marital stability and satisfaction. (Kelly & Conley, 1987).

A current finding to emerge from personality and marriage research has been that
neuroticism appears particularly problematic to relationship satisfaction and marital stability

(Barelds, 2005; Belsky & Hsieh, 1998; Karney & Bradbury, 1995; Kelly & Conley, 1987;
Kurdek, 1993; Schmitt, Kliegel, & Shapiro, 2007). Some studies have linked husbands
extraversion to mole marital satisfaction (Lester, Haig, & Monello, 1989). Other studies suggest
positive links between extraversion and marital satisfaction (Barelds, 2005; Belsky & Hsieh,
1998), and that extraversion is especially important for womens account of marriage (Chen et
al.,2007).

1.2

Statement of the problem

This study aims to determine the relationship between husbands personality and marital

satisfaction among Islamic family in Hulu Langat, Selangor. Factors investigated in this study
are personal factor (age, education, income) and family characteristic (family structure). This
study will also determine the relationship between husbands personality and marital satisfaction
among the Islamic family. In summary, there are four research questions to be addressed in this
present study:
1.2.1 Research question:
1. What is the respondents personality?
2. What is the level of marital satisfaction among the respondents?
3. What are the personal factors that have significantly related to respondents
personality and marital satisfaction?
4. Does husbands personality related to respondents marital satisfaction?
1.2.2

Conceptual framework

Personal factors
-

Age
Education
Income

Husbands Personality

Marital satisfaction

Family Characteristic
-

Family structure

1.3

Significance of Study
The significant study for this study is to give guide line for each family to get an

improvement of emotional well-being to get happiness in their family. According to the past
study, Horwitz et al. (1996), Marks and Lambert (1998), and Simon (2002) present evidence of
improvements in emotional well-being following good marriage, and declines following the end
of a union. Marks and Lambert (1998) report that marital gain affects men and women in the
same way, but marital loss is generally more depressing for women. The studies to date are
suggestive of an association between good marital satisfaction involvement and better mental
health outcomes, including greater self-esteem, better adaptation to bereavement, a lower
incidence of depression and anxiety, a lower likelihood of alcohol and drug abuse, and greater
life satisfaction and happiness in general.
Next, the significant study that we found from this study is to give guide line to the
community for reduce the statistic divorce in Malaysia. From this study the each factor that can
effect marital satisfaction will indentify and each family can refer this study to get a better
marital satisfaction and get a happiness life. Good marital satisfaction will give a longer life for
each family because no emotional issue will come if each family get a good marital satisfaction
and the number of divorce family will reduce slowly. Other than that from this study we will get
predict divorce in the future and community will ready with a good way to solve a divorces
family.
The next significant study is to give guide line for each family give a good life to their
children with a good marital satisfaction. Children raised by their own married parents do better,
on average, across a range of outcomes than children who grow up in other living arrangements.
Marital life period and marital satisfaction of the parents have shown significant impact on
mental health status of their children. Children of parents with high marital satisfaction and high
marital life period are mentally healthier than children with low marital satisfaction parents and
below of 20 years of marital life period. Children who grow up with happy families will have a
good mental health than their counterparts who have experienced a parental divorce. According
to Cherlin (1999) children who going up with non-intact family will give effect to children, that
can be associated with short- and long-term problems, partly attributable to the effects of family
structure on the childs mental health, and partly attributable to inherited characteristics and their
interaction with the environment.

1.4

Research Objective

This section consists of two parts which are main objective and specific objectives of this study.
General Objective:
To determine the relationship between husbands personality and marital satisfaction among
Islamic Family in Hulu Langat, Selangor
Specific Objective:
Obj 1: To describe personal factors (age, education, income) and family characteristic
(family structure) of the husband
Obj 2: To describe personality of husband
Obj 3: To identify level of marital satisfaction
Obj 4: To determine the relationship between husbands personality and marital
satisfaction
Obj 5: To determine the relationship between age and husbands personality
Obj 6: To determine the relationship between education level and husbands personality
Obj 7: To determine the relationship between income and husbands personality
Obj 8: To determine the relationship between family structure and husbands personality
Obj 9: To determine the relationship between husbands age and marital satisfaction
Obj 10: To determine the relationship between husbands education and marital
satisfaction
Obj 11: To determine the relationship between husbands income and marital satisfaction
Obj 12: To determine the relationship between family structure and marital satisfaction

1.5

Hypotheses

Based on research objectives, the following research hypothesis were tested in this study. There
is no significant relationship between husbands personality and marital satisfaction
There is no significant relationship between age and husbands personality
There is no significant relationship between education level and husbands
personality
There is no significant relationship between income and husbands personality
There is no significant relationship between family structure and husbands
personality
There is no significant relationship between husbands age and marital satisfaction
There is no significant relationship between education level and marital satisfaction
There is no significant relationship between income and marital satisfaction
There is no significant relationship between family structure and marital satisfaction

1.6

Terminology definition

1.6.1 Subject Husband

Conceptual Definition: Husband is a grown man who is married and breadwinner for families
who become official spouse of a woman. (Moeliyono, Anton.M,dkk.1990)
Operational Definition: We will conduct among Islamic Husband in Semenyih, Hulu Langat,
Selangor. There we will take 396 respondents from Islamic husband to perform on this study.
1.6.2 IV Husbands Personality
Conceptual Definition: Husbands Personality is relatively enduring set of characteristics that
define by husband and affect out interactions with the environment (Bee & Bjorklund,2007)
Operational Definition: Husbands Personality in this study will using 5-factor (FFM) consists of
5 aspects of personality (called Big Five): neuroticism, extroversion, conscientiousness,
openness to experience, and agreeableness (NEO-FFI; Costa & McCrae,1992)
1.6.3 AV Personal Factor
Conceptual Definition: Personal factors are defined as those distinguishing characteristics, which
might affect behavior (Hagerstrom,2010)
Operational Definition: The personal factors in this study only describe age, education, income,
and family structure of the husband.
1.6.4 DV - Marital Satisfaction
Conceptual Definition: Snyder (1979, 1983; in Sousou,2004) defined marital satisfaction as a
construction including a variety of dimensions that included quality of communication, leisure
interactions, cohesiveness on matter relevant to the relationship (e.g.child rearing and finance)
and family history of distress.
Operational Definition: Marital Satisfaction will be measured using the 35-item Comprehensive
Marital Satisfaction Scale (CMSS) (Blum & Mehrabian, 1999). The CMSS has solid evidence of
reliability content validity, and construct validity (Blum & Mehrabian, 1999, Mehrabian, 2005)

1.7

Limitation of the Study

This study must be viewed in lights of its limitations. The current study focused only on

personal factors (age, education, income) and family characteristic (family structure) of the
husband in term of personality on marital satisfaction. Respondents for the study would include
only on Husbands Islamic in Hulu Langat, Selangor. Besides, the sampling technique that will
be used in this study is cluster sampling technique which is involved in Multi-Stage. In this
study, the total sample sizes that are involved are 396 respondents. On other hand, wives
personality and marital satisfaction may be also be pertinent to focus, but was not the scope of
the study. The findings of this study are depends on honestly and sincerely of the respondents
during answered Self- Administered Questionnaires that are given. Lastly, further study is
needed to provide a richer understanding on wives of personality and marital satisfaction in order
to live happily.

Chapter 2: Literature review

This literature review section is organized into several categories as below:
2.1

IV - Husbands Personality

2.2

AV and IV Relationship between personal factors (age, education, income, and

family structure) and husbands personality

2.3

DV Marital Satisfaction

2.4

AV and DV Relationship between personal factors (age, education, income, and

family structure) and marital satisfaction

2.5

IV and DV Husbands personality and marital satisfaction

2.6

Summary

2.1 Review IV Husbands Personality

According to McCrae (1991), the five-factor model (FFM) consists of five aspects of
personality (called Big Five): neuroticism, extroversion, conscientiousness, openness to
experience, and agreeableness. (Costa & McCrae,1992). Previous research had demonstrated
robust relationship between romantic relationship quality, functioning, and outcomes and
broad personality traits such as the Big Five (Goldberg, 1993; in Letzring & Noftle, 2010).
The typology was developed by Torgersen (1995, in Vollrath & Torgersen, 2000) and
was built on three fundamental personality factors from the core of several basic systems
(Eynsenck, 1994), those factors being neuroticism or negative affectivity, extroversion or
positive affectivity, and conscientiousness. In constructing the typology, Torgersen (1995, in
Vollrath & Torgersen, 2002) aimed at representing every possible combination of these three
basic personality factors. (Torgersen, 1995 and 2002).
Various critiques had faulted the field for sole reliance on self-report data in marriage
and family research (Gottman & Notarius, 2002; Watson & Humrichouse, 2006). With the
awareness, we obtained both self-reports and corresponding responses from spouses
describing each of the Big Five (and vice versa with the spouse as the subject). This allowed
us to compute trait averages for both spouses (for example; the average of husbands

neuroticism reports of his neuroticism). Persons married 20+ years are certainly well
positioned to describe their spouses. As each of the Big Five traits can be described as valueladen (for example; ideal is less neuroticism but more extraversion, openness,
conscientiousness and agreeableness; Watson & Humrichouse, 2006), positive reporting
differences between self and spousal reports represent relatively more positive perceptions.
(Watson & Humrichouse, 2006).

2.2 Relationship between AV - Personal factors(age, education, income, family structure)

and IV -Husband personality
2.2.1 Family structure
According to Swann, de la Ronde, and Hixon (1994), was found that newlywed
married couples desired self-verifying evaluations by spouses, as opposed to more positive
evaluations. (Swann, de la Ronde, and Hixon, 1994). Similarly, Neff and Karney (2005)
reported that newlywed husbands whose spousal trait reports corresponded to their wives
self-descriptions were more supported by their wives; in addition, the couple was less likely
to divorce over the first two years of marriage. (Neff and Karney, 2005). In contrast, others
including Murray, Holmes and Griffin (1996) and ORourke and Cappeliez (2005) identified
and described protective aspects of idealizing ones partner and relationship. (Murray,
Holmes and Griffin, 1996),(ORourke and Cappeliez, 2005).
2.2.2 Education and income
Terman and colleagues (1938) first advanced the notion that people have enduring
dispositions that influence married life. As concluded by Karney and Bradbury (1995), It
would be difficult to imagine a model of marriage that did not in some way account
forenduring traits that each spouse brings to the relationship (p.22). Indeed, nearly every
model of intimate relationship acknowledges that each individuals personality plays a role.
For example, Karney and Bradburys (1995) vulnerability-stress-adaption model (VSA)
posits that individuals bring stable characteristics called enduring vulnerabilities to married
life (for example ; personality traits, attachment styles, education level ). This model states
that couples utilize adaptive process to understand and negotiate both enduring

10

vulnerabilities and stressful events (for example; workload, finances, health). (Karney and
Bradburys, 1995).
2.2.3 Age
The previous study, a study sample differences was account for these different
findings : specifically, the relative age of spouses and duration of marriages. Samples of
young married persons and newlywed couple are composed of a significant proportion that
will divorce. Although rates of divorce in late-middle age are rising (Bair, 2007), number of
years wed continues to be a robust predictor of relationship continuity (Kingston, 2007). The
research was suggested that interpersonal familiarity increase self and other agreement
between personality ratings (Paulhus & Reynolds, 1995) : we contend that spouses married
20+ years have had ample opportunity to see their partners character and behavior across a
range of settings.

In

other words,

long-wed spouses are well-situated proxy

informants.(Paulhus & Reynolds, 1995).

2.3 Review DV - Marital satisfaction

Some marital research had investigated the veracity of the old adage, birds of a
feather flock together with the aim of understanding whether personality similarities of
spouses are correlated with and perhaps predictive of, marital stability and satisfaction. In an
early longitudinal study on the topic, Kelly and Conley (1987) explored the psychological
antecedents of marital stability (staying married or getting divorced) in 300 couples, who
were recruited between 1935 and 1938 for a study of marital compatibility. (Kelly & Conley,
1987).
2.4 Relationship between personal factors and marital satisfaction
2.4.1 Age and marital satisfaction
According to the previous study, Age at time of marriage was chosen because of its
prevalence in marital satisfaction literature, and also because it has been described as the
single best predictor of marital satisfaction (Bumpass & Sweet, 1972). Lee (1977) studied the

11

relationship between marital satisfaction, age at marriage, and marital role performance.
Through use of multivariate analysis, Lee found a positive correlation between age at time of
marriage and marital satisfaction after controlling for the antecedent variables of length of
marriage, education, socioeconomic background, and religious importance. This means that
as the age at marriage increased, marital satisfaction increased as well. This positive
correlation finding was true for both males and females.
Booth and Edwards (1985) expanded on the research done by Bumpass and Sweet
(1972) and Lee (1977) and also found that age at marriage was positively correlated with
marital satisfaction due to inadequate preparation. They found that marital instability is the
highest for those who married early (before age 20). Those who married in their twenties
scored the lowest on marital instability. They found that those who married later than their
twenties scored similarly to those that married earlier, which suggested that marital stability
may have a curvilinear relationship with age.

2.4.2 Education and marital satisfaction

Marital satisfaction is a complex process that has overtime been thought to be
influenced by many factors, including education, socio-economic status, love, commitment,
marital communication, conflict, gender, length of marriage, the presence of children, sexual
relations and the division of labour (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1992:194). There is a positive
relationship between marital satisfaction and the partners levels of education of the full
sample, men and women, even though this is not sign cant for women. This is in line with the
previous evidence in the literature of marital satisfaction (some examples are Stanley et al.,
2006, Hahlweg and Markman, 1988, Halford et al., 2003, Sayers et al., 1998, Silliman et al.,
2001). These results on marital satisfaction are consistent with the findings of the theoretical
model, and thus they may explain why some individuals attend university even though they
are going to obtain a negative job satisfaction.

2.4.3 Income and marital satisfaction

The connection between marital success and economic prosperity or hardship has
been a subject of study for centuries. At an early point in this research Terman (1938) wrote "
it is well known that more divorce occur in the higher classes." In the fifties and sixties

12

empirical studies involving thousands of respondents brought out different finding including
both positive and negative relationship between marital satisfaction and income.
Coombs and Zumeta (1970) argue that it was the attitude of wives towards their
income situation that is relevant. On the other hand Mott and Moor (1977) reported little or
no association between the husbandss earning and marital stability. But while the effects of
income were small, they observed mean earning to be higher among stable couples.
2.4.4 Family characteristic (children) and marital satisfaction
White and Booth (1985) made a study of the impact of the birth of a child on marital
quality and found that the structural change such as birth of a child, different nurturance
patterns at various stages of child development may have very little effect on marital quality.
Lavee et al., (1996) tested the hypothesis that the quality of marital relationships is
related to spouses' distress with their parental role and that the stress related to the parental
role will be influenced by other roles and by the number of children at home and their age
composition. Results revealed that although parenting stress of both parents were affected by
the number of children and economic distress, the wife's employment and the household
division of labour had no effect on levels of stress. Such stress was found to have a negative
effect on the psychological well-being and perceived marital quality of both husbands and
wives. A significant association between husbands' and wives' parenting stress and a mutual
effect of their perceived marital quality on each other were noted.
2.5

Husbands personality and marital satisfaction

A recurrent finding to emerge from personality and marriage research has been that
neuroticism appears particularly problematic to relationship satisfaction and marital stability
(Barelds, 2005; Belsky & Hsieh, 1998; Karney & Bradbury, 1995; Kelly & Conley, 1987;
Kurdek, 1993; Schmitt, Kliegel, & Shapiro, 2007). A negative association between
neuroticism and marital satisfaction has emerged in both cross sectional and longitudinal
research (Bouchard, Lussier, & Sabourin, 1999; Caughlin, Huston, & Houts, 2000; Kelly&
Conley, 1987). This trait is linked to negative affect (Ormel& Wohlfarth, 1991),

13

susceptibility to negative mood inductions (Gross, Sutton, & Ketelaar, 1998), passive coping
(Watson & Hubbard, 1996), and preferences for negative stimuli (Rusting & Larsen, 1995).
Some studies have linked husbands extraversion to low marital satisfaction (Lester,
Haig, & Monello, 1989). Other studies suggest positive links between extraversion and
marital satisfaction (Barelds, 2005; Belsky & Hsieh, 1998), and that extraversion is
especially important for womens account of marriage (Chen et al., 2007).
Openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness are generally, but
inconsistently, associated with marital satisfaction. Several studies have linked self-reported
openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness to marital outcomes (Botwin, Buss, &
Shackelford, 1997; Bouchard et al., 1999). Watson and Humrichouse (2006) found that
decreases in spouse ratings of openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness were
associated with decreases in marital satisfaction over the first two years of marriage.

2.6

Summary
Marital satisfaction is examined in psychological research in order to better
understand the reasons for marital discord and variables that can lead to divorce. Age is used
as a variable in this study because it has been hypothesized to be the single best predictor of
future marital satisfaction (Bumpass & Sweet, 1972).
Education level has also been found to be related to marital satisfaction, and is used in
this study because past research has been done related to perceived marital satisfaction based
on similarities in education (Tucker & OGrady, 2001). However, the researchers did not
expand on their findings using actual married participants. Therefore, this research is focused
on whether education level in general, and differences in education level specifically, is
correlated with marital satisfaction.
However, income was included as a variable because income is the one factors will
influence marital satisfaction. Lastly, family characteristic (e.g children) was involved as a
variable because children are a nearest factor that can influence marital satisfaction of their
parent. The current study redresses these limitations with the aid of a suitable sample size,
standardized measures and statistical methods that adjust for shared variance within dyads to
enable simultaneous estimation of phenomena reported by men and women (between-dyad
analyses) and husbands and wives (within-dyad analyses).

14

Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1

Introduction
The study is design to determine the relationship between husbands personality
and marital satisfaction among Islamic Family in Hulu Langat, Selangor. This chapter
discusses the methodology that is used in this study. This methodology plays an
important role in implementing this research study accordingly. The first section
describes on research design, follows by study location, population and sample selection
and instrumentation. Next section are discusses on data collection that are included
method, procedures, and medium of data collection. Last section is discusses on data
analysis.

3.2

Research Designs
Research Design is the backbone of the entire research process. Research Design
is important and requires evaluation independently of research results. Since the research
problem was well defined and all the variables related to this study are well established.
The current study fits well as a descriptive and correlational design. Specifically,
correlational design is often used to identify the variables that will be tested in an
experiment. Correlational design also can examine existing data or obtain new data
information in order to determine the relationships between husbands personality and
marital satisfaction among Islamic Family in Hulu Langat, Selangor. Additionally, the
study is correlational in nature where it facilities the determination of the relationships
between personal factors and husbands personality with marital satisfaction of the
respondents. Via the correlational design, the direction and the strength of the association
between the variables could be identified.

3.3

Study Location
The study will be conducted at Hulu Langat, Selangor. There are seven districts in
Hulu Langat which included Ampang, Beranang, Cheras, Kajang, Semenyih, Ulu Langat
and Ulu Semenyih. In this study, we are focused on District of Semenyih only to
distribute allthe questionnaires that will fill up by the respondents. In Semenyih, there are

15

eleven villages that already exist but we are only chosing six villages by using simple
random sampling to choose the respondents.
3.4

Population and Sample Size

The research population in this study comprised all the husband who have been
married in Hulu Langat, Selangor. The sampling frame for this research will be obtain
from a random sample on Islamic Husbands in Hulu Langat. Next, the respondents will
be choosing on Islamic Husbands in Semenyih Territory. In addition, the respondents
will select using the Cluster Sampling (Multi-Stage Sampling) technique. This technique
will enable sample selection to be proportionate to the population of the Selangor State
and its localities.
There are seven districts in Hulu Langat which included Ampang, Beranang,
Cheras, Kajang, Semenyih, Ulu Langat and Ulu Semenyih. In this study, we are focused
on District of Semenyih only to distribute all the questionnaires that will fill up by the
respondents. In Semenyih, there are eleven villages that already exist but we are only
chosing six villages by using simple random sampling to choose the respondents.

16

Stage 1

Ampang

Hulu Langat

Beranang

Cheras

Kajang

Stage 2

Semenyih

Semenyih

Ulu Semenyih

Ulu Langat

Ulu Semenyih

Stage 3

Use Simple Random

Village 1

Village 3

Village 2

Village 5

Village 4

Village 7

Village 6

Village 9

Village 8

Stage 4

Village 11

Village 10

Use Simple Random

Village 1

Village 3

(Multi- Stage Sampling)

Village 5

Village 7

Village 9

Village 11

Respondents

Sample size will be determined to make a rough estimate of how many

respondents are required to answer the research question on this study which is the
relationship between Husbands Personality and marital satisfaction among Islamic
Family in Hulu Langat, Selangor. Therefore, for the sample size, the total population of
Malay Group in Semenyih is N= 42 070. So, researcher will do calculation to choose
sample size which is n = 396 respondents.

17

Note: N= 42 070 (Total population Malay Group in Semenyih, Hulu Langat, Jabatan
Perangkaan Selangor, 2012)
3.5

Instrumentation
3.5.1

IV- Husband Personality

Husbands Personality will be measured by NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-

FFI). The NEO-FFI is a 60 item self-report measure of personality traits. The NEO-FFI is
a widely used index of Big Five personality traits (neuroticism, extraversion, openness to
experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness). Besides, there is none reliability that
stated in this instrument. 12 domain items will be answered on a 5 point scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) with higher scores indicating greater
levels of each personality traits (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Marital satisfaction is measured
by Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale (CMSS). Example of sample items in
NEO-FFI is I am not a worrier, I have a very active imagination, and I keep my
belongings clean and neat.
3.5.2

DV- Marital Satisfaction

The Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale (CMSS) is a 35-item self-report

measure of marital satisfaction. Besides, the realibility test for this instrument is 0.94 and
0.93 (E, Rosowsky et all, 2012). Items will be answered on a 9-point scale from - 4 (very
strong disagreement) until +4 (very strong agreement). A total scale score is computed by
subtracting the algebraic sum of 17 negatively worded items from the algebraic sum of
the 18 positively worded items with higher scores indicating higher marital satisfaction.

18

Example of sample items in CMSS is for the positively worded items My spouse is very
loving and affectionate, My spouse and I have similar ambitions and goal and My
spouse and I kiss daily. For the negatively worded items is I regret marrying my
spouse, My spouse and I have marital difficulties and My spouse and I do not
communicate well with each other.
This scale is nearly balanced for response bias and contains 18 positively worded
and 17 negatively worded items. Plus (+) or minus (-) signs preceding each item indicate
item scoring directions. Although use of the scale in its entirely is strongly recommended,
item 3, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 23, 24, 26, 33, 34, and 35 can constitute a shortened 14
item version with 7 positively and 7 negatively worded items that are most representative
of the entire scale. Scale title, scoring directions (+ and -) and this footnote should be
deleted when researcher administering the scale in the questionnaires.
3.6

Data Collection
3.6.1

Method
The respondents in this study were 396 husbands. They are received SelfAdministered Questionnaires because our method is Self- Administered
Questionnaires in order to collect information about husband and their marital
satisfation in marriage institution.

3.6.2

Procedures
The first procedure is researcher will obtain a letter of permissions from Head of
Hulu Langat to conduct this study in order to determine the relationships between
husbands personality and marital satisfaction among Islamic Family in Hulu
Langat, Selangor. Next, researcher will get approval from Faculty of Human
Ecology and UPM Ethics Committee. Usually, UPM Ethics Committee will
provide researcher with guidance, including a copy of a sample consent form or
guidelines for questionnaires. The fourth procedure is researcher will run pilot
study. The purpose researcher to run the pilot study is to make sure those
questionnaires is understandable and acceptable to respon by respondents. Next,

19

researcher will do revision of questionnaires. The last procedure is researcher will

get approval from Head of Hulu Langat and after incorporating feedback from the
pilot study, the questionnaire is ready to be distribute to the respondents in Hulu
Langat for actual study.

Permissions from Head of Hulu Langat

Approval from Faculty of Human Ecology

Approval from UPM Ethics Committee

Pilot Study

Revision of Questionnaires

Approval from Head of Hulu Langat

Actual Study
Figure 1: Procedure Process

3.6.3

Medium of Data Collection

The survey method was utilized in this study in order to collect sufficeint data.
Self- Administered Questionnaires were given to the husband in Hulu Langat.
There are three section divisions for Self-Administered Questionnaire which is
Section A, B and C. Section A is Husbands Profile which included personal

20

factors (age, education and income) and family characteristic (family structure).
For Section B is Husbands Personality that involved in NEO-Five Factor
Inventory (NEO-FFI). The NEO-FFI is a 60 item self-report measure of
personality traits. 12 domain items will be answered on a 5 point scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) with higher scores indicating
greater levels of each personality traits (Costa & McCrae, 1992). On other hand,
Section C is for marital satisfaction that measured by Comprehensive Marital
Satisfaction Scale (CMSS).

The Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale

(CMSS) is a 35-item self-report measure of marital satisfaction. Items will be

answered on a 9-point scale from - 4 (very strong disagreement) until +4 (very
strong agreement). A total score is computed by subtracting the sum of items,
with higher scores indicating higher marital satisfaction. All questionnaires were
collected on the next day.
Table 1.1 Medium of Data Collection

3.7

Section

Description

Husbands Profile

Husbands Personality

Marital Satisfaction

Data Analysis
Data Analysis is important in every research to get a meaningful result. Data
Analysis will be used for recoding, storing, and reducing data, assessing data quality and
statistical analysis. There are four steps in data analysis which included editing data,
coding data, developing a frame of analysis and analyzing data. Data from questionnaires
will be compiled, sorted, edited, classified and coded into a coding sheet and analyze
using a Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). The relationship between all
variables will be computed and presented systematically.

21

In this study, data will analyze using descriptive analysis and Pearson correlation
analysis. Descriptive Analysis will be used to describe the shape, central tendency, and
variables one at a time in this study. Therefore, researcher will be looking at variables
one at a time which include mean, median, range and proportion. In order to get proper
data, researcher will run on descriptive analysis from objective one until three only.
The Pearson correlation will require using of a correlation coefficient to
statistically analyze measured data. To compute a Pearson correlation coefficient using
SPSS, researcher will test hypothesis that comes from objective four until twelve.

22

4.0

Appendices
Instrumentation
1. IV(Husbands Personality)
Name of the

NEO-FIVE Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI)

instrument
Author/Year

(Keyamehr, 2002 in Karimzadeh,2007)

Reference

Karimzadeh, A.(2007).Investigation of relations, personality

factors and coping style. Unpublished dissertation Tehran
University, Tehran.

Purpose

To measure of personality types

Reliability

None

Total items

12 items

Scoring

Splitting the seaks at the median and combining high and low
scores. The unequal frequencies at the types are due to the
negative correlation between N and E and to the high frequency of
participants with scores just at the median.

Sample items

1. I am not a worrier
2. I have a very active imagination
3. I keep my belongings clean and neat

Remarks

Five-point answer format strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree

(5)

23

2. DV (Marital Satisfaction)
Name of the

Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale (CMSS)

instrument
Author/Year

(Blum & Mehrabian, 1999)

Reference

Blum, J.S., & Mehrabian, A.(1999).Personality and temperament

correlates of marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 67, 93125.

Purpose

To measure of Marital Satisfaction

Reliability

0.94 and 0.93 (E,Rosowsky et al,2012)

Total items

35-item (17 negative items)

Scoring

A total score is computed by subtracting the sum of 17 negatively

worded items from the sum of the 18 positively worded items.

Sample items

a. Positively worded items

1. My spouse is very loving and affectionate
2. My spouse and I have similar ambitions and goal
3. My spouse and I kiss daily
b. Negatively worded items
1. I regret marrying my spouse
2. My spouse and I have marital difficulties
3. My spouse and I do not communicate well with each
other

Remarks

Nine-point scale from -4 (very strong disagreement) to +4(very

strong agreement). A higher scores indicating higher marital
satisfaction.

24

5.0

References
Alder, Emily S. (2010). Age, Education Level, and Length of Courtship in Relation to
Marital Satisfaction (Master's thesis, Pacific University). Retrieved from:
http://commons.pacificu.edu/spp/145
Barelds, D. P. H. (2005). Self and partner personality in intimate relationships. European
Journal of Personality, 19, 501-518.
Bair, D. (2007). Calling it quits: Late life divorce and starting over. New York: Random
House.
Belsky, J., & Hsieh, K. H. (1998). Patterns of marital change during the early childhood
years: Parent personality, coparenting, and division-of-labor correlates. Journal of
Family Psychology, 12, 511-528.
Bee, H.L, & Bjorklund, B.R. (2007). The Journey of Adulthood. Pearson Education.
Blum, J. S., & Mehrabian, A. (1999). Personality and temperament correlates of marital
satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 67, 93125.
Botwin, M. D., Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Personality and mate
preferences: Five factors in mate selection and marital satisfaction. Journal of
Personality, 65, 107-136.
Bouchard, G., Lussier, Y., & Sabourin, S. (1999). Personality and marital adjustment:
Utility of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61,
651-660.
Bumpass, L. L. & Sweet, J. A. (1972). Differentials in marital instability: 1970. American
Sociological Review, 37(12), 754-766.
Chen, Z., Tanaka, N., Uji, M., Hiramura, H., Shikai, N., Fujihara, S. et al. (2007). The
role of personalities in the marital adjustment of Japanese couples. Social Behavior
and Personality, 35, 561-572.
Claxton, A., ORourke, N., Z. Smith, J., & DeLongis, A. (2011). Personality traits and
marital satisfaction within enduring relationship: An intra-couple discrepancy
approach. Journal of Social and Personal Relationship, 29(3), 375-396

25

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEOFFIR) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Gottman, J. M., & Notarius, C. I. (2002). Marital research in the 20th century and a
research agenda for the 21st century. Family Process, 41, 159-197.
Gross, J. J., Sutton, S. K., & Ketelaar, T. (1998). Relations between affect and
personality: Support for the affect-level and affective reactivity views. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 279-288.
Hagerstrom, Glenn E., (2010). Personal Factors, Perceptions, Influences and Their
Relationship with Adherence Behaviors in Patients with Diabetes. Nursing
Dissertations. Scholar Works @ Georgia State University.
Jose, O. & Alfons, V. (2007). Do demographics affect marital satisfaction? Journal of
Sex & Marital Therapy, 33, 73-85. doi: 10.1080/00926230600998573
Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and
stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118,
3-34.
Kelly, E. L., & Conley, J. J. (1987). Personality and compatibility: A prospective analysis
of marital stability and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 52, 27-40.
Lester, D., Haig, C., & Monello, R. (1989). Spouses personality and marital satisfaction.
Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 253-254.
McCrae, R., & Costa, P. T. (1991). The full five- factor model and well-being.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 227-232.
Mehrabian, A. (2005). Manual for the Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale
(CMSS). Monterey, CA: Author.

26

Moeliyono, Anton.M, dkk. (1990).Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia.Jakarta: Balai Pustaka

(Tim penyusun Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia Departemen Pendidikan dan
Kebudayaan.
Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. W. (1996). The benefits of positive illusions:
Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 79-98.
Najarpourian, S., Fatehizadeh, M., Etemadi, O., Ghasemi, V., Abedi, M.R.,& Bahrami, F.
(2012). Personality type and marital satisfaction. Interdiciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 4(5), 372-383
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, 480-497.
ORourke, N., & Cappeliez, P. (2005). Marital satisfaction and self-deception:
Reconstruction of relationship histories among older adults. Social Behavior and
Personality, 33, 273-282.
Ormel, J., & Wohlfarth, T. (1991). How neuroticism, long-term difficulties, and life
situation change influence psychological distress: A longitudinal model. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 744-755.
Paulhus, D. L., & Reynolds, S. (1995). Enhancing target variance in personality
impressions: Highlighting the person in person perception. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 69, 1233-1242.
Rosowsky, E., King, K.D., Coolidge, F.L., Rhoades, C.S. & Segal, D.L. (2012). Marital
satisfaction and personality traits in long-term marriage: An exploratory study.
Clinical Gerontologist, 35, 77-87
Rusting, C. L., & Larsen, R. J. (1995). Moods as sources of stimulation: Relationships
between personality and desired mood states. Personality and Individual
Differences, 18, 321-329.

27

Sousou, S. D. (2004). The role of agreeableness and neuroticism in marital satisfaction:

Actor and partner contribution. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University
of New York At Albany.
Steinmetz, S.K, Clavan, S. & Stein, K.F. (1990). Marriage and Family Realities
Historical and Contemporary Perspectives. New York: Harper & Row.
Stevens, D., Kiger, G. & Riley, P.J. (2001). Working Hard and Hardly Working:
Domestic Labor and marital Satisfaction among Dual-Earner Couples. Joumal
ofMarriage & the Family, 63(2), 514-526.
Swann, W. B., de la Ronde, C., & Hixon, J. G. (1994). Authenticity and positive strivings
in marriage and courtship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 857869
Terman, L. M., Buttenwieser, P., Ferguson, L. W., Johnson, W. B., & Wilson, D. P.
(1938). Psychological factors in marital happiness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Watson, D., & Humrichouse, J. (2006). Personality development in emerging adulthood:
Integrating evidence from self-ratings and spouse ratings. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 91, 959-974
White, J. K., Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (2004). Big five personality variables and
relationship constructs. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(7), 1519-1530.

28