3. Results
The mean ratings of individual virtues and values are presented in
Table 2 below. The results revealed the following virtues to be of highest personal importance to our respondents: reliability, loyalty, honesty, fairness, perseverance, truthfulness, and tolerance. Competitiveness was ranked last. As for values, respondents placed the following in the upper half of their value hierarchy: health, love, family safety, self-respect, inner harmony, friendship, and peace. The lowest ratings were assigned to comfort, excitement, power, beauty, and social status.
Next, we measured the frequency of different types of disagreements that occurred between partners in the past 12 months. Factor analysis showed that these variables loaded onto a single factor which we labelled partner disagreement (see
Table 3 below). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was 0.9 and a statistically significant Bartlett’s test showed that the data were suitable for factor analysis. The variable “Bad habit (alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, gambling)” was removed due to low factor loading. The partner disagreement factor explained 40.8% of the variance. We used the regression method for factor extraction.
We then used a factor analysis to examine the dimensionality of the group of questions relating to forms of conflict between partners (
Table 4). The items were suitable for factorisation (KMO test of 0.67 and a statistically significant Bartlett’s test). The variable “constructive dispute (as a form of partnership disagreement)” had a low factor loading and was thus removed from the analysis and used as a separate variable termed constructive dispute. The remaining items relating to psychological violence, aggressive incidents, and physical violence were subjected to factor analysis and the single extracted factor accounted for 52.4% of the variance. We used the regression method for factor extraction and labelled the factor partner aggression.
Finally, we measured relationship satisfaction. Most of the respondents reported being satisfied with their relationship with a mean rating of 4.7 (SD = 1.1) on a 6-point scale. A small percentage of participants (15.0%) were less satisfied, dissatisfied, or totally dissatisfied with their partner relationship.
Using a principal component analysis of items 2–25 of the CSI (excluding the first general item and the final seven items anchored with adjectives), we extracted two principal components which jointly explained 67.0% of the variance (see
Table 5 below). The first component, labelled quality, explained most of the variance (61.3%) while the second component, labelled stability, explained an additional 5.7% of the variance. The items that were loaded on stability were: not being able to imagine the relationship ending and not being able to imagine someone else making you as happy as your chosen partner does.
Hypothesis Testing
As previously stated, we hypothesised that love would receive a high rating in the hierarchy of values in an intimate relationship. The results obtained showed that love ranked second in the value hierarchy. In addition, love was strongly associated with other values, including self-respect (r = 0.56, p < 0.001), internal harmony (r = 0.49, p < 0.001), health (r = 0.47, p < 0.001), and family safety (r = 0.45, p < 0.001). Based on these findings, hypothesis H1 was empirically supported.
Our second hypothesis posited that love would have a positive correlation with the stability of a relationship. Using a multiple linear regression analysis, we examined the effect of virtues and values on relationship stability. Only excitement (β = 0.121, p = 0.030, r2 = 0.01) had a statistically significant effect on relationship stability, a construct previously created using a principal component analysis. Excitement, however, accounted for only 1% of the variance in relationship stability. H2 was therefore rejected.
Finally, we tested the third hypothesis which stated that love would have a positive association with relationship quality. Using a multiple linear regression analysis (
Table 6), we found that love, family safety, comfort, and self-respect had a statistically significant effect on the relationship quality construct which was previously created using a principal component analysis. Out of all the values, love had the strongest positive association with relationship quality, while self-respect was negatively associated with quality. The overall model was statistically significant but with these four explanatory variables, we could explain only 17% of the variance. Based on these results, H3 was empirically supported.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
The central aim of this study was to shed light on the link between values and virtues on the one hand, and relationship quality and stability on the other, in a previously understudied but geographically and numerically large cultural environment of Central and Eastern European societies contending with sweeping social, political and economic changes stemming from rapid liberalisation following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The sudden emergence of free markets, the elimination of price controls, the flood of Western consumer goods, and an overnight stark increase in personal and political freedoms, including being confronted with seemingly endless choices and possibilities, was a transitional “shock therapy” for the populations of these countries that has led to significant changes in their values and behaviour. This is likely reflected also in the sphere of relationships and marriage.
In a large sample of currently married individuals or those living in a committed romantic relationship, several key findings emerged. The values of love, family safety, and comfort were positively associated with relationship quality while self-respect, an individualistic value, was negatively associated. These values explained a modest 17% of the variance in relationship quality. Only excitement had a significant positive association with relationship stability but the effect size was negligible. Love, therefore, played a significant role in an individual’s subjective perception of relationship quality but was not associated with subjective estimates of relationship stability. It is noteworthy that a non-overlapping set of values correlated with the two relationship outcomes (quality and stability), outcomes that otherwise appear closely related. This may indicate that different ethical considerations come into play in an individual’s evaluations of the various facets of their romantic relationship. The dual conceptualisation of love (attraction and virtue) by
Jeffries (
2002) helps explain why we found a differential pattern of associations for love and excitement: the latter contains elements of pleasure and sexual attraction, and it cannot be said to be the same thing as love. In a related development, a previous study found that an experimental increase in relationship excitement by means of a therapeutic intervention led to significantly higher levels of relationship satisfaction (
Coulter and Malouff 2013). The study of marital values and virtues is therefore not of purely academic interest but may also have practical applications in marital therapy.
As reviewed in the Introduction, there is a growing body of empirical evidence showing associations between values, virtues, and marital outcomes. Despite this promising line of inquiry, this growing awareness has not yet been adequately reflected in the marital counselling and psychotherapy literature, despite obvious clinical implications. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 117 interventional studies concluded that important marital virtues such as commitment, sacrifice, and forgiveness have rarely been studied as clinical outcomes (
Hawkins et al. 2008). The marital therapy literature has been characterised as having a “hegemonic focus” on communication skills (
Hawkins et al. 2008, p. 730). In a broad conceptual critique of the modern value-neutral practice of family therapy,
Fowers (
2001) notes that current psychoeducational approaches most commonly involve teaching clients communication and conflict resolution skills. Though perfectly in line with the contemporary cultural zeitgeist of proposing “technical solutions to almost any human problem”, if we limit ourselves to technique while neglecting the importance of personal character strengths such as self-restraint, courage, generosity, justice, and good judgment, we run the risk of “los[ing] sight of other essential aspects of marriage” (
Fowers 2001, p. 328). This technocratic view of marriage therapy as a value-neutral endeavour makes it harder for clients “to identify and cultivate underlying character strengths necessary for good communication” (
Fowers 2001, p. 327). Unfortunately, raising these ethical and moral questions has encountered some resistance in the field of marital therapy as being “needless moralizing” (
Fowers 2001, p. 328). The insufficient attention being paid to epistemological questions in contemporary family research is also noted by
Barton and Bishop (
2014) who highlight a general lack of critical examination of underlying assumptions and paradigms embedded in this field and call for studying outcomes beyond individual happiness and self-esteem since these are “cultural ideals of political liberalism and liberal individualism” (p. 254). The strong focus in the marital satisfaction literature on individual happiness and satisfaction has been characterised as “ontological individualism”, described as “a cornerstone of Western cultures that greatly value individual autonomy and emotional well-being (
Fowers et al. 2016, p. 998). These valuable perspectives on the epistemological limitations of the current marital quality literature have informed our approach to studying virtues, values, and marital outcomes.
In terms of characterising the moral foundations of contemporary Slovenian society, it can be concluded that our respondents prioritised communitarian virtues, including loyalty, honesty, and fairness, over and above individualistic virtues such as competitiveness. Competitiveness, a virtue highly prized in Western capitalist societies and undoubtedly essential in the business world and public life in general—but potentially detrimental and strife-promoting in an intimate relationship—was rated conspicuously last. With respect to values, we found that value-ideals such as health, love, family safety, self-respect, inner harmony, friendship, and peace ranked in the top third of the value hierarchy. Meanwhile, at or near the bottom of the pack, we found comfort, excitement, power, beauty, and social status. In short, several eudaemonic values received high endorsements while the more individualistic and hedonistic values obtained the lowest ratings. It should be emphasised that we offered our respondents a much more diverse palette of virtues and values to choose from than typically seen in the marital literature where a narrow range of marital virtues or values was preselected. We believe that our approach permitted individuals to select what truly matters to them and therefore did not constrain their answers with preconceived (often individualistic and liberal) notions.
How do our findings compare to other value surveys in our cultural milieu? In the most recent wave of the World Values
Survey (
2020), Slovenia had higher than average scores on secular-rational and self-expression values, placing it in the Catholic Europe cultural zone. In a recent representative sampling of public opinion in Slovenia (
N = 853),
Hafner-Fink et al. (
2020), using a 10-point Likert scale, measured the importance of six values (ranked here in descending order of mean ratings): family (9.63), leisure time (8.79), work (8.65), friendship (8.48), politics (4.61), and religion (4.45). Though utilising different measures, we found some notable similarities, including the prioritisation of family and friendship. In a recent survey comparing Slovenian (
N = 208) and Austrian (
N = 196) managers, it was found that collectivist values were associated with democratic leadership in both countries, but the effect of collectivism was stronger in Slovenia (
Nedelko and Potočan 2021).
4.1. Strengths and Limitations
Our study has several strengths, including the large sample size, the breadth of measurement of moral concepts, the use of reliable and valid outcome measures, and the anonymous survey design which is important in any research relating to morality and ethics to reduce social desirability bias, especially in a low-trust society such as Slovenia where generations of political repression and surveillance of the citizenry by the state security apparatus still affect the public consciousness which is reflected in typically low survey response rates. No study is without its limitations, however, and the same applies to the research presented here. Our sample was cross-sectional and there was an overrepresentation of women, college educated or higher, and inhabitants of the north-eastern Podravska region (which borders Austria and has a historically Germanic cultural influence). Another limitation is that a large majority of our respondents reported being satisfied with their relationship and/or marriage; therefore, our results mostly relate to what values and virtues are linked to a happy relationship rather than the correlates of a troubled relationship. We also obtained relationship quality ratings from only one member of the couple where it would have been preferable to include both members of the dyad. This was not possible, however, as it would have precluded us from carrying out the survey anonymously.
4.2. Conclusions and Future Directions
In summary, this study presents some novel findings from an understudied area of research: romantic relationships/marriage in post-socialist European societies. These observations are informative from the perspective of decades-long attempts to achieve a closer economic and political convergence between older, established Western EU member-states and the more recent additions from Central and Eastern Europe. Geographically and culturally, Slovenia is situated at the crossroads between the Balkans and Central Europe. The period of transition from socialism to a Western-style democracy has witnessed a rapid establishment of a new social order characterised by greater liberalism, individualism, and growing social and wealth inequality. Despite ostensibly being part of the liberal capitalist order for three decades now, and despite joining the system of formal Western alliances almost a generation ago, virtue and value hierarchies in Slovenia are, according to our findings, still largely collectivist. What this says about the prospects of achieving full convergence between the “old” EU and the “new” states located in the ever-expanding eastern flank of the EU remains to be seen. These nations continue to face considerable challenges in attempting to converge with Western European economic and political systems following almost half a century of poverty, economic mismanagement, government corruption, and a lack of civil society. Future empirical research is warranted as these societies continue to evolve in an uncertain direction.