02–.05) and in study 2 greater sexual desire (ηp² =. In both studies, the participants were randomly assigned to either a control “no information” condition or an experimental “psychoeducation intervention” condition where they viewed a 3.5-min video on the benefits of sexual mindfulness.Īcross both studies, those in the experimental intervention reported significantly greater sexual satisfaction (ηp² =. Participants in study 1 (N = 179) and study 2 (N = 239) completed sexual well-being and sexual mindfulness measures at three time points over a 2-week period. We tested whether a 3.5-min online psychoeducational intervention about the benefits of sexual mindfulness and five strategies to have more mindful sex could bolster sexual well-being in two community samples. It remains unclear if psychoeducation about the benefits of sexual mindfulness for sexuality would also be effective, and if such an intervention would benefit nonclinical samples. Traditional interventions that include both psychoeducation and mindfulness training are effective for improving sexual dysfunction. Implications for research are discussed.Ĭognitive distractions during sex are among the most common mechanisms underlying problems with sexual well-being (e.g., sexual dissatisfaction, low sexual desire). The CSI scales demonstrated strong convergent validity with other measures of satisfaction and excellent construct validity with anchor scales from the nomological net surrounding satisfaction, suggesting that they assess the same theoretical construct as do prior scales. Compared with the MAS and the DAS, the CSI scales were shown to have higher precision of measurement (less noise) and correspondingly greater power for detecting differences in levels of satisfaction.

Principal-components analysis and item response theory applied to the larger item pool were used to develop the Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI) scales. Using item response theory, the authors demonstrated that the MAT and DAS provided relatively poor levels of precision in assessing satisfaction, particularly given the length of those scales.

Spanier, 1976), and an additional 75 potential satisfaction items, were given to 5,315 online participants. Wallace, 1959), the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS G. Eight well-validated self-report measures of relationship satisfaction, including the Marital Adjustment Test (MAT H. The present study took a critical look at a central construct in couples research: relationship satisfaction.

Measurement ruler