1. Marriage Success (MRSUC1)

Degree to which an individual is in love with partner. It is based on self-perceived behaviour in relation to the partner, and in comparison with norm data.

2. Marriage Love (LOVE1)

Degree of harmony and personal satisfaction in the marriage relationship. Based on self-perceptions of the ongoing day-by-day behaviour in relation to the family setting.

3. Wife's Role (ROLE1)

Modified version of a test developed by Dr. Janet Spence designed to assess expected role and behaviour of the wife; both in and out of marriage.

4. Divorce Proneness (DVCPR1)

Designed to determine the presence in marriage relationship of either real divorce planning or of behaviour depicting a real divorce threat.

5. Sexual Education (SEXIQ1)

Designed to assess degree of one's knowledge in relation to sexual matters or behaviour. It includes select matters pertaining to psychosexual development.

6. Personal Happiness (HAPPYI)

Degree to which an individual is happy and content with present life. Based on the degree of involvement in future planning, and extent to which such planning is being realized.

7. Locus of Control (PRESED1)

Modified version of a test by Dr. Julian Rotter, and designed to assess one's own personal philosophy of life in relation to success and failure. Whether the subject is internally or externally directed.

8. Self-Esteem (SEFEST1)

Modified version of a test developed by Dr. Lilburn S. Barksdale. It is designed to assess one's perceived degree of personal importance in relation to persons both within and outside the extended family.

9. Coping Skills (COPIN1)

Modified version of a test developed at Princeton University to assess 'coping skills'. This test seeks to determine the perceived presence of skills to deal with usual family problems and include work, play, religion and other areas of life space.

10. Need for Therapy (TIIRPY1)

Used to assess the degree of malfunctioning in an individual in relation to life functioning, and the degree to which the anxiety and emotional problems are evident in a self perceived interview.

Note: The above test (THRPY1) was administered to determine subjects who were in need of therapy to such a degree as to preclude them from the statistical analysis. In such cases, subjects were not informed that their results would be discounted from the research.

All women participating in the study were:

(a) between the ages of 21 - 40 years.
(b) married for five years or more.
(c) mothers of at least two children.
(d) able to sign a release for research publication.
(e) agreed to arrange a follow-up consultation to explain results.

The idea of gaining free psychological assessment and interviewing within this research project was an attractive incentive in gaining subjects for the study. Following an announcement given during a radio interview through the ABC, our Australian National Radio Station, many enquiries followed. Word of mouth attracted more subjects after women had used the computer and spoken with their friends about their results.

On some occasions husbands accompanied their wives so they were also offered free assessment, although this was not a construct of the experimental design. It simply gave more incentive in data collection to achieve the sample (n=35) as reported successfully married women. All women reported to be happily married.

SELECTION OF WOMEN FROM DIVORCED OR SEPARATED
MARRIAGES

This was achieved by the advertisement to participate in research, offered by twenty branches of the South Australian organization of Parents without Partners. Again, the idea of free psychological assessment and interviewing attracted a wide range of subjects deriving a sample of (n=35).

TELEPHONE ENQUIRIES OF SUBJECTS WISHING TO ENTER THE RESEARCH PROGRAM

All enquiries were offered a standard proforma which was closely followed, giving subjects a comprehensive understanding of what the project involved. This entailed the following information.

(a) What the research involved.
(b) How psychological assessments would be taken.
(c) That results would be provided at the appointment immediately following assessment.
(d) That baby-sitting facilities would be provided.
(e) Information obtained would be kept strictly confidential.
(f) That results of the research would be available after publication.

TEST ADMINISTRATION

Women were gradually introduced to the application for the computer and taught how to operate it. They were offered tea/coffee and made to feel comfortable, without unnecessary distraction. A standard proforma of written instructions was covered with each subject and clinicians remained with them until it was obviously understood. Three trainee psychologists (interns) and the supervising psychologist followed a standard procedure. (See questionnaire/Appendix B).

DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE

In addition to the computerized assessments a short written questionnaire was administered. This covered such information as Nationality, Number of children, Number of years in the relationship, Religious affiliation, Time spent together with partner or alone - each week, Positive and negative feedback from partner, Financial commitments, Hobbies and pastimes spent together, Sports played together or separately, State of health of subject and partner, Hours spent watching television alone and together, How often did partner/ self go out to dinner alone and together, Drinking habits self/partner, Occupation, Hours spent at work each week, Number of years of schooling and highest qualification gained, State/independent schooling. (See appendix B for questionnaire items).

The questionnaire was printed on the same sheet as the profile to avoid dislocating sets of data used in further analysis; departing from this study when perhaps considering questions such as new housing and transport in suburban Adelaide, where a north south sprawl makes travelling difficult if reliant on public transport.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The attached table (Appendix A) reveals significant divergences between means and standard deviations for both groups on all tests with the exception of SEFEST1. In the remainder of indexes, a level of significance value for P;= > 0.005 was maintained.

2. It was found that CMAP was a suitable battery for the investigation of critical aspects of a marriage relationship. This was also confirmed by the responses of all women participating in the study.

3. Normative data acquired from corresponding women in the United States of America was suitable for corresponding women in Australia.

4. As a diagnostic instrument the CMAP has vital importance if modified for application in the area of marriage preparation. Scores obtained could thus be compared to those of this study. Further research would bear out this conclusion.

5. The CMAP discerns between purportedly happily married women to a statistically significant degree, except for the index taken for Self-Esteem.

6. The non-significance values on SEFEST for Australian divorced or separated and married women differs from American women. Statistics in South Australia reveal that one in three families are single parent families. Further, the New Family Law Act (1975) does not necessitate proving grounds for divorce and thus there is no stigma attached.

7. Results from this study confirm further investigation into the demographic variables obtained through the questionnaire using Pearson r and a biserial r for variable dichotomy.

8. Multiple correlation and regression can be performed on all variables together with Fisher's Descriminant Statistical Techniques between experimental and control groups for all variables.

9. It will be seen from the demographic questionnaire that all variables can be correlated with individual tests of the CMAP using multiple regression. The results of this further analysis will be published at the 40th Annual Convention of the ICP to be held at Southampton - England, 1982.

10. All women participating in the study reported answering questions in the various tests was facilitated by the computer. They explained that it was less personal in dealing with a machine and that it was easier to give their initial first responses to items which might otherwise have proven embarrassing when face to face with the clinician in interviewing. This was consistent with the findings of the literature review. Each subject agreed that computerized assessment was less threatening than encountering face to face interviewing.

11. All women participating in the study explained that the cost of computerized assessment was not unreasonable for the three hours of psychological assessment with results being offered at the end of the session. Eighty percent of the women however enquired of the possibility of Medical rebate, which is not offered at the present time here in Australia.

It was found that the CMAP was a suitable battery for the investigation. This was also confirmed by Normative data acquired from corresponding women in the United States.

Bibliography

Angle H., Elingwood E., Haw W., and Johnson T. "Computerized Interviewing in Comprehensive Assessment". Behavior Therapy 1977, 8 754.

Bayroff A., Ross R., Fischel M., "Development of a Programmed Testing". (Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology) 1975 5 270-271.

Bayroff A., Ross. R., Fischel M. "Development of a Programmed Testing", U.S.A. Army Research Institute for the Behavioural Sciences, TP259., 1974.

Beaumont J., "The validity of Category Tests Administered on On-Line Computer". Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1975, 31, 458-462.

Betz. N. "The Effects of Immediate Knowledge of Results on Computer Administered Test Generability", Dissertation Abs International, 1976, 37, b-B. 3127.

Biskin B., Kolotkin R., "Effects of Computerized Administration of Scores on the MMPI", Applied Psychological Measurement, 1977, 1, 543-549.

Brooks R., and Kleinmuntz D., "Design of an Intelligent Computer Psychodiagnostician", Behavioural Science, 1974, 1974, 19, 16-20.

Cassel Russell N., "The Psychology of Decision Making", Christopher Publishing House North Quincy Mass", 1973.

Cassel Russell N., "The Computerized Marriage Assessment Profile", Project Innovation - Education", Journals, Western Psych Services. 1968.

Cassell Russell N., "Leadership Abilities Evaluation Inventory", Western Psychological Services, 1979.

Cassell Russell N., "Cassell Group Level of Aspiration Test", Western Psychological Measurement, 1977, 1, 551-564.

Corey, "Using Computerized Tests to Measure New Dimensions of Abilities", Applied Psychological Measurement, 1977, 1, 551-564.

Costello Brian R., "Computerized Psychological Assessment", Australian Computer Society Journal, 1979.

Costello Brian R., "Parent Power", Macmillans (Australia), 1979 ISBN 07251 03493.

Denner S., "Automated Testing: A Preview", Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 1972, 16, 175-179.

Elwood, "Automated Personality Description", American Psychologist, 1964, 19, 544, 1969, 278-289.

Finney J., "Programmed Interpretation of the MMPI and CPI", Archives of General Psychiatry, 1966, 13, 75-81.

Gilbertadt H., Lashene R., "Automated Assessment Intelligence", Perceptual Motore Skills, 1976, 43, 627-635.

Hansen K., "The Advantages of 16 Bit Microprocessors., Behaviour Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1978, 10, 535-538.

Johnson J. and Williams, "The Use of On-Line Computer Technology in Mental Health Admitting Systems", Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 30, 388-90.

Klett J., Pumroy D., :Automated Procedures in Psychological Assessment", Reynolds (Ed), Advance in Psychological Assessment, Vol 2, California Sc. E. 76.

Maultsby M, Slack., "A Computerized Based psychiatry history System", Archives of General Psychiatry, 1971, 25, 570-572.

LarkinK., Weiss D., "An Empirical Investigation of Computer Administration Pyramidability Testing," Minneapolis Minnesota, Dept. Psychology., 1974. Illigan W., "Computer Controlled Oral Test Administration - A Method and Example", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1978, 38, 823-828.

Paitich D., "Computers in Behavioural Sciences", Behavioural Science, 1973, 18, 131-136.

Reich, T. Robins L, Woodruss, A.A. Tableson, M.Rich & Cunningham L., "Computer-assisted Derivation of a Screening Interview., Archives of General Psychiatry, 1975, 37, 847-852.

Rutherford B., Koplay J., "Program Cognito, Computerized Testing". Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1968,28, 177-179.

Appendix (B)
Computerized Marriage Assessment Profile

INSTRUCTIONS
You are being given (10) Psychological Tests which will be rated on the above graph. Answering the questions accurately is essential for accurate results. Remember to keep your partner in mind when answering questions. This is most important. After you have completed each test and the computer says READY, type the word RUN. The computer will then say WHAT IS YOUR DESIRE? Type in the next computer rest name example: MRSUC1. The computer will then say WHAT DISK NUMBER? Type in 0. You should record your score at the top of the column. ASK FOR HELP WHENEVER NEEDED.

Your clinician's name is:
Note* These assessments are copyright together with the above profile and offered through the courtesy of Dr. Russel N. Cassel, Project Innovation, Chula Vista, California.
Date of Assessment:
CLEARED FOR RESEARCH PUBLICATION WITHOUT USING YOUR NAME
(Signature):
(Clinician):

Demographic Questionnaire
Name:
Age:
Divorced, Separated, Married Control
Referred by:
Tel No:
No of Children:
Nationality:
Time since divorced/separated:
No of years in relationship (current):
How many hours spent at work each week:
Hobbies/Pastimes shared together e.g. cards:
How long since you last went out to dinner together:
Sports shared together:
Occupation (self):
Partner:
Number of years schooling: State/Indep School Religion:
Church together Yes/No
Financial commitments: Heavy, Average, Light, None
Receives compliments from partner: Many, few, none
Receives criticisms from partner: Many, Few, None
Partner drinks: excessively, average, mild, non-drinker
Self:
How often does partner go out alone?
1-2, 2-3 nights per week, once/fortnight, once/month
Self:
Together:
With Family:
Do you drive a car: Yes/No
Partner: Yes/No
How many hours watching TV/Week Alone Together
How many hours spent together each week:
How many hours spent alone, with children
State of health (Self): Excellent, good, poor
Partner: excellent, good, poor
Children: excellent, good, poor