38. Maenpaa, Age. & Jalovaara Evlilik için İspanyolca kızlar, Yards. (2013). The consequences regarding homogamy when you look at the socio-economic records and training toward changeover off cohabitation to relationships. Acta Sociologica , 56 (3), 247-263.

39. Oprisan, Elizabeth., & Cristea, D. (2012). A number of parameters away from dictate throughout the concept of marital fulfillment. Procedia – Societal and Behavioural Sciences , , 33 , 468-472.

A great longitudinal research from worry spillover in-marriage: Really does spousal service adequacy buffer the consequences?

40. Rammstedt, B., & Schupp, J. (2008). Only the congruent endure – Identification parallels into the lovers. Identification and you may Personal Variations , forty-five (6), 533-535.

We expect you’ll select variations­ one of analyzed nations, because they features diffe­ lease sociocultural condition, and additionally differences found in the private conditions that can get impact on the newest balance in the relationship

43. Ruppanner, L., Bernhardt, E., & Branden, Meters. (2017). Section out of housework and his along with her view of cleaning fairness: An excellent typology from Swedish partners. Market Search , thirty-six , 501-524.

44. Russell, R. J. H., & Wells, P. (1993). Relationship additionally the Relashionship Questionnaire: MARQ Guide . Sevenoaks: Hodder and you may Stoughton.

45. Russell, R. J. H. & Wells, P. (1991). Personality similarity and quality of wedding. Character and Individual Distinctions , 12 (5), 407-412.

47. Russell, Roentgen.J.H. & Wells, P.A good. (1994b). Predictors out-of joy when you look at the maried people. Identity and Personal Variations , 17 (3), 313-321.

fifty. Shafer, K. (2013a). Disentangling the partnership anywhere between ages and you may relationship history in the many years-assortative mating. ily Feedback , 49 (1), 83-114. (suite…)