Running Head: TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT

The Effects that Texting has on Conflict within Romantic Relationships

Destiny R. Andrade, Alexander W. Parent, Ayse E. Kamber, Katelyn R. DiSaia, Alexa R. Silva

Bryant University

Abstract
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 1

This study examined the relationship between a person’s conflict style, the exclusivity of

their romantic relationship, and how their texting habits are defined in relation to the levels of

conflict that occur in a young adult’s romantic relationship. Participants read through a

quantitative analytical survey that was designed to have them evaluate their texting behaviors

when conflict is occurring in their romantic relationship, which is defined as a relationship

lasting six months or longer. Participants defended their perceptions by answering various

questions that revolved around texting, relationship maintenance, relationship development,

conflict, compromise, and domination. The conflict style “domination” and the use of texting for

“relationship maintenance” showed no significant relationship. Also, the conflict style

“compromise” and “relationship development” showed no significant relationship. This suggests

that texting strategies do not have an influence on the development or the maintenance of a

young adult’s romantic relationship when conflict arises.

Introduction
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 2

Young adult cell phone owners is the demographic that has heavily influenced the

modern day phenomenon of texting becoming more mainstream. According to the Pew Research

Center’s Internet & American Life Project, its 18-24 year old cell phone owners had an average

of 109.5 messages a day (Smith, 2011). Text messaging between young adults, at this frequency,

has become a necessary aspect to more individual’s lives and can have a heavy impact on the

ultimate satisfaction within their romantic relationships. Texting ultimately affects the

development and maintenance of relationships due to the fact that it can hinder the quality or aid

in evolving an individual’s interpersonal relationships. The purpose of pursuing research within

this area of communication is to understand the large prevalence that texting increasingly has on

the lives of impressionable young adults, especially when texting is used for certain areas of

relationship management. Our study focuses specifically on the effects that texting behaviors

have on the levels of conflict within romantic relationships between young adults.

Literature Review

As technology continues to grow more prevalent in our world today, the need for it is

powerful in how we communicate in interpersonal relationships. Whether people are using social

media, text messaging or emailing to communicate to one another, the usage of our phones and

computers are what help us stay connected from various geographic distances. In a report that

was conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project on smartphone

ownership, a sample of 3,014 adults showed that 66% of those adults who owned phones were in

between the ages of 18-29 (Rainie, 2012). The romantic relationships of these teenagers and

young adults are heavily influenced by the use of mobile devices as a form of communication.

New technology being used by this generation allows individuals to interact through multiple
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 3

communication channels. According to Dimmick, Feaster, & Hoplamazian (2011), with new

communication channels emerging, the dynamic of everyday communication is getting altered.

These changes can be seen among how couples interact on a daily basis through channels such as

texting, phone calls and face-to-face communication. The new channels emerging with the

advanced technology can also affect the communication of romantic couples in terms of

relationship development, relationship maintenance, and conflict styles.

There are five conflict behaviors that exist: integrating, compromising, avoiding,

obliging, and dominating (Pruitt & Rubin, 1986). Integrating and compromising styles are used

when people are concerned about others just as much as they are concerned about themselves.

Avoiding and obliging styles are both used by non-confrontational individuals who are not

concerned with themselves or the other person (Gross & Guerrero, 2000), as well as those who

only want to preserve a relationship. Domination, however, is the most confrontational conflict

style that places emphasis on “defeating the opponent” (Cai & Fink, 2002). According to a study

conducted by Allison & Emmers (2011), both U.S citizens and internationals preferred

integrating and compromising the most and dominance the least when it came to conflicts. Cai &

Fink (2002), however, states that integrating and compromising can be combined, as they are

similar conflict styles.

Compromise in both computer-mediated communication and face-to-face

communication was studied by Meluch & Walter (2012). The study concluded that individuals

are more likely to compromise with others in face-to-face settings and less likely to compromise

with others in computer-mediated settings. Specifically, this occurs because compromising is a

“difficult task to undertake in a computer-mediated communication context due to the heightened

communication that must take place between the individuals.” Additionally, those in face-to-face
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 4

communication settings may feel more pressure “to be involved because of immediacy.” On the

other hand, in computer-mediated communication settings, there is less immediacy and more

time constraints, Therefore, compromise will happen more face-to-face than it will over a

computer. Hample, Richards, & Skubisz (2013) state that people argue to

“assert their dominance over the other person.” This contrasts with the idea of compromise in a

relationship, in which Gross & Guerrero (2000) previously stated as a conflict style in which the

person cares about the other. Someone who cares about another person and their viewpoints

would not try to “assert dominance,” as Hample, Richards, & Skubisz (2013) previously stated.

In addition, this source stated that domination is a behavior that can lead to blurting, which

according to Hample, Richards, & Skubisz (2013) is “saying things spontaneously and without

editing.” People who blurt see interpersonal arguments in a “less cooperative or civil” way and

emphasize dominance. These people also ranked high in aggression, both verbal aggression and

“indirect interpersonal aggression.”

Conflicts due to texting have been seen in long-distance relationships (LDR). A study

conducted by Lee, Bassick, & Mumpower (2016) focused on the relationship satisfaction of

young adults in LDR based on their preferred channel when initiating a conflict. These channels

included texting, email, phone calls, video calls and face-to-face communication. The study

stated that “the more satisfied participants were with their LDR, the less frequently they used

texting to initiate conflicts with their partners, and the longer they were in current LDR, the more

frequently they used texting for conflict initiation.” While conflict styles were not specified in

this study, it is still significant that conflicts can arise from texting.

It is important to also discuss texting behaviors as they pertain to romantic relationships

because these behaviors may influence the conflicts that arise from texting. Jin & Peña (2010)
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 5

claim that maintaining relationships through texting has become an increasingly important factor

within modern young couples because it reduces levels of relational uncertainty. Knobloch &

Solomon (2002) define relational uncertainty as ‘‘the degree of confidence people have in their

perceptions of involvement within interpersonal relationships.’’

Jin & Peña (2010) conducted a study to measure how people use different strategies for

reducing relational uncertainty. It was concluded that the “non-tethered” feature that cell phones

have allows individuals to communicate more openly and interdependently. Being able to

communicate at various degrees from any location reassures satisfaction and inner desires being

met with ease. This is due to the idea that arrangements and concerns can be resolved in real

time, instead of issues needing to wait until partners are face-to-face. In simpler terms, according

to this study, texting made relationship maintenance faster and easier for those in romantic

relationships. The results of this study are consistent with Berger & Calabrese (1975) findings of

uncertainty reduction theory, which states that when there is a greater amount of communication

and an increase in interactions between partners, partner and individual uncertainty is lower. This

is due to the relationship constantly being maintained.

Furthermore, Berger & Calabrese (1975) also claim that the uncertainty reduction

theory points to relationship development as a “major goal” when increasing certainty in a

relationship. In accordance with relationship development, a study conducted by Ruppel (2015)

found that those in more developed relationships used “text-based communication technologies”

for self-disclosure less than those in relationships that are not as developed. Therefore, it can be

concluded that texting is important to develop a relationship in its starting stages, but not as

important to maintain it a relationship that has already been developed.

TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 6

Rationale

There is sufficient research that cell-phone usage affects romantic relationships. Whether

it be text messaging, phone calls, or emails, there is some sort of negative or positive effect. We

know that conflict can ultimately exist within cell-phone usage. It is evident through the research

of Dimmick, Feaster, & Hoplamazian (2011) and Rainie (2012) that texting among the young

adult age group of 18-29 is becoming increasingly common along with the use of new

technology to communicate. Therefore, our study will continue to focus on this demographic.

Despite previous research on all types of mobile-phone communication, this study will narrow

cell-phone usage down to solely texting. Additionally, we will be looking at conflict as the main

effect of texting. The findings of Lee, Bassick, & Mumpower (2016) prove that conflicts can

arise due to texting in long distance relationships. Our study will focus on romantic relationships

that are not specific to distance to see if these results stand. However, the study conducted by

Lee, Bassick, & Mumpower (2016) did not specify conflict styles. Due to the findings of Allison

and Emmers (2011) in which dominance was preferred the least and compromise was preferred

the most among all types of people, we decided to study these two conflict styles. Additionally,

the findings of Hample, Richards, & Skubisz (2013) for evidence of dominance in relationships

and the findings of Meluch & Walter (2012) for evidence of compromise in relationships

influenced our decision to focus on those two conflict styles.

However, we were not able to form a hypothesis that predicted a directional relationship.

This is because the studies of Jin & Peña (2010) and Ruppel (2014) contrasted with each other

regarding texting behaviors. Jin & Peña (2010) claim that relationship maintenance is an

important factor in couples who text each other, while Ruppel (2014) claims that relationship

development is an important factor in couples who text each other, with maintenance being less
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 7

important. Due to these varying results, our study will focus on both relationship development

and relationship maintenance as it pertains to texting, with no specified relational direction. With

all of these factors in mind, we formulated a research question:

RQ: Do different texting habits affect the levels of conflict in exclusive romantic relationships

among young adults?

Method

Research Design

A quantitative analytical survey is the research design of choice for our research question.

This design is appropriate to test our research question for a variety of reasons. A survey is a

time-friendly research design, which will ensure that we can get enough responses from

participants in order to generalize our results on time. Additionally, our survey requires

individual opinions that require evaluating a relationship’s conflict and texting behaviors.

Therefore, an experiment would not suffice, because an individual needs time to reflect on their

relationships, rather than take part in a timed experiment. Our goal was to test if texting

behaviors affect conflict levels in young adult romantic relationships. Out of all the responses

that we received from our participants, 71 of those responses were considered valid. Out of

those 71 responses, 27 of those participants were males (38.0 %) and 44 were females (62.0 %).

The average age for all participants was 21 years old. Although this was the average age, it is

important to make note that 7 of the 71 members did not indicate their age.
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 8

Variable Specifications

Texting: The independent variable being studied is texting. Luo (2014), defines texting as

an exchange of short messages through a phone network between more than one cellular device.

This study will not look at social media messaging or messenger applications. The scale being

used is a Likert scale created by Broaddus and Dickson-Gomez (2016). This scale is known as

“The Uses of Texting in Sexual Relationships Scale,” which was altered for this study to

specifically focus on texting behaviors regarding conflict: maintenance and development. All

other questions not relevant to our variables were eliminated.

Relationship Maintenance: In our study, we also used Broaddus & Dickson-Gomez’s

(2016) Uses of Texting in Sexual Relationships Scale. For this scale, we have members of the

study answer 10 Likert-type items (1= never 7= all the time) representing the various uses of

text messaging within relationships. Range of scores were recorded from a minimum of 24 to a

maximum of 69. This dimension represented (M = 47.28, SD = 9.605). Cronbach’s alpha for

relationship maintenance was .818.

Relationship Development: For relationship development, we also used a sub-scale from

Broaddus & Dickson-Gomez’s (2016) Uses of Texting in Sexual Relationship Scale. Along with

Relationship Maintenance, we also had participants respond to 5 Likert-type items (1 = never 7

= all the time) based on the uses of text messages when texting their partner. After running our

test, scores ranged from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 35. This dimension represented

(M= 23.73, sd = 5.417). Cronbach’s alpha score for Relationship Development was .749.

Conflict: The dependent variable being studied is conflict. Conflict is defined by Peterson

(1983) as the interference of the actions of one individual with the actions of another individual.

In our study, we will look at the interference of actions that individuals believe occurs within
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 9

their romantic relationships. Specifically, we will measure the behaviors of individuals in

relationships when engaging in conflict: dominance and compromise. To measure the dependent

variable, we will be using another Likert scale created by Zacchilli, Hendrick, and Hendrick

(2009). This scale is called “the romantic partner conflict scale.”

Compromise: In our study, we used a subscale of Zachilli, Hendrick & Hendricks (2012)

Romantic Partner Conflict Scale. In involvement with the survey, participants were asked to

respond to 14 Likert-type items (1= Strongly disagree with statement 5= Strongly agree with

statement) that would help explain how they handle conflict with their partner. Scores for this

specific dimension ranged from the minimum, 54, to the maximum, 182. Specifically, the

responses for compromise showed (M = 164.82, SD = 21.405). Cronbach’s alpha for

compromise was .912.

Domination: The subscale of Domination in our study was also represented by Zachilli,

Hendrick & Hendricks (2012) Romantic Partner Conflict Scale. Particularly, in our survey, we

had all respondents answer to 6 Likert-type items (1 = Strongly disagree with statement, 5 =

Strongly agree with statement) based on how they handle conflict with their partner. Scores for

this subscale ranged from the minimum of 6 and maximum of 84. For this dimension (M =

55.66, SD = 21.039). Cronbach’s alpha for domination was .840.

Romantic relationships: ‘Romantic relationships’ in this study is a potential confounding

variable. To control this variable, we use the restriction strategy. Romantic relationships in this

study are defined as exclusive relationships in which individuals are in a monogamous

relationship for over six months. Therefore, any individual who wants to participate in this study

will have to note these restrictions. Conceptually, we will refer to Jerves, Rober, and Enzlin

(2013) definition of a romantic relationship as a voluntary dyadic relationship between two

TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 10

people who agree that they are dating. To allow time for conflict to occur within a relationship,

the individuals who partake in the survey must be in a relationship of at least six months.

Age: Age is another possible confounding variable. To control this variable, we once

again use the restriction strategy. Any individual who wants to participate in this study must be a

young adult between the ages of 18-29. This is the age group that typically uses cellular devices

to communicate with people the most, according to Rainie (2012), who explains that out of a

specific sample of 3,014 citizens, 66% percent of those people were between the ages of 18-29

and identified as having a cellular device.

Sampling Method & Sample

The data that was collected focused on texting as a form of communication and

conflict in romantic relationships. Participants were young adults that were 18 to 29 years old

and were currently in a romantic relationship for at least six months. Using the purposive

sampling method, the questionnaires were sent via email to subjects who met the criteria. Our

survey practices anonymity, and so the identity of the participants were not revealed when they

completed the survey.

Procedure

To ensure the validity of the research and to eliminate the use of deception, our study will

not include a cover story and will be followed by a debriefing form. Clear instructions will be

given to the research participants preceding the survey that will be emailed to them. They will be

instructed to read carefully and think critically about the answers they will denote on the survey.

Once the survey has been administered to them, it will be conducted strictly online so

participants will not be allotted a specific amount of time for which they must complete the

survey. Following the survey, there will be a debriefing form that begins immediately after the
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 11

last question on the survey. Participants will be thanked for their cooperation and will then be

advised to print a copy of the debriefing form to keep for their personal records.

Results

Our single research question examined whether or not different texting habits affect the

levels of conflict in romantic relationships among young adults. A Pearson Product-Moment test

was used to examine if there was a correlation between two sets of variables. Firstly, the

correlation between the conflict style “compromise” and the use of texting for “relationship

development.” Secondly, the correlation between the conflict style “domination” and the use of

texting for “relationship maintenance.” After running our PPM, our results showed that there

was no statistical significance between the variables “compromise” and “relationship

development” in relation to whether texting habits influenced the level of conflict in exclusive

relationships among young adults. This was showed by [N (71) = -.024, p = .841]. Our second

pair of variables were “domination” and “relationship maintenance.” Results from our PPM test

also showed that there was no statistical significance between the two variables in relation to

whether texting habits influenced the level of conflict in exclusive relationships among young

adults. This presented itself by [N (71) = -.066, p = .587]. Additionally, there was no significant

correlation even when variables were reversed. That is, domination with relationship

development [N (71) = .043, p = .719] and compromise with relationship maintenance [N (71) = .

078, p = .517].

Discussion
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 12

We proposed one research question to examine whether various texting behaviors had

any effect on the level of conflict in exclusive romantic relationships among young adults. Since

we proposed a research question, we made no prediction that accounted for the direction of the

relationship. In order to see the relationship between dominance and relationship maintenance,

and between compromise and relationship development, we ran the PPM correlation test after

gathering our data. The results indicated that there was no significant relationship between

dominance and relationship maintenance. Similarly, there was no significant relationship

between compromise and relationship development. Our results suggests that there is no

correlation between texting behaviors and conflict in romantic relationships. This means that

young adults between the ages of 18 to 29 can use compromise or dominance conflict strategies

when texting their romantic partner, however these strategies will not have an influence on

relationship maintenance or development. Our results gravitate towards the findings in previous

research conducted by Meluch & Walter (2012), where it was suggested that individuals prefer

face-to face communication to compromise rather than using computer-mediated settings due to

the understanding of computer-mediated settings being less immediate. While we did not test for

face-to-face communication, our results suggest that this may have more of an effect than

texting.

Limitations

Our study had multiple limitations. The first one is quite significant because it

involves generalizability. Our study focused on young adults in the ages between 18 to 29. Since

the majority of participants from our sample that answered our survey were ages 18 to 21, there

was not a lot of data collected from the other ages, In fact, the average age of participants was

21. Because the average age of participants was 21, we do not believe that the results from our
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 13

sample can be generalized to the population. The data we collected shows there is not a

relationship between texting and conflict in romantic relationships. Therefore, it is possible that

data could have been collected from participants who are 22 to 29 years old that showed a

relationship between texting and conflict in romantic relationships. If this data was collected, our

results would be much more generalizable.

Our next limitation dealt with our survey design/selection. Our survey required

participants to recall different ways with how they text their partners and how they handle

conflict. Using these questions might limit the way respondents answer questions because they

could have selective memory inhibiting their recall of certain events. In turn, this selective

memory may cause participants to randomly fill out our survey based off of recent events

affecting the chance of getting significant results

Our third limitation was our method of sampling and time constraints. We chose a

lengthy study and a challenging topic which affected the amount of responses we got compared

to what we would have preferred. Because we used a purposive method of sampling, we used

participants that matched our specific criteria for the study. With that being said, our sample size

and time frame to achieve a large enough sample was insufficient for the study we conducted.

This limited us from getting much more results that could have given us statistically significant

data. Along with that, sampling our respondents to those who already meet the criteria disable us

from getting a larger range of responses.

Since our study focused on romantic relations that had lasted 6 months or longer, it was

difficult to find significant relationships among our variables. Partners within the same age group

as population but in romantic relationships that had lasted less than 6 months may show

completely different results. It is possible that within the initial phase of a relationship, a partner
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 14

will experience a significant amount of conflict that is related to texting his or her partners.

Our survey may have consisted of emotional content for some participants. This is

why our fourth limitation was our survey had been designed in a way that enhanced socially

desirable responding from participants when completing the survey. A participant may want his

or her relationship to sound healthier than it is or he or she may want to sound less dominant or

controlling over a partner. This affected our study because it skewed our results to show that

there was no correlation between dominance and relationship maintenance, due to participants

trying to mask their dominant behavior, even though the survey was anonymous.

Our last limitation involves reliability of our scales since some participants accidentally

answered the questions incorrectly making these scores on the scales not reliable. This may have

been a result of confusion when looking at scales with oppositely worded items. This may also

be caused by participants rushing while taking the survey. Therefore, this affects our results

because it provides us with conflicting and inconsistent data on whether or not texting causes

conflict in romantic relationships.

Directions for Future Research

We recommend that for future researchers who choose to repeat our study, gather

data and compare it based on the age and sex of participants. Age and sex could also be held

constant. This would ensure that data is collected from all ages included in our population so that

results can be generalizable to the entire population. Data would also be more accurate, so it

would be interesting to see how the effects of texting on conflict in romantic relationships differ

between age groups and se. xFuture researchers could test Relationship Confidence because it is

possible for there to be conflict in relationships that are successful. We also suggest that future

researchers who choose to attempt to find significant results conduct a longitudinal study that
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 15

requires repeated observations without any time constraints. It would also be interesting if future

researchers compared different modes of communication, such as face-to-face and computer-

mediated communication, and study their relationship with conflict.

Although this study does not have statistically significant data, it allowed us to gain a

greater understanding of a topic that is relevant to our current age group. There is little research

on our topic so it would be interesting for future researchers to delve into it more. New research

being released on this topic may also help partners in romantic relationships better evaluate how

he or she uses texting with his or her partner.

References

Allison, M.-L., & Emmers-Sommer, T. M. (2011). Beyond individualism-collectivism and

conflict style: Considering acculturation and media use. Journal of Intercultural

Communication Research, 40(2), 135–152. doi:

10.1080/17475759.2011.581033 Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some

explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of

interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99–112.

Broaddus, M., & Dickson-Gomez, J.

(2016). The uses of texting in sexual relationships scale: Associations with risky

rexual behavior among at-risk african american emerging adults. AIDS Education and
TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 16

Prevention, 28(5), 393–404. Doi: 10.1521/aeap.2016.28.5.393 Cai, D., & Fink, E. (2002).

Conflict style differences between individualists and collectivists.

Communication Monographs, 69(1), 67–87. doi: 10.1080/03637750216536

Dimmick, J., Feaster, J. C., & Hoplamazian, G. J. (2011). News in the interstices: The niches of

mobile media in space and time. New Media & Society, 13(1), 23–39.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810363452

Gross, M. A., & Guerrero, L. K. (2000). Managing conflict appropriately and effectively: An

application of the competence model to rahim's organizational conflict styles.

International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(3), 200–226. Doi:

10.1108/eb022840 Hample, D., Richards, A. S., & Skubisz, C. (2013). Blurting.

Communication Monographs, 80(4), 503–532. doi:

10.1080/03637751.2013.830316

Jerves, E., Rober, P., & Enzlin, P. (2013). Characteristics of romantic relationships

during adolescence: A review of anglo-western literature. Maskana, 4(2), 21-34.

Jin, B., & Peña, J. F. (2010). Mobile communication in romantic relationships: Mobile phone

use, relational uncertainty, love, commitment, and attachment styles. Communication

Reports, 23(1), 39–51. doi: 10.1080/08934211003598742

Knobloch, L. K., & Solomon, D. H. (2002). Information seeking beyond initial interaction:

Negotiating relational uncertainty within close relationships. Human

Communication Research, 28, 243–257.

Lee, S. K., Bassick, M. A., & Mumpower, S. W. (2016). Fighting

TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 17

electronically: Long-distance romantic couples’ conflict management over mediated

communication. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 26(3).

http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/026/3/026341.html

Luo, S. (2014). Effects of texting on satisfaction in romantic relationships: The role of

attachment. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 145–152. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.014

Meluch, A. L., & Walter, H. L. (2012). Conflict management styles and

argumentativeness: Examining the differences between face-to-face and computer-

mediated communication. Ohio Communication Journal, 50.

Retrieved from http://bryant.idm.oclc.org/login?

url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true

db=ufh&AN=90651169&site=ehost-live

Peterson, D. R. (1983). conflict. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T.

L. Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L. A. Peplau, & D. R. Peterson (Eds.),

close

relationships (pp. 360–396). New York: Freeman.

Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement. New

York: Random House.

Rainie, L. (2012). Smartphone Ownership Update: September 2012. Retrieved

from https://www.pewinternet.org/2012/09/11/smartphone-ownership-update-

september-2012/ Ruppel, E. K. (2015). Use of communication technologies in romantic

relationships: Self-disclosure and the role of relationship development. Journal

of Social and Personal Relationships, 32(5), 667–686.

TEXTING AND RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT 18

https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407514541075 Smith, A. (2011). Americans and text

messaging. Retrieved from

https://www.pewinternet.org/2011/09/19/americans-and-text-messaging/ Zacchilli, T.

L., Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. S. (2009). The romantic partner conflict scale: A new scale to

measure relationship conflict. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(8), 1073–1096.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509347936