This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Davis, K. E. Articles by Latty-Mann, H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Love Styles and Relationship Quality: A Contribution to Validation

University of South Carolina, Columbia, USA

Holly Latty-Mann

University of South Carolina, Columbia, USA

Using a sample of seventy heterosexual undergraduate couples, we examined the usefulness of the new measures developed by Hendrick & Hendrick (1986) of six of Lee's (1973) basic love styles to predict individual and couple relationship qualities. The six love styles (Eros, Storge, Pragma, Ludus, Agape and Mania) were related to six aspects of relationship quality (Viability, Intimacy, Care, Passion, Satisfaction and Conflict/Ambivalence) derived from Davis & Todd's (1982, 1985) work on friendship and love relationships. Item-loadings and factor structure of the love style scales were replicated, and the pattern of relations among love styles was consistent across gender. Eros and Agape were positively related to individual reports of relationship qualities, and Ludus was negatively related. Mania was positively related to Passion. The pattern of results was supportive of Lee's theory for Eros, Agape, Ludus and Mania, but not for Storge and Pragma. Couples were significantly similar in all love styles except Pragma and Mania. Absolute differences between couple members in specific love styles were related to relationship quality measures for Eros, Agape and Ludus. Agape discrepancies were predictive of lower Intimacy and Viability (for women) and Care (for men). Eros discrepancies were predictive of generally poorer relationships for women, and Ludus discrepancies of generally poorer relationships for men. The findings were quite supportive of the validity and usefulness of the love style assessment developed by Hendrick & Hendrick (1986).

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 4, No. 4, 409-428 (1987)
DOI: 10.1177/0265407587044002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. Latty-Mann and K. E. Davis Attachment Theory and Partner Choice: Preference and Actuality Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, February 1, 1996; 13(1): 5 - 23. [Abstract]

				K. Murthy, A. Rotzien, and T. Vacha-Haase Validity Studies Second-Order Structure Underlying the Hendrick-Hendrick Love Attitudes Scale Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 1996; 56(1): 108 - 121. [Abstract]

				G. D. Morrow, E. M. Clark, and K. F. Brock Individual and Partner Love Styles: Implications for the Quality of Romantic Involvements Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, August 1, 1995; 12(3): 363 - 387. [Abstract]

				J. Bookwala, I. H. Frieze, and N. K. Grote Love, Aggression and Satisfaction in Dating Relationships Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, November 1, 1994; 11(4): 625 - 632. [Abstract]

				P. A. Frazier and E. Esterly Correlates of Relationship Beliefs: Gender, Relationship Experience and Relationship Satisfaction Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, August 1, 1990; 7(3): 331 - 352. [Abstract]

				M. B. Levy and K. E. Davis Lovestyles and Attachment Styles Compared: Their Relations to Each Other and to Various Relationship Characteristics Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, November 1, 1988; 5(4): 439 - 471. [Abstract]