Leave Room for Jesus: The Link between Prayers and Relationship Quality

My V. H. Nguyen, Natalia R. Taylor, David H. Haight, Maria F. Liendo Patiño, and Alan A. Payan

Robert J. Sternberg created a theory which described the correlation

between three aspects of love: passion (in which satisfaction is

included), intimacy (in which prayer is included), and

commitment.The stronger the areas the more mature the relationship.

Prayer is viewed differently within the field of psychology, both in the

secular and non-secular sides, yet the principle remains constant

(Laird, Synder, Rapoff, & Green, 2004). The study conducted is

based in the definition which takes on the view that prayer is a form

of communicating with God and also as a form of communion with

Him whether it be alone or with others (Grudem, 1994; Ladd, &

Spilka, 2002).

Satisfaction can be described as overall happiness between both

partners and can be used to determine willingness to stay together.

Considering that caring is one of the most crucial factors that a

couple needs to create a long-lasting relationship, prayer takes a

crucial role. A study findings emphasized the role of prayer in

relationship, through the enhancement of relationship satisfaction

(Lambert, Fichman, & Stanley, 2012).

Rusbult (1980) defined commitment as a choice committed

deliberately by people to remain in a relationship while attach to their

significant other emotionally. Prayer has been supported to provide

greater commitment. Researchers have noticed that only prayers

directed toward the partner significantly impacted commitment

(Fincham, & Beach, 2014). Other studies discovered that praying for

one another increased long term commitment, while there is a

deficiency in the correlation between commitment levels in a

relationship in praying for personal reasons (Fincham, & Beach,

2014).

Even though relationship satisfaction and commitment are two

important aspects by themselves, it is essential to look at the

overlapping between the two. In the context of praying, studies

showed that prayers positively correlated with relationship

satisfaction and commitment (Fincham et al., 2008; Fincham et al.,

2010). The present study explored prayers exclusively directed to a

person’s partner, and measured the frequency of the prayers.

,

Research Questions

Relationship satisfaction and Prayer Frequency

Relationship satisfaction findings. It was predicted that prayers and

relationship satisfaction are correlated, such that high frequency of

prayer leads to high level of satisfaction. Prayer frequency ranged from

10-19 on the PFPM (Fincham et al., 2010) and satisfaction levels ranged

from 17-31 on the RAS (Hendrick, 1988). The correlation between

frequency in prayer and relationship satisfaction was r(8)= .876, p< 0.01,

two-tailed. Results indicated a significant positive correlation,

demonstrating a strong relationship between the frequency in prayer and

the satisfaction level in the relationship. (see Table 1 and Figure 1)

Table 1

Participants’ Scores on Prayer Frequency, Commitment Level, and

Satisfaction Level

Figure 1. Correlation between Satisfaction Level and Prayer Frequency.

Commitment findings

It was hypothesized that prayers are associated with a person’s

commitment in a romantic relationship. The commitment levels ranged

from 18-53 on the CLI (Rusbult, et al., 1998), as presented in Table 1.

Prayer frequency and level of commitment were correlated at r(8)= .859,

p< 0.01, two-tailed. A significant correlation between the level of

commitment in the relationship and the frequency of prayer in the

relationship was found. Thus, the positive correlation indicated an

apparent link between the two variables such that high prayer frequency

was associated with high commitment (see Table 1 and Figure 2).

Figure 2. Correlation between Commitment Level and Prayer Frequency.

The research was comprised of 20 undergraduates from a private

Christian university taking a psychology course. The participants

received extra credit for completing the survey. The present study

only included data from 8 students (2 females) who were in a

relationship. The age range of the participants is from 19 years to

24 years, with a mean of 21 years. For additional demographic

information, see Figure 1.

Figure 2. Demographic data.

Prayer for partner

In order to measure the amount of time an individual prayed for their

partner, the Partner-Focused Prayer Measure (PFPM) was used

(Fincham, et al., 2010). This measure is a 4-item survey that asks the

participant to rate on a 5-point scale of how often the individual prays

for a partner, with 1 being never and 5 being very frequently. The scale

had high construct validity, which was used in multiple studies with the

validity ranging from 0.72 to 0.96, indicating good values (Fincham, &

Beach, 2014; Fincham et al., 2010). Items include questions such as “I

pray for the well-being of my partner”. The scores were added, and the

greater sum implies greater amount of time spent in prayer for a

partner. The total score varies from 4 to 20.

Relationship satisfaction leve

To access the level of relationship satisfaction of the participant, a

Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) was adopted from Hendrick

(1988). The questionnaire consists of 7 items, with sample questions

such as “How well does your partner meet your needs?” and “How

many problems are there in your relationship?” (reverse-scored). The

scale is a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 being the lowest satisfaction level

and 5 being the highest; questions 4 and 7 are reverse-scored. A high

summed score demonstrates a high level of relationship satisfaction,

with scores ranging from 7 to 35. The scale’s internal consistency

coefficient is .86, demonstrating high reliability (Büyüşahin, 2005).

Commitment level

To measure the commitment level from the participant, the present

study used the “Commitment Level Items” (CLI) (Rusbult, Martz, &

Agnew, 1998). The survey includes 7 items with a 9-point Likert scale

from 0 to 8 (0 = do not agree at all; 4 = agree somewhat; 8 = agree

completely). Sample items are “I want our relationship to last for a very

long time”, and “I would not feel very upset if our relationship were to

end in the near future (inverted scoring). The scores ranged from 0 to

56. The commitment level had an alphas ranged from .91 to .95,

illustrating high internal reliability (Rusbult et al., 1998), and a total high

score indicates a high level of commitment.

Measures

The present study predicted that there exists an association

between prayers, relationship satisfaction, and commitment.

These hypotheses were supported, as the participants reported

to have a high prayer frequency also revealed a high level of

satisfaction and commitment. These findings were consistent

with previous researches; Lambert et al. (2012) illustrated that

prayers positively enhance relationship satisfaction, while

Fincham and Beach (2014) inspected impact of prayers over

commitment and found significant correlation. Several other

studies also supported the link between prayers with the two

other variables (Fincham et al., 2008; Fincham et al., 2010). As

prayer was the main variable of concern, commitment level

increased as prayers frequency increased. In the same manner,

the satisfaction of the relationship varied in the same direction as

frequency of prayers. The present study mainly focused on

participants who were involved in a relationship, and the results

indicated that other than commitment and relationship

satisfaction, prayer is also a crucial element which could have an

astounding impact on the relationship.

Limitations

• Limited sample size. While there were a total number of 20

participants, due to the nature of the questionnaire, only the

answers of 8 students were taken into account.

• Low variety in age range due to participants being

undergraduates.

• Convenient sampling. Even though the questionnaire had high

construct validity, the survey items limited the number the

participant, and was only concerned with students in a

relationship, and ruled out the people who were single or

divorced. Thus, the study faced the problem with

generalizability to the population.

• Significant difference in the sexes of the undergraduates (6

males, 2 females). For this reason, gender might have been a

confounding variable, due to the characteristics of man and

women.

Implications and Future Research

• The findings suggest that prayers should be integrated a

relationship as mediator between the two parties.

• The research on this subject could be furthered by conducting

a longitudinal study. In other words, researcher could keep

tract on the influence of prayer influences on couples through

good and bad moments; researchers can examine whether

prayers can be regarded as a coping mechanism in a

relationship.

• The study could be carried out on a larger sample, with a

variance in demographic. The sample could include people

from early adulthood, middle adulthood, and late adulthood;

the data taken from these participants would offer a deeper

insight into people relationship.

• Future studies could inspect the perspective of people who

are not in a relationship, in order to gain a profound

understanding, not only in the context of romantic

relationships, but also the human relationships as a whole.

It is predicted that prayers and relationship satisfaction are

correlated, such that high frequency of prayer leads to high

level of satisfaction.

It is hypothesized that prayers are positively associated with

a person’s commitment in a romantic relationship (see Figure

1).

Figure 1. Model for Interaction of Variables.

SampleIntroduction Results Discussion

Data PFPM RAS CLI

Mean 13.38 23.38 32.75

Range 10 – 18 17 – 31 18 – 53

Note. PFPM = Prayer For Partner Measure, score range: 4 – 20; RAS =

Relationship Assessment Scale, score range: 7 – 35; CLI =

Commitment Level Items, score range: 0 – 56.

0

10

20

30

40

0 5 10 15 20

Sa

tisfa

ctio

n L

eve

l

Prayer Frequency

0

15

30

45

60

0 5 10 15 20

Co

mm

itm

en

t L

eve

l

Prayer Frequency

3, 37%

2, 25%

2, 25%

1, 13%

Religious Belief

Christianity Judaism Islam None

2, 25%

2, 25%2, 25%

2, 25%

Ethnicity

American Indian or Alaska Native Asian or Asian American

Black or African American Hispanic or Latino

Prayer Frequency

Relationship

Satisfaction

Commitment