In order to evaluate our 2nd hypothesis, we earliest recoded, for each and every of the items into the position size, the part of solutions you to definitely let you know if husbands have less, equivalent or maybe more scores 
, namely, condition, with hypogamy, which means husbands has actually straight down position than wives, homogamy, meaning equivalent condition, and you can hypergamy, definition husbands that have highest standing than simply spouses. To the prospective relationship of country, analyses were significant for the training (X 2 =eleven.9; df=2; p=.003; n=.20), and you can economic effect off a potential separation (X dos =nine.51; df=2; p=.009; n=.18). Analysis showed that, to have Spanish players, there’s way more knowledge hypogamy, whereas for Dominican players you will find so much more studies homogamy. Towards economic items in the event of separation, since there is far more homogamy to possess Foreign language users, there’s more hypergamy getting Dominicans (see Contour step one).
Which have previous failed marriages or perhaps not wasn’t relevant in order to variations in position. Concerning possible organization ranging from status and you can many years married, high connections was basically included in wellness (X 2 =fourteen.7; df=4; p=.005; n=.16), although to own couples y exists (40.4%, each), to possess people y prevails (43.4%). Put differently, towards group with ages hitched, husbands keeps down health reputation. That have people of prior marriages and having pupils regarding newest relationships didn’t significantly apply at status.
Inside the sum, the fresh analyses concerning the 2nd theory indicated that contrary to all of our requirement, the biggest function related to condition ‘s the nation.
Univariate examination shown significant differences in foundation step 1 (F=5
To contrast our third hypothesis, that predict that homogamy will be associated to higher marital satisfaction for both countries, we have estimated the scores in ong the three types of status (hypogamy, homogamy, and hypergamy) for the seven items of the scale. The analyses revealed significant differences in bda=.951, F(6, 584)= 2.47; p<.05]. Univariate tests revealed significant differences in factor 2 of marital satisfaction (F=4.54; df=2; p<.05; h 2 =.01), with no significant differences by country. Post hoc comparisons revealed that hypergamy in health status have significantly smaller y situations (M=4.14, SE=0.11; and M=4.57, SE=0.10, respectively).
Also, significant differences in marital satisfaction based on education status were found [Wilks’ Lambda=.938, F(6, 584)= 3.17; p<.01]. 46; df=2; p<.01; h 2 =.03), and total scale (F=3.61; df=2; p<.05; h 2 =.XX). There were also significant differences in factor 1 by country (F=; df=1; p<.001; h 2 =.04), as well as by the interaction of status by country (F=4.90; df=2; p<.05; h 2 =.03). Post hoc comparisons revealed that hypogamic education status situations have significantly smaller ic situations (M=4.18, SE=0.11; and M=4.58, SE=0.11, respectively). In addition, hypergamy situations in Spain and Dominican Republic scored significantly higher than hypogamy situations in Spain. Homogamy situations in Dominican Republic scored significantly higher than hypogamy situations in Spain.
Eventually, hypogamy situations within the The country of spain scored notably less than hypogamy affairs during the Dominican Republic
Likewise, significant differences in marital satisfaction based on economic status were found [Wilks’ Lambda=.937, F(6, 584)= 3.21; p<.01]. Univariate tests revealed significant differences in factor 1 (F=6.64; df=2; p<.01; h 2 =.04). There were also significant differences in factor 1 by country (F=; df=1; p<.001; h 2 =.03), with Dominicans scoring significantly higher than Spaniards (M=4.8, SE=.015, and M=4.34, SE=.10, respectively). Economic hypergamy was associated to significantly higher ic and hypogamic status. Spaniards with hypergamy status scored significantly higher than the other two groups from Spain. Dominicans with hypogamic status scored significantly lower than the other two groups from the same country.
Additionally, significant differences in marital satisfaction based on housekeeping status were found [Wilks’ Lambda=.920, F(6, 584)= 4.12; p<.001]. Univariate tests revealed significant differences in factor 1 (F=; df=2; p<.001; h 2 =.06), and total scale (F=6.84; df=2; p=.001; h 2 =.04), without significant differences by country. Hypogamy status was associated to significantly higher y status (M=4.88, SE=.14, M=4.34, SE=.07, respectively).