Marital Text

Abstract

Face-to-face prevention-focused relationship education programs have generally been efficacious in improving couples’ communication and relationship satisfaction. Computer-based interventions have furthered the dissemination of these interventions, so anyone with access to a computer can participate in the intervention. One of the next steps in this line of research is finding affordable and convenient ways to disseminate this information. One possibility is text messaging. The current study examined the feasibility of utilizing text messages as a dissemination tool for relationship enhancement. In this study, 128 married individuals were randomly assigned to a control condition (n = 64), where relationship-related text messages were not received, or to a treatment condition (n = 64), where relationship-related text messages were received. Individuals assigned to the treatment condition responded positively toward the intervention. Participants’ dropout and retention rates were promising, and 99% of the participants supplied authentic phone numbers. Participants reported the intervention helped them make changes in their relationship, and that the text messages’ content was beneficial to their relationship. Strengths, limitations, and ideas for future research are discussed, as well as the implications for utilizing text messages as a dissemination tool for preventative relationship education.

Keywords

couples texting dissemination Bayesian statistics

Prevention-focused relationship education programs have generally been found efficacious in improving couples’ communication and relationship satisfaction (Jakubowski, Milne, Brunner, & Miller, 2004). Traditionally, these interventions have been delivered to couples as face-to-face programs in groups. Simons, Harris, and Willis (1994) found that only a minority of couples attend such programs because they may lack interest, believe the intervention to be intrusive, or lack the desire to talk openly about their relationship problems.

Computers and technology have been shown to be a valuable tool in the dissemination of relationship education programs and to improve relationship functioning (see Braithwaite & Fincham, 2007; Braithwaite & Fincham, 2009; Braithwaite & Fincham, 2011; Braithwaite & Fincham, 2014; Cavanagh & Shapiro, 2004; Doss et al., 2016). In particular, programs such as ePREP, http://OurRelationship.com, and watching movies together as a couple and discussing them have all utilized atypical forms of therapeutic delivery and have produced favorable results. Braithwaite and Fincham’s ePREP (2007, 2009, 2011, 2014) has reduced couples’ levels of anxiety, depression, and intimate partner violence and has improved relationship functioning. Doss et al.’s (2016) http://OurRelationship.com program, an online adaptation of an in-person couple therapy, has been shown to produce improvements in couples’ relationship satisfaction (Cohen’s d = 0.69), relationship confidence (d = 0.47), positive relationship quality (d = 0.15), and in reducing negative relationship quality (d = 0.57). And finally, a large-scale clinical trial found that watching movies and discussing them—an “intervention” that was intended to be a control condition—was as effective as a skill-based relationship education program (Rogge, Cobb, Lawrence, Johnson, & Bradbury, 2013). One potential common factor in all these interventions is increased investment in the relationship, that is, all of these interventions make the relationship more salient and lead to increases in efforts to improve it. Because those who receive these technology-based forms of treatment tend to view them as acceptable forms of treatment (Cavanagh & Shapiro, 2004), this led us to question what other forms of technology could be useful in the dissemination of relationship education?

We believe that one of the next steps in this line of research is finding simple, convenient, and affordable ways to disseminate these interventions to individuals and couples. A potentially useful approach is text messaging (texts) or texting. Texting, or type-written messages or photos sent through mobile phones, allows individuals to be reached at any time or place as long as their phone has a signal (Pettigrew, 2009). Texting also allows individuals to respond when it is most convenient (Pettigrew, 2009). Texts have also been shown to be used by people of various races and socioeconomic backgrounds (Lenhart, 2010).

According to Lenhart (2010), cell phones have become a necessity. An estimated 82% of adults carry mobile phones, with 80% of Whites, 87% of African Americans, and 87% of Latinos reporting owning a mobile phone. African Americans and Latinos, who tend to be of lower socioeconomic status, utilize texting more often than Whites. Additionally, 71% of individuals who make less than US$30,000 a year report owning a cell phone (Lenhart, 2010). Leading us to conclude that texting may have wide-reaching potential even considering individuals of various races or socioeconomic backgrounds.

Texting has already been utilized as an adjunct to traditional forms of therapy (adjunct text therapy (ATT)) with success (see Aguilera & Muñoz, 2011; Chow et al., 2015; Mason, Benotsch, Way, & Snipes, 2014; Obermayer, Riley, Asif, & Jean-Mary, 2004; Weitzel, Bernhardt, Usdan, Mays, & Glanz, 2007). For example, sending individuals’ text messages on randomly selected weekdays has been shown to increase individuals’ amounts of exercise, induce changes in diet, and increase participants’ motivation to change (Chow et al., 2015). Further, text messages have been shown to reduce the negative consequences of alcohol (Weitzel et al., 2007), increase smoking cessation (Obermayer et al., 2004), improve desirable qualities (Aguilera & Muñoz, 2011), facilitate help-seeking behaviors (Joyce & Weibelzahl, 2011), and create an environment of change (Mason et al., 2014).

Most reactions to ATTs have been positive. Participants report these interventions as easy to use, reading a majority of the messages, while generally reporting the texts to be beneficial (Aguilera & Muñoz, 2011; Chow et al., 2015; Obermayer et al., 2004). Criticisms of ATTs have included being sent excessive texts, insufficient texts, or receiving texts at inopportune times (Aguilera & Muñoz, 2011; Chow et al., 2015; Obermayer et al., 2004). Further, some participants have reported the content of various text messages to be demanding or guilt inducing (Keoleian, Stalcup, Polcin, Brown, & Galloway, 2013).

With this in mind, the current study sought to examine the feasibility of utilizing texting as a dissemination tool for relationship enhancement.

Method

Before data were collected, permission was sought and granted from the local institutional review board. Participants were married students who could receive text messages (N = 128) and obtained from a private religious university in the Western United States. All participants were and recruited via the universities’ online research participation system, and aggregated across two semesters. In exchange for participation, participants were granted course credit for a general education requirement. Participation in this study was one of many options from which participants could choose to receive course credit.

From the online research participation system, participants were directed to a recruitment assessment. After completing the assessment, participants were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control condition. Regardless of condition assignment, participants received two text messages: (1) asking them to validate their participation in the study and (2) directing them to take a follow-up survey via a text message embedded URL—sent 28 days after recruitment. All text messages were sent via the online mass text messaging service http://dialmycalls.com at 4:00 pm mountain standard time.

Individuals assigned to the treatment condition (n = 64) received one relationship-related text message daily for 28 days (see Table 1 for a complete list of text messages). These text messages were designed to promote relationship enhancement. Individuals assigned to the control condition (n = 64) only received texts asking them to validate their participation in the study and directing them to take the follow-up survey. Those assigned to the control condition did not receive text messages designed to promote relationship enhancement.

Table 1.

A complete List of Text Messages.

Text Messages
Please respond “yes” to this verification text message to begin your participation in the text message study for four Sona credits. Generally, how are things in you and your spouse’s relationship? Are there ways to make things better? Check out this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/01/marriage-tips-advice-_n_4870389.html Positive feedback is crucial in maintaining motivation to change. Try complementing your spouse on the changes they are making, rather than dwelling on their inadequacies. When is the last time you did something kind for your partner? When is the last time you just had fun with your spouse? Go on a small date with your spouse tonight (e.g., a walk in a nearby park) or do something out of the ordinary. After a long day’s work, doing a household chore is the last thing you want to do. However, maybe doing dishes or folding the laundry may relieve some of your spouse’s stress. When was the last time you told your partner that you loved him or her? Make time to have fun together with your spouse. Here are some ideas about how you and your spouse can remain happy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3PFuMg6JQY Agreeing to a partner’s solution can be difficult. When was the last time that you let your partner decide something for you both (e.g., deciding what movie to watch or where to go to dinner)? Think of someone who has one of the best marriages that you know. How did they get their relationship to function so well? Try applying these strategies to your own marriage. When is the last time you showed your partner you really cared about her/him? Make an effort to do something simple but meaningful for your partner (e.g., a text, candy bar, e-mail, or phone call). When you are sad, how do you talk with your partner? What about when you are angry, stressed, tired, hungry, irritated, and so on? “The linchpin of a lasting marriage is a simple concept with a profound impact: friendship. Successful couples have a mutual respect for and enjoyment of each other’s company”—John Gottman. Coming up with ways to have fun in your relationship is a skill, the more your practice, the better you get. If you don’t consciously create a vision for your marriage and intentionally bring this vision into reality, it won’t magically happen on its own. Couples who last “know each other intimately, are well versed in each other’s likes, dislikes, personality quirks, hopes, and dreams. They have an abiding regard for each other and express this fondness”—John Gottman. When we are upset, we rarely get communication right. Err on the side of being too understanding and forgiving rather than too quick to perceive insult where none is intended. When is the last time you discussed your life goals with your partner? What are they? How can you best support your partner in their goals? How can they help you with yours? During date night, do your best to not talk about problems within the marriage, participate in texting, talking on the phone, or being on Facebook. Spend this time to reconnect with your spouse and talk about your relationship. Sometimes couples repeatedly get into fights about the same thing. Approaching the situation with different strategies may increase your understanding of the way you see the problem and how your spouse sees it from their point of view. What is your partner’s favorite candy bar? Drop by a gas station or grocery store and pick one up, just for him or her. Does your partner know that you appreciate them? How do you show them that you love them? Remember: There are multiple ways to let your partner know you love them without audibly saying the words, “I love you.” Often times the things that couples are frustrated about are NOT what couples actually fight about. The first try at something in your relationship may not work out as planned. However, great works come not by strength, but by perseverance—Samuel Johnson. Has your spouse ever not heard what you were saying because they were not listening or paying attention? Try asking your partner if they are ready to pay attention. If they’re not, try asking them when they will be. Getting irritated or annoyed is something that happens to everyone. However, have you noticed particular times when you are more irritable than others (e.g., tired or hungry)? There is nothing better than a love letter, find a way to put a small note in a place your partner will eventually find it. This survey will only take 10 min and ends your participation in the text message study for Sona credit: URL to follow-up survey.

Text Messages

Please respond “yes” to this verification text message to begin your participation in the text message study for four Sona credits.

Generally, how are things in you and your spouse’s relationship? Are there ways to make things better? Check out this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/01/marriage-tips-advice-_n_4870389.html

Positive feedback is crucial in maintaining motivation to change. Try complementing your spouse on the changes they are making, rather than dwelling on their inadequacies.

When is the last time you did something kind for your partner?

When is the last time you just had fun with your spouse? Go on a small date with your spouse tonight (e.g., a walk in a nearby park) or do something out of the ordinary.

After a long day’s work, doing a household chore is the last thing you want to do. However, maybe doing dishes or folding the laundry may relieve some of your spouse’s stress.

When was the last time you told your partner that you loved him or her?

Make time to have fun together with your spouse. Here are some ideas about how you and your spouse can remain happy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3PFuMg6JQY

Agreeing to a partner’s solution can be difficult. When was the last time that you let your partner decide something for you both (e.g., deciding what movie to watch or where to go to dinner)?

Think of someone who has one of the best marriages that you know. How did they get their relationship to function so well? Try applying these strategies to your own marriage.

When is the last time you showed your partner you really cared about her/him? Make an effort to do something simple but meaningful for your partner (e.g., a text, candy bar, e-mail, or phone call).

When you are sad, how do you talk with your partner? What about when you are angry, stressed, tired, hungry, irritated, and so on?

“The linchpin of a lasting marriage is a simple concept with a profound impact: friendship. Successful couples have a mutual respect for and enjoyment of each other’s company”—John Gottman.

Coming up with ways to have fun in your relationship is a skill, the more your practice, the better you get.

If you don’t consciously create a vision for your marriage and intentionally bring this vision into reality, it won’t magically happen on its own.

Couples who last “know each other intimately, are well versed in each other’s likes, dislikes, personality quirks, hopes, and dreams. They have an abiding regard for each other and express this fondness”—John Gottman.

When we are upset, we rarely get communication right. Err on the side of being too understanding and forgiving rather than too quick to perceive insult where none is intended.

When is the last time you discussed your life goals with your partner? What are they? How can you best support your partner in their goals? How can they help you with yours?

During date night, do your best to not talk about problems within the marriage, participate in texting, talking on the phone, or being on Facebook. Spend this time to reconnect with your spouse and talk about your relationship.

Sometimes couples repeatedly get into fights about the same thing. Approaching the situation with different strategies may increase your understanding of the way you see the problem and how your spouse sees it from their point of view.

What is your partner’s favorite candy bar? Drop by a gas station or grocery store and pick one up, just for him or her.

Does your partner know that you appreciate them? How do you show them that you love them? Remember: There are multiple ways to let your partner know you love them without audibly saying the words, “I love you.”

Often times the things that couples are frustrated about are NOT what couples actually fight about.

The first try at something in your relationship may not work out as planned. However, great works come not by strength, but by perseverance—Samuel Johnson.

Has your spouse ever not heard what you were saying because they were not listening or paying attention? Try asking your partner if they are ready to pay attention. If they’re not, try asking them when they will be.

Getting irritated or annoyed is something that happens to everyone. However, have you noticed particular times when you are more irritable than others (e.g., tired or hungry)?

There is nothing better than a love letter, find a way to put a small note in a place your partner will eventually find it.

This survey will only take 10 min and ends your participation in the text message study for Sona credit: URL to follow-up survey.

Sample Information

Across the two semesters, 91% of participants reported being White, 2% Asian American, 1% Black, 2% Hawaiian Native, 1% Native American or Alaskan Native, and 3% reported belonging to an ethnicity not listed (Other). The average age of the participants was (M = 22.98, SD = 5.12), the average years married (M = 1.90, SD = 5.12), and the number of female participants (n = 80) was greater than the number of male participants (n = 48).

Primary Outcome Measures

Reactions toward the text messages

To assess reactions based on the relationship-related text messages (prompts), participants assigned to the treatment condition were asked to respond to a qualitative battery of 10 items assessed on a 6-point Likert-type scale. The values were strongly disagree (coded as 1), disagree (2), somewhat disagree (3), somewhat agree (4), agree (5), and strongly agree (6; see Table 2 for a list of the 10 reaction items).

Table 2.

The Reactions of the Treatment Condition to the Text Messages.

Reactions	Strongly Disagree (%)	Disagree (%)	Somewhat Disagree (%)	Somewhat Agree (%)	Agree (%)	Strongly Agree (%)
1. The text messages I received encouraged me to be more mindful of my relationship	5	2	0	28	38	27
2. The text messages provided good insight	0	0	3	30	52	15
3. I felt the text messages were demanding	20	63	7	8	2	0
4. I read more than 70% of the text messages	0	0	2	2	22	75
5. The text message content was beneficial to my relationship	2	3	2	40	43	10
6. The text messages helped me make changes in my relationship	2	7	19	53	17	3
7. I would recommend these text messages to my friends	0	3	5	47	28	17
8. It was embarrassing receiving these text messages	52	42	5	0	0	2
9. The text messages were helpful	0	3	5	30	48	13
10. The text messages were the proper length	0	3	3	8	55	30

Note. After accounting for missingness, 60 individuals assigned to the treatment condition recorded their reactions to the text messages, with the exception of reaction 6 (n = 59). All percentages were rounded to the nearest whole number.

Dropout rate

During the study, if conditions became too stressful, participants were asked to reply—via text message—“STOP” to http://dialmycalls.com . If a participant texted “STOP,” they were considered a “dropout.” These individuals were removed from the study immediately and increased the dropout rate.

Retention rate

All participants were sent a follow-up assessment 28 days after recruitment. Participants, who responded to the first survey, but did not respond to the second survey, or did not provide their phone number in the second survey, detracted from the retention rate.

Phone number verification

Participants’ phone numbers were considered verified, if they responded “yes” to a verification text message, completed the follow-up assessment, or both. Participants who did not include phone numbers in the recruitment assessment were not included in the experiment or the analysis of phone number verification.

Data Analysis Plan

Because this was a feasibility study, we sought to analyze the difference in the probabilities of participants’ reactions, discrete probability distributions related to participant reactions, participant dropout and retention rates, and the number of participants who verified their phone number. We also wanted to examine whether meaningful differences were present between the proportion of individuals who agreed and disagreed with our self-report measures via a Bayesian analysis.

Examining these probabilities and differences between proportions suits our research question in that they will (1) provide valuable insights into our participants’ reactions to the study’s text messages, (2) notify us of changes we can make to increase participants’ adherence to the intervention, and (3) supply us with feedback about precautions that may need to be taken to ensure participants give us authentic phone numbers.

Results

Analysis of the Text Messages: Probability Distributions and Binary Outcomes

Probability distributions

Discrete probability distributions were constructed for each of the 10 inquiry items and percentages were derived for each response category (see Table 1).

Deriving binary outcomes

Participants were coded to have agreed with an item if they responded somewhat agree, agree, or strongly agree with the statement, that is, the percentages of these responses were summed. A participant was coded to have disagreed with an item if they responded somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree.

Reporting on binary outcomes

In total, 93% of participants assigned to the treatment condition agreed that the text messages encouraged them to be more mindful of their relationship, 97% agreed that the text messages provided good insight, and 10% of participants thought that the text messages were demanding. Also, 99% of individuals indicated that they read at least 70% of the text messages, 93% indicated that the text message content was beneficial to their relationship, 73% found that the text messages helped them make changes in their relationship, and 93% agreed that they would recommend these text messages to their friends. Only 2% of participants agreed that it was embarrassing to receive the texts, 91% reported that the texts were helpful, and 93% indicated that the text messages were the proper length.

Examining Differences Between Proportions: A Bayesian Approach

Selecting prior distributions for Bayesian analysis

For the subsequent analysis, utilized a Beta(α, β) prior distribution, where α and β are selected by the researcher. Because Bayesian analyses are new to psychological research, we utilized a prior distribution that was uninformative (i.e., our prior knowledge indicated that both outcomes in participants’ reactions were equally likely) and relied on the data for interference. A Beta(1, 1) prior distribution accomplished both of these tasks and was utilized in the subsequent analysis.

Likelihood distributions

The likelihood distributions for the proportion of individuals who agreed and the proportion of individuals who disagreed follow a binomial distribution, Bin(n, θ), where n is the number of individuals who responded to the item and θ is the proportion of individuals who, respectively, agreed or disagreed with the item.

Posterior distributions

Posterior distributions are calculated for both the number of people who agreed and disagreed. Posterior distributions followed a Beta(α’, β’) distribution, where α’ = observed number of successes of n trials + α, and β’ = n − observed number of successes of n trials + β

Estimating posterior distribution of differences

The posterior distribution of differences is unknown in closed form. However, the posterior distribution of differences can be estimated by generating draws via Monte Carlo simulation. After utilizing this technique, draws from the respective posterior distributions, that is, the posterior distribution for the proportion of individuals who agreed, and the posterior distribution for the proportion of individuals who disagreed—are subtracted from one another. Credible intervals (CIs) are then calculated to summarize the posterior distribution of differences.

CI interpretation and deriving significant differences

Instead of reporting 95% confidence intervals, we will report 99.5% CIs, accomplishing two tasks: (1) CIs that do not include 0 suggest that the proportion of individuals who indicated that they agreed/disagreed with the self-report item is statistically greater than the proportion of individuals who disagreed/agreed with our self-report item, and (2) to mitigate the effects of overtesting; decreasing the Type I error rate. The 99.5% CIs should be interpreted as: There is a 99.5% chance that the proportion of individuals who agreed/disagreed with the statement is between XX% and XX% greater than the number of individuals who disagreed/agreed with the statement, given the data and our prior knowledge.

Comparing Proportions

We found that the texts generally encouraged participants to be more mindful of their relationships, that the texts provided good insight, and that the texts were not demanding. A majority of our sample reported reading more than 70% of the text messages, felt that the content was beneficial to their relationship, and that the texts helped them to make changes in their relationship. Further, participants agreed that they would recommend these text messages to their friends, that it was not embarrassing receiving the text messages, that the messages were helpful, and that the messages were the proper length (see Table 3 for the 99.5% CIs).

Table 3.

Table of the 99.5% CIs Comparing the Proportions of the Participants’ Reactions to Receiving the Text Messages and Their Respective Directions.

Reaction	99.5% CIs	Direction
1. The text messages I received encouraged me to be more mindful of my relationship	[67.84%, 94.92%]	Agreed > disagreed
2. The text messages provided good insight	[76.47%, 97.79%]	Agreed > disagreed
3. I felt the text messages were demanding	[58.30%, 90.23%]	Disagreed >agreed
4. I read more than 70% of the text messages	[81.71%, 99.11%]	Agreed > disagreed
5. The text message content was beneficial to my relationship	[67.51%, 94.39%]	Agreed > disagreed
6. The text messages helped me to make changes in my relationship	[20.65%, 65.00%]	Agreed > disagreed
7. I would recommend these text messages to my friends	[63.38%, 92.64%]	Agreed > disagreed
8. It was embarrassing receiving these text messages	[81.42%, 99.07%]	Disagreed > agreed
9. The text messages were helpful	[63.82%, 92.36%]	Agreed > disagreed
10. The text messages were proper length	[67.29%, 94.62%]	Agreed > disagreed

Note. CI = credible interval.

Analysis Dropout Rate

During the course of the study, one individual—randomly assigned to the treatment condition—terminated their participation by replying “STOP” to the intervention. The dropout rate was less than 1%.

Analysis of Retention Rate

In total, 93% of individuals participated in the follow-up survey. Nine individuals—four assigned to the treatment condition, and five in the control condition—did not complete the follow-up survey. Also, missingness was not related to treatment assignment (r = −0.03, p > 0.05).

Phone Number Verification

With a single exception, all participants verified their phone numbers by texting “yes” to the verification text message or completing the follow-up survey (>99%).

Discussion

We sought to examine the feasibility of utilizing text messages as a dissemination tool for relationship enhancement, and our results seem promising. Several individuals agreed that the intervention helped them make changes in their relationship, that the content was beneficial to their relationship, that they read over 70% of text messages, and that the messages encouraged them to be more mindful of their relationship (see Table 1). Further, the Bayesian analysis that compared the proportion of individuals who agreed/disagreed to the 10 participant reaction items was also promising. Additionally, 99% of participants authenticated their phone number, and the retention rate was 93%, which is greater than the recommended 70% retention rate for randomized controlled trail best-evidence behavioral interventions (Lyles et al., 2007).

These preliminary findings appear to be consistent with those Aguilera and Muñoz’s (2011) who found that text messages may be useful as a behavioral change tool and that text messages can improve desirable qualities, for example, producing changes in a relationship. These findings also fall in line with the broader area of literature that suggests that the content of the text messages was beneficial to the participants and that participants tend read a majority of the text messages that are sent to them (Aguilera & Muñoz, 2011; Chow et al., 2015; Obermayer et al., 2004).

Strengths of the Current Study

A strength of the current study is reflected in the reactions of married individuals in the treatment condition to the intervention. For instance, a greater proportion of participants believed that the texts were the proper length (99.5% CI [67.29%, 94.62%]), assisted them in making changes in their relationship (99.5% CI [20.65%, 65.00%]), and saw the texts as helpful (99.5% CI [63.82%, 92.36%]), among others.

One common complaint with the texts sent during ATTs was that some were demanding or guilt inducing (Keoleian et al., 2013). Contrary to ATTs, our participants’ reactions to the texts indicated that a greater proportion felt that the text messages were not demanding (99.5% CI [58.30%, 90.23%]).

Recommended Changes and Limitations

We recruited a homogenous sample from a large, private, religious university in the Western United States. Because this was a feasibility study, this suited our purposes. However, in future replications of this study, we plan to recruit a larger, more diverse, nationally representative sample that will allow for generalizable statistical inference.

Further, although the reaction to the text message content was positive, we found that http://dialmycalls.com allows its users to send only 142 characters per text message. Any text message exceeding 142 characters must be sent via a string of two text messages. Although this does not have to be changed, it would be convenient for whoever is sending the text messages and would require less time for participants to read.

Future Research

Although this feasibility study was not without limitation, preliminary findings have indicated that sending romantically involved individuals text message prompts produced changes in the relationship (99.5% CI [20.65%, 65.00%]), that the texts were helpful (99.5% CI [63.82%, 92.36%]), and that the content of the messages was beneficial to the individuals that were receiving them (99.5% CI [67.51%, 94.39%]). Due to these preliminary findings, the necessity of cell phones (Lenhart, 2010), the reach of text messages (Pettigrew, 2009), the low cost of delivery, the high retention rate, the low dose, and because texting is used by people of all socioeconomic backgrounds and races (Lenhart, 2010), further investigation into text-message-based prevention or intervention programs may be warranted.

In addition to replicating the current findings, future research could analyze whether the current intervention has an effect on constructs related to relationship health, for example, relationship satisfaction, constructive communication, and depression. This would be useful in determining the overall efficacy of the intervention using psychometrically valid and reliable scales. Additionally, after finishing the intervention, participants could rate text messages on a Likert-type scale to maximize the prompts efficacy. Also, the current study only sent text messages to married individuals. Future research could send both of the married individuals text messages and investigate the dyadic effects that the intervention may have on the relationship.

Future research could also investigate dose and posttreatment effects. Investigating dose and posttreatment effects could be beneficial in determining (1) causality and (2) when, during the intervention, constructs relating to relationship health are most effective, and (3) how long a treatment effect may last.

Conclusion

Relationship education programs, both face-to-face and computer-based, have been efficacious in increasing relationship satisfaction and in improving couples’ communication and relationship functioning (Braithwaite & Fincham, 2014; Jakubowski et al., 2004). Given that computer-based interventions are viewed as adequate forms of treatment (Cavanagh & Shapiro, 2004), results of the current study sought to suggest further investigation into the feasibility of utilizing texts as a dissemination tool for relationship enhancement shows significant promise.

We analyzed reactions to the intervention, dropout and retention rates, and whether participants would authenticate their phone numbers in a sample of married individuals, and the results seem promising. We discuss the next step in this process: investigating the efficacy of this method of delivery in a large, nationally representative sample.

Further, if text messaging proves to be a beneficial tool for dissemination of preventative relationship education, the implication is that other therapeutic interventions could be readily applied using text messages to any diverse context, given the population has the capability to receive text messages and cellular service.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by the Brigham Young University Experiential Learning Grant.

ORCID iD

S. Gabe Hatch

References

Aguilera

Muñoz

R. F.

(2011). Text messaging as an adjunct to CBT in low-income populations: A usability and feasibility pilot study. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42, 472.

Braithwaite

S. R.

Fincham

F. D.

(2007). ePREP: Computer based prevention of relationship dysfunction, depression and anxiety. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26, 609–622.

Braithwaite

S. R.

Fincham

F. D.

(2009). A randomized clinical trial of a computer based preventive intervention: Replication and extension of ePREP. Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 32.

Braithwaite

S. R.

Fincham

F. D.

(2011). Computer-based dissemination: A randomized clinical trial of ePREP using the actor partner interdependence model. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 49, 126–131.

Braithwaite

S. R.

Fincham

F. D.

(2014). Computer-based prevention of intimate partner violence in marriage. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 54, 12–21.

Cavanagh

Shapiro

D. A.

(2004). Computer treatment for common mental health problems. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 239–251.

Chow

C. K.

Redfern

Hillis

G. S.

Thakkar

Santo

Hackett

M. L.

… Bompoint

(2015). Effect of lifestyle-focused text messaging on risk factor modification in patients with coronary heart disease: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 314, 1255–1263.

Doss

B. D.

Cicila

L. N.

Georgia

E. J.

Roddy

M. K.

Nowlan

K. M.

Benson

L. A.

Christensen

(2016). A randomized controlled trial of the web-based OurRelationship program: Effects on relationship and individual functioning. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84, 285.

Jakubowski

S. F.

Milne

E. P.

Brunner

Miller

R. B.

(2004). A review of empirically supported marital enrichment programs. Family Relations, 53, 528–536.

10.

Joyce

Weibelzahl

(2011). Student counseling services: Using text messaging to lower barriers to help seeking. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 48, 287–299.

11.

Keoleian

Stalcup

S. A.

Polcin

D. L.

Brown

Galloway

(2013). A cognitive behavioral therapy-based text messaging intervention for methamphetamine dependence. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 45, 434–442.

12.

Lenhart

(2010, 9). Cell phones and American adults. Retrieved March 17, 2017, from Pew Research Center Internet, Science & Tech: http://www.pewinternet.org/2010/09/02/cell-phones-and-american-adults/

13.

Lyles

C. M.

Kay

L. S.

Crepaz

Herbst

J. H.

Passin

W. F.

Kim

A. S.

… Mullins

M. M.

(2007). Best-evidence interventions: Findings from a systematic review of HIV behavioral interventions for US populations at high risk, 2000–2004. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 133–143.

14.

Mason

Benotsch

E. G.

Way

Kim

Snipes

(2014). Text messaging to increase readiness to change alcohol use in college students. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 35, 47–52.

15.

Obermayer

J. L.

Riley

W. T.

Asif

Jean-Mary

(2004). College smoking-cessation using cell phone text messaging. Journal of American College Health, 53, 71–78.

16.

Pettigrew

(2009). Text messaging and connectedness within close interpersonal relationships. Marriage & Family Review, 45, 697–716.

17.

Rogge

R. D.

Cobb

R. J.

Lawrence

Johnson

M. D.

Bradbury

T. N.

(2013). Is skills training necessary for the primary prevention of marital distress and dissolution? A 3-year experimental study of three interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81, 949.

18.

Simons

Harris

Willis

(1994). Pathways to marriage: Learning for married life in Australia. Adelaide, Australia: Centre for Research in Education and Work, University of South Australia.

19.

Weitzel

J. A.

Bernhardt

J. M.

Usdan

Mays

Glanz

(2007). Using wireless handheld computers and tailored text messaging to reduce negative consequences of drinking alcohol. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and drugs, 68, 534–537.