PREPARE: Prediction of Marital

Satisfaction
EMR6410, Spring 06
Dr. Warren Lacefield, Professor
Hong Zhong, EMR
Amy Gullickson, IDPE

Overview
PREPARE:

Premarital Personal and

Relationship Evaluation
A series of tests designed to assess an
engaged couples relationship
Originally published in 1978
Revised in 1986, 1996 and 2000

Description of the Instrument

165

items
Assesses 20 areas of relationship quality:

Significant Issues for Couples (12 scales)

Personality Assessment (4 scales)
Family of Origin Map (4 scales)

Scoring
Individual

scores for each spouse

Positive Couple Agreement (PCA) score

based on the couples level of consensus for each

area of the instrument

Couples

classified into four types

PREPARE Typologies
Vitalized

couples
Harmonious couples
Traditional couples
Conflicted couples
(Fowers, Montel & Olson, 1996)

Typology Validity
The

study conducted by Fowers and

Olson(1996) offered clear statistical support
for the external validity of the premarital
typology.
Based on survey of 393 couples who took
PREPARE

237 still married

89 who cancelled their weddings
67 couples who were separated or divorced

(Fowers, Montel & Olson, 1996)

Concurrent Validity
PREPARE

tested in comparison to three other

marital relationship scales
Overall correlation between tests p < .01
129 combinations of scales and criterion
variables tested:

96 tested in the predicted direction at p < .01

21 non-significant
2 tested opposite of predicted at p < .01

(Fowers & Olson, 1986)

Predictive Validity: Two Studies

Larsen

& Olson (1989) accurate predictions

for Married/Satisfied and Divorced/Separated

individual scores 77%

PCA scores 84%

Fowers

& Olson (1986) combined PCA and

individual scores accurately predict:

91% of couples who would divorce or separate

93% of couples who would be highly satisfied

Face Validity: Interviews

Four

practitioners who use the instrument as

part of pre-marital counseling
83 administrations among them
Items seem appropriate to couples
Participants and counselors agree that
PREPARE results portray couples accurately

Reliability
Internal

reliability (scales) mean alpha = .73

Test-retest with two week interval reliability
ranges from .64 to .93, mean = .78
(Larsen & Olson, 1989)

Validity & Reliability: as advertised

Predictions based on validated typology

classification
National Norms based on 500,000 couples for
PREPARE
PREPARE has validity in that it discriminates
premarital couples that get divorced from those that
are happily married with about 80-85% accuracy.
Reliability is high (alpha reliability of .80 - .85).

(http://www.prepare-enrich.com/about_us.cfm?id=33#Evidence_for_PE)

Burows MMY Report on Reliability

Internal

consistency reliabilities for the

subscales from .73 to .90
Average reliabilities for each of the tests for
PREPARE is .75.
Test-retest reliability scores (administration
interval not reported) are reported at .80.

Burows Report (continued)

Both

the internal consistency and the testretest reliabilities have improved from those
reported by Larson et al. (1995) for a
previous version (e.g., internal consistency
range from .64 to .85; test-retest r = .73).
Unreliable items dropped for version 2000
Data suggest that the instrument has very
good reliability for relationship scales

Advantages
High

reliability, high validity and large

norms(n=250,000) with couples from various
ethnic groups.
Inventories provide the counselor with a rich
array of items that reflect the many
dimensions of relationships.
Provides the user with a good sense of the
clinical and research issues.

Limitations

The applicability of these inventories to diverse family

groups and family contexts is unclear.
Persons with lower reading levels would have some
difficulty.
It is not designed for one person.
It is not designed for individuals with very severe
emotional problems and with couples having intense
marital conflict.
Reliability and predictive validity have not been
tested on version 2000.

Summary
Facilitate

the communication in each couple

about meaningful issues in their relationship.
Increase their awareness of their relationship
strengths and growth areas.
Provide them with relationship skills
Improve their relationship.

Areas for Further Study

Family Adaptability and Cohesion, Evaluation Scales III

(FACES III), Olson, Portner & Lavee (2002)
Enriching Relationship Issues, Communication and Happiness
Inventory, Olson (2002)
Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills (PAIRS),
Gordon (1994)
Marital Satisfaction Inventory (MSI), Snyder (1991)
Family Environment Scale (FES), Moos & Moos (1986)
Pre-Marriage Awareness Inventory (PAI), Velander (1978)
Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS), Spanier (1976)

References

Barnett, Lindean E., Rev. Personal Interview, 4/4/06.

Buros Institute of Mental Measurements. Mental Measurement Yearbook (Online).
SilverPlatter Information, Inc. website: http://libproxy.library.wmich.edu:2048/login?
url=http://web 5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/start.ws?customer=c50469&databases=S(YB)
Evers, Eric, Rev. Personal Interview, 4/6/06.
Evers, Paige G., Rev. Personal Interview, 4/3/06.
Fowers, B.J., Montel, K.H., & Olson, D.H.(1996). Predicting Success For Premarital
Couple Types Based on PREPARE. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, 22 (1), 103-119.
Knutson, L. and Olson, D.H. (2003). Effectiveness of PREPARE Program with Premarital
Couples in Community Settings. Marriage & Family: A Christian Journal, 6 (4), 529-546.
Larson, J.H., Holman, T.B., Klein, D.M., Busby, D. M., Stahmann, R. F., and Peterson, D.
(1995). A review of comprehensive questionnaires used in premarital education and
counseling. Family Relations, 44, 245-252.
Olson, D.H., & Olson, A.K.(1999). Prepare/Enrich Program: Version 2000. Handbook of
Preventative Approaches in Couple Therapy. Pages 196-216 New York: Brunner/Mazel,
Inc.
PREPARE/ENRICH website: http://www.prepare-enrich.com/indexm.cfm
Watson, David G., Rev. Email communication, 4/12/06.