<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.0//EN" "http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query/static/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
<PublisherName>Science and Education Publishing</PublisherName>
<JournalTitle>American Journal of Applied Psychology</JournalTitle>
<Issn>2333-4738</Issn>
<Volume>5</Volume>
<Issue>1</Issue>
<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>1</Month>
<Day>17</Day>
</PubDate>
</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>From Perceived Similarity of Ideals to Relationship Satisfaction: A Path Analysis Using Dyadic Data</ArticleTitle>
<FirstPage>12</FirstPage>
<LastPage>17</LastPage>
<Language>EN</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
<FirstName>Iulia-Diana</FirstName>
<LastName>Muraru</LastName>
</Author>
<Author>
<FirstName>Magdalena</FirstName>
<LastName>Iorga</LastName>
<Affiliation>Department of Behavioral Sciences, University of Medicine and Pharmacy 'Gr.T.Popa', Iasi, Romania</Affiliation>
</Author>
<Author>
<FirstName>Nicoleta</FirstName>
<LastName>Turliuc</LastName>
</Author>

</AuthorList>
<ArticleIdList>
<ArticleId IdType="pii">AJAP2017513</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="doi">10.12691/ajap-5-1-3</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
<History>
<PubDate PubStatus="received">
<Year>2016</Year>
<Month>8</Month>
<Day>15</Day>
</PubDate>
<PubDate PubStatus="revised">
<Year>2016</Year>
<Month>12</Month>
<Day>26</Day>
</PubDate>
<PubDate PubStatus="accepted">
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>1</Month>
<Day>15</Day>
</PubDate>
</History>
<Abstract>Aim: The purpose of this study is to develop, using the ideal standards model (with its five dimensions: warmth-trustworthiness, vitality-attractiveness, status-resources, intimacy-loyalty and passion) and dyadic data analysis, a complex model assessing the relationship between perceived ideal similarity and relationship satisfaction. Material and Methods: Couples completed measures about perceived ideal similarity, communication about ideals, importance of ideals, perception of the current partner/relationship, coping strategies used when the partner/relationship is less than ideal and relationship satisfaction. Results: The fit indices for the proposed models are very good (GFI &gt; .90, AGFI &gt; .90, CFI &gt; .90, RMSEA &lt; .08, NFI &gt; .90, CFI&gt;.90) with the exception of status-resources dimension. As a result, it was eliminated from the analysis. Perceived similarity of ideals led to own (warmth-trustworthiness, vitality-attractiveness, and passion) and partner (intimacy-loyalty) communication about those ideals. More communication about ideals led to own (warmth-trustworthiness, vitality-attractiveness, intimacy-loyalty) and partner (warmth-trustworthiness, passion) increased real-ideal discrepancy scores. These, in turn, motivated own (warmth-trustworthiness, vitality-attractiveness, intimacy-loyalty, passion) and partner (intimacy-loyalty) use of coping strategies to manage the discrepancies between actual and ideal partner/relationship. The use of coping strategies led to higher rate regarding own (warmth-trustworthiness, vitality-attractiveness, intimacy-loyalty, passion) and partner (intimacy-loyalty, passion) relationship satisfaction. Conclusions: Given the importance that ideal standards play in relationship/partner evaluation, it could be helpful to shed light on the processes that have an impact on relationships improving/deteriorating over time. Thus, the impact of perceived ideal similarity on marital satisfaction could be of particular interest.</Abstract>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
