Spiritually incorporating couple therapy in practice: Christian-accommodated couple therapy as an illustration.

Spiritually incorporating couple therapy (SICT)-couple therapy that incorporates spiritual interventions-has a growing research base. Information is limited on how spiritual interventions are used in practice; thus we studied treatment-as-usual (TAU). SICT is treatment that, at a couple's request, sometimes draws upon spiritual resources when addressing relational issues. We tracked 65 couples from 29 couple therapists (who advertised as spiritually incorporating therapists) over 402 sessions of SICT. Couple spirituality predicted use of spiritual interventions more than did therapist spirituality. The most used spiritual interventions included silent prayer for the couple, discussions of hope and forgiveness, and encouragement to consult their heart. In SICT, therapists used evidence-based couple therapy approaches. SICT should (a) treat highly religious couples in high distress as being at risk for early drop out; (b) follow couples' leads in using spiritual methods; and (c) draw on evidence-based couple and spiritual practices. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Forgiveness-reconciliation and communication-conflict-resolution interventions versus retested controls in early married couples.

The first 6 months of marriage are optimal for marriage enrichment interventions. The Hope-Focused Approach to couple enrichment was presented as two 9-hr interventions--(a) Handling Our Problems Effectively (HOPE), which emphasized communication and conflict resolution, and (b) Forgiveness and Reconciliation through Experiencing Empathy (FREE). HOPE and FREE were compared with repeated assessment controls. Couples were randomly assigned and were assessed at pretreatment (t1); 1 month posttreatment (t2) and at 3- (t3), 6- (t4), and 12-month (t5) follow-ups using self-reports. In addition to self-report measures, couples were assessed at t1, t2, and t5 using salivary cortisol, and behavioral coding of decision making. Of 179 couples who began the study, 145 cases were analyzed. Both FREE and HOPE produced lasting positive changes on self-reports. For cortisol reactivity, HOPE and FREE reduced reactivity at t2, but only HOPE at t5. For coded behaviors, control couples deteriorated; FREE and HOPE did not change. Enrichment training was effective regardless of the focus of the training.

Relationship factors and quality among mixed-orientation couples.

Mixed-orientation couples are defined as a heterosexual couple in which 1 partner experiences same-sex attraction and the other does not. Despite the fact that there is a sizable number of mixed-orientation couples in the U.S. adult population, few researchers have studied this population, and thus, there is limited understanding of these relationships. The authors examined the degree to which relationship commitment, partner-focused forgivingness, and marital values were associated with relationship quality, and how these variables predicted relationship quality. The total sample (N = 265) consisted of 2 independent samples-105 sexual minorities (i.e., the spouse who experiences same-sex attraction) and 160 heterosexual spouses. The data were not dyadic. Together, commitment, partner-focused forgivingness, and marital values accounted for roughly 43% of the variance in relationship quality. Relationship commitment was found to be the largest single predictor of relationship quality, followed by partner-focused forgivingness. Research and clinical implications are discussed. This study significantly adds to the current research base by quantitatively measuring various variables in these relationships, as well as expanding our understanding of relationship quality in mixed-orientation couples and factors that may play a role.