Table 2.
Effects of communal strength and perceived partner responsiveness on relationship satisfaction.
|
PwPD’sRelationship satisfaction |
CP’sRelationship satisfaction |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b (SE) | t | CI | b (SE) | t | CI | |
| PwPD CS | 4.32 (1.49) | 25.24* | 1.17, 7.48 | 2.97 (.88) | 3.37** | 1.11, 4.83 |
| CP CS | –1.39 (1.84) | –.756 | –5.30, 2.50 | 1.82 (1.09) | 1.67 | –.480, 4.12 |
| PwPD PPR | 9.78 (3.39) | 2.89* | 2.63, 16.93 | 2.01 (2.57) | .783 | –3.41, 7.44 |
| CP PPR | .455 (4.67) | .097 | –9.41, 10.32 | 6.07 (3.55) | 1.71 | –1.42, 13.56 |
Note. b represents unstandardized betas; SE represents standard error of the estimate. PwPD = partner with PD (N = 20), CP = care partners (N = 20). *p <.05. **p <.01