RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES

The Kansas Marital

Satisfaction Scale (KMS)
Three-item self-report for married couples
The Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMS) is a three-item measure designed to assess
relationship satisfaction in married couples. The original version of the measure includes
items aimed at assessing a person’s satisfaction with their spouse, their marriage and their
marital relationship.

Internal consistency Test-retest reliability Validity Sensitivity to change

Psychometric features ✓ ? ✓ ✓

Brevity Availability Ease of scoring Used in the UK

Implementation
features ✓ ✓ ✓ ?

*Please note that our assessment of this measure is based solely on the English version of the measure. The other versions of this
measure were not assessed and therefore it should not be assumed that they would receive the same rating.

What is this document?

This assessment of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale has been produced by the Early Intervention
Foundation (EIF) as part of guidance on selecting measures relating to parental conflict and its impact on
children. For more information on how to select and use a measurement tool, download our short practical
guide on using validated tools to measure parental conflict and its impact on children: https://www.eif.org.uk/
resource/using-validated-tools-to-measure-parental-conflict-and-its-impact-on-children

We found insufficient evidence to establish that the KMS has a good test-retest reliability
over short periods of time.

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES 1 EARLY INTERVENTION FOUNDATION | NOVEMBER 2022

About the measure

Author(s)/ Publication year Type of measure

developer(s) for the original
Schumm, W. R., version of the
Nichols, C. W., measure
Schectman, K. L., &
Grigsby, C. C. 1983 Parent self-report

Outcome(s) assessed This measure has been designed to assess marital satisfaction
in married couples.
Subscales There are no subscales.

Mode of administration This measure can be completed in person or online.

Example item ‘How satisfied are you with your marriage?’

Target population This measure was originally developed for married couples.

Response format Seven-point Likert scale (1 = ‘Extremely dissatisfied’; 2 =

‘Very dissatisfied’; 3 = ‘Somewhat dissatisfied’; 4 = ‘Mixed’;
5 = ‘Somewhat satisfied’; 6 = ‘Very satisfied’; 7 = ‘Extremely
satisfied’).
Strengths & limitations Strengths:
• The KMS is a valid measure which is sensitive to change in
short interventions.
• The KMS is short and quick to complete.
• It is free to access and easy to score: the measure is scored
by summing together the point value responses of each item.
Limitations:
• According to our review, we are unsure about the stability of
the KMS over time.
• We are also unsure if the measure can be used in the UK.
Link N/A

Contact details N/A

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES 2 EARLY INTERVENTION FOUNDATION | NOVEMBER 2022

Copyright Based on our review of the evidence, it appears that the
developers did not provide information on copyright. The key
reference (included below) should be cited when using the
measure.
Key reference(s) Schumm, W. R., Nichols, C. W., Schectman, K. L., & Grigsby,
C. C. (1983). Characteristics of responses to the Kansas
Marital Satisfaction Scale by a sample of 84 married mothers.
Psychological Reports, 53(2), 567–572.

Psychometric features in detail

Internal We found a number of papers (Graham, Diebels, & Barnow, 2011;

consistency Green, Woody, Maxwell, Mercer, & Williams, 1998; Grover, Paff-
Bergen, Russell, & Schumm, 1984; Nichols, Schumm, Schectman,
& Grigsby, 1983; Schumm et al., 1986; Schumm, Scanlon, Crow,
Green, & Buckler, 1983) reporting good internal consistency for the
✓ KMS, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.89–0.96.
Green et al. (1998) examined the KMS, with a modified five-
point Likert scale, in a large sample of African American adults
and compared these findings with the results from a sample of
Caucasian spouses. 589 African-American husbands, 299 African
American wives, 1,818 Caucasian husbands and 1,511 Caucasian
wives completed the measure. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.96 for the
entire sample, 0.95 in African American wives and 0.96 in African
American husbands, Caucasian wives and Caucasian husbands.
Nichols et al. (1983) examined the KMS in a sample of 84 married
mothers and reported high internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s
alpha of 0.98.
Schumm et al. (1986) examined the internal consistency of
the KMS in a sample of 61 wives and found the KMS to have a
Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.93.
Schumm et al. (1983) examined the KMS in a sample of 79 married
couples and reported a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.89 and 0.93 for
husbands and wives, respectively.
Grover et al. (1984) examined the internal consistency of the KMS
in a sample of 51 wives and reported a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.92.
Graham et al. (2011) conducted a meta-analysis of 398 articles that
evaluated the reliability of seven different relationship satisfaction
measures. The authors found the KMS to be the strongest measure
overall, with an average Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.95 across studies.

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES 3 EARLY INTERVENTION FOUNDATION | NOVEMBER 2022

Test-retest From our review of the evidence, we found only one study reporting
reliability on test-retest reliability over a long period of time (10 weeks). This
evidence is not sufficient for us to conclude that the PPC has good
test-retest reliability over short periods of time.
In Mitchell et al. (1983) the measure was analysed after a time
? interval of 10 weeks reported with 106 mothers who participated
in a nutrition education programme. The authors reported that the
correlation coefficient score was 0.71 (p < 0.001).

Validity Green et al. (1998) assessed the validity of the measure by examining
the correlations between the KMS, with a modified five-point Likert
scale, and the Generalized Contentment Scale, and between the
KMS and the Cohesion subscale of the Family Adaptability and
✓ Cohesion Scales. The authors reported that the Pearson correlation
coefficients between the KMS and the Generalized Contentment Scale
(all p<0.001) was -0.41 and -0.30 for African American wives and
husbands respectively, and -0.39 and -0.30 for Caucasian wives and
husbands respectively. This study was conducted with a sample of
589 African-America husbands, 299 African American wives, 1,818
Caucasian husbands and 1,511 Caucasian wives.
Crane et al. (2000) assessed the validity of the KMS by examining
the correlation between the KMS and the Revised Dyadic Adjustment
Scale. The authors reported that the Pearson correlation coefficient
between the two scales was 0.783. This study was conducted with a
sample of 486 married individuals.
Schumm et al. (1986) assessed the validity of the KMS by examining
the correlations between the KMS and the Quality Marriage Index, the
Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS), the DAS satisfaction subscale, the
DAS cohesion subscale, the DAS consensus subscale and the DAS
Affectional Expression subscale. The authors report that the Pearson
correlation coefficient between the KMS and the other scales was
0.91, 0.83, 0.77, 0.72, 0.63 and 0.58 respectively (all correlations were
significant, p < 0.001). The study was conducted in a sample of 61
wives.
Calahan et al. (1996) assessed the validity of the KMS by examining
the correlation between the KMS and the Quality Marriage Index.
Pearson correlation coefficients were revealed to be 0.95 for wives,
0.90 for husbands and 0.93 for the total sample (all significant,
p<0.01). The study was conducted in a sample of 220 married
spouses.

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES 4 EARLY INTERVENTION FOUNDATION | NOVEMBER 2022

Sensitivity to This measure assesses marital satisfaction and there is evidence
change to suggest that the KMS can detect changes after participating in
short interventions.
Jansen et al. (2021) reported that the KMS detected changes
between pre-test and post-test (mean pre =16.7; mean post = 17.9)
✓
p< 0.001, Cohen’s d = -0.25. This study was a single arm pre-post
multisite trial that aimed to adapt, pilot, optimise and evaluate
a low-cost parenting program, with data collected from North
Macedonia, Republic of Moldova and Romania in 2018. 93 parents
of children aged 2–9 completed the KMS at pre-test and post-test.
Kwena et al. (2022) also reported that the KMS was sensitive to
change between pre-test and post-test; marital satisfaction scores
significantly increased from a median of 5.0 to 6.3 (p < .01) among
men and from 4 to 6 (p < .01) among women. This study adopted
a prospective pre-post design and recruited 118 individuals, 58
couples, who all completed the KMS pre-test and post-test. The
intervention tested was a counsellor-led couple education and
counselling intervened dubbed Waya.

Implementation features in detail

Brevity This measure has three items and can be completed in less than
10 minutes.

Availability This measure is free to use and does not require a clinical license
to be used.

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES 5 EARLY INTERVENTION FOUNDATION | NOVEMBER 2022

Ease of The measure has simple scoring instructions involving basic
scoring calculations. More precisely, the measure is scored by summing
together the point value responses for each item. It does not need
to be scored by someone with specific training or qualifications.
The resultant score ranges from 3 to 21, with a higher score
✓
indicating greater marital satisfaction.

Used in No evidence was found for the use of this measure in the UK.
the UK

Language(s) The KMS is available in English.

References
Calahan, C. A. (1996). Correlations of Scores on the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale and the Quality Marriage
Index. Psychological Reports, 78(2), 530–530. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1996.78.2.530
Crane, D. R., Middleton, K. C., & Bean, R. A. (2000). Establishing Criterion Scores for the Kansas Marital
Satisfaction Scale and the Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 28(1),
53–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/019261800261815
Graham, J. M., Diebels, K. J., & Barnow, Z. B. (2011). The reliability of relationship satisfaction: A reliability
generalization meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022441
Green, R. G., Woody, D., Maxwell, S., Mercer, R., & Williams, S. (1998). Reliability and Validity of the Kansas Marital
Satisfaction Scale in a Sample of African-American Husbands and Wives. Psychological Reports, 82(1), 255–
258. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1998.82.1.255
Grover, K. J., Paff-Bergen, L. A., Russell, C. S., & Schumm, W. R. (1984). The Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale: A
Further Brief Report. Psychological Reports, 54(2), 629–630. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1984.54.2.629
Jansen, E., Frantz, I., Hutchings, J., Lachman, J., Williams, M., Taut, D., Baban, A., Raleva,M., Lesco, G., Ward, C.,
Gardner, F., Fang, X., Heinrichs, N., Foran, H. M. (2021). Preventing child mental health problems in southeastern
Europe: Feasibility study (phase 1 of MOST framework). Family Process, 61(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/
famp.12720
Kwena, Z. A., Bukusi, E. A., Turan, J. M., Darbes, L., Farquhar, C., Makokha, C., & Baeten, J. M. (2022). Effects of the
Waya Intervention on Marital Satisfaction and HIV Risk Behaviors in Western Kenya: A Pre-Post Study Design.
Archives of Sexual Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02180-9
Mitchell, S. E., Newell, G. K., & Schumm, W. R. (1983). Test-Retest Reliability of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction
Scale. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 545–546. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1983.53.2.545
Nichols, C. W., Schumm, W. R., Schectman, K. L., & Grigsby, C. C. (1983). Characteristics of Responses to the
Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale by a Sample of 84 Married Mothers. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 567–572.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1983.53.2.567
Schumm, W. R., Paff-Bergen, L. A., Hatch, R. C., Obiorah, F. C., Copeland, J. M., Meens, L. D., & Bugaighis, M. A.
(1986). Concurrent and Discriminant Validity of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale. Journal of Marriage and
Family, 48(2), 381–387. https://doi.org/10.2307/352405
Schumm, W. R., Scanlon, E. D., Crow, C. L., Green, D. M., & Buckler, D. L. (1983). Characteristics of the Kansas
Marital Satisfaction Scale in a Sample of 79 Married Couples. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 583–588. https://doi.
org/10.2466/pr0.1983.53.2.583
RELATIONSHIP QUALITY | MARRIED COUPLES 6 EARLY INTERVENTION FOUNDATION | NOVEMBER 2022