Mixed-methods analysis assessed dyadic adjustment levels in couples, suggesting interventions for support.
This article examines the dyadic adjustment among couples in the early stage of marriage within selected Baptist assemblies in Nairobi North Baptist Association Zone. Using a pragmatic paradigm and a mixed-methods approach for data collection, the study sought to address the following objectives: to assess the level of dyadic adjustment among couples during the early years of marriage and to identify potential recommendations for counseling and support interventions aimed at enhancing dyadic adjustment within selected Baptist Assemblies in Nairobi North Baptist Association Zone. The literature review was based on Interpersonal Relationship Theory. The researcher used both purposive sampling for questionnaire respondents and random sampling for the focus group discussion participants. The population of the couples who got married in the Baptist Churches within the period of 2019-2023 consisted of 145 couples, and using the Yamane formula, the sample size of 106 couples was derived. A total of 10 participants were purposefully selected for the focus group discussion from within the four Baptist Assemblies. The researcher collected data using standardized Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale which was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 29 and presented using inferential and descriptive statistics while the Focus Group Discussion responses were recorded and then transcribed. The RDAS levels among the 104 sample participant’s found were: 40.8% at low level, 52.8% at moderate level and 5.77% at high level. The RDA scores statistics indicated a mean dyadic adjustment score of 41.47 and a median of 42.00, with a standard deviation of 10.004, suggesting variability in the scores. The recommendations for couples in the early stage of marriage from the selected Baptist Churches included marriage and family therapy, training in communication and Psychoeducation on healthy attachment, among others.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kamau et al. (2025) studied this question.