Relationship Change Scale (RCS)

Abstract

The Relationship Change Scale (RCS) is a specialized 27-item psychological scale designed to measure an individual’s subjective perception of change within an intimate relationship over a defined period. Developed initially by Schlein (1971) and formalized by Guerney (1977), the RCS is widely utilized as an outcome measure, particularly in research evaluating the effectiveness of couples therapy and psychoeducational programs, such as those emphasizing the Relationship Enhancement (RE) model. It moves beyond simple satisfaction metrics by quantifying perceived shifts across multiple dimensions of dyadic functioning.

The instrument requires respondents to rate the degree of change they have observed in areas including communication skills, emotional intimacy, mutual understanding, and overall relationship strength, using a 5-point scale ranging from “Much Less” to “Much More.”

Keywords

Relationship Change Scale, RCS, Relationship Enhancement, marital satisfaction, communication, intimacy, couples therapy, psychological assessment, dyadic change.

Authors

S. P. Schlein, B. G. Guerney

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Relationship Change Scale (RCS) is to quantify the subjective degree of positive or negative change experienced by an individual regarding specific facets of their intimate partnership. It serves as a sensitive instrument for tracking therapeutic progress or evaluating the impact of life transitions (e.g., pregnancy, illness) on relationship quality.

Unlike scales that measure static levels of satisfaction, the RCS focuses specifically on perceived movement, making it particularly useful for assessing intervention efficacy. It provides granular data on whether skills taught (e.g., active listening, constructive conflict resolution) have translated into perceived behavioral and emotional changes within the relationship.

Construct

The RCS measures the perceived change in the quality of the interpersonal relationship across several core psychological and behavioral constructs. These constructs are heavily weighted toward skills deemed essential for healthy functioning within the Relationship Enhancement framework.

The 27 items assess specific dimensions, which generally fall into four conceptual areas: Individual Satisfaction and Perception (satisfaction with self/partner); Mutual Understanding and Empathy (awareness of partner’s needs, understanding feelings); Communication Skills and Openness (ability to express feelings, ease of talking, listening capacity); and Dyadic Quality and Strength (trust, intimacy, conflict handling, sexual satisfaction).

Validity

The validity of the RCS is typically supported through its application in experimental research designs. Studies examining the scale frequently report evidence of construct validity, demonstrating that changes measured by the RCS significantly differentiate between treatment and control groups following relationship training programs.

Furthermore, concurrent validity is often established by correlating RCS change scores with post-intervention scores on established measures of marital adjustment and relationship satisfaction. The scale’s comprehensive coverage of communication and intimacy skills lends face validity to its use in evaluating skill-based therapeutic approaches.

Reliability

While specific psychometric data must be drawn from published validation studies, the RCS is generally reported to possess acceptable levels of reliability for use in research settings. Reliability assessments typically focus on internal consistency, reflecting the extent to which the 27 items homogeneously measure the underlying construct of relationship change.

Given its structure, reliability analysis often involves calculating Cronbach’s alpha for the overall scale and its various conceptual sub-components (e.g., communication cluster, satisfaction cluster). High internal consistency is crucial, as the scale aims to capture a coherent shift across multiple related dimensions of dyadic interaction.

Factor Analysis

Although the initial development did not explicitly detail a formal factor structure, empirical studies utilizing the RCS often suggest a multi-factor solution, consistent with the diverse range of skills and perceptions the instrument covers. The items logically cluster into distinct, yet correlated, dimensions of relationship functioning.

Typical factor groupings identified in subsequent research include: (1) Personal Fulfillment/Self-Acceptance within the partnership; (2) Empathic Understanding and Awareness of the partner; and (3) Interactive Skills and Dyadic Strength, encompassing trust, communication, and conflict management. Researchers often score these derived factors separately to provide a profile of change rather than relying solely on a single total score.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-Report Questionnaire / Outcome Measure

Format: 27 items rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (Much Less, Less, No Change, More, Much More), assessing perceived change.

Language Available: English (Primary)

Population Group: Individuals in intimate relationships (dating, cohabiting, married, or engaged in couples counseling).

Age Group: Adults

Population Details: Has been applied to various populations, including dating college students, married couples, and specific clinical samples such as those dealing with chronic illness or pregnancy (Rankin & Campbell, 1983).

Test Methodology: Retrospective self-assessment of perceived change in relationship quality between two defined time points (e.g., pre- and post-intervention).

Keywords

Psychoeducational intervention, relationship assessment, dyadic functioning, self-report, Schlein 1971, Guerney 1977, couples counseling, emotional change.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source material.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source material.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Relationship Change Scale was initially developed in 1971 by S. P. Schlein as part of his doctoral dissertation research at Pennsylvania State University. It was subsequently refined and popularized through the work of B. G. Guerney, notably in his 1977 publication, which formalized the Relationship Enhancement programs. The test year is generally cited as 1971 or 1977.

The instrument is widely cited and often reproduced in academic contexts for research use. The instrument can be found online via academic repositories, such as the electronic theses and dissertations collection at East Tennessee State University: http://dc.etsu.edu/etd. Specific commercial licensing or fee requirements for clinical practice should be verified with institutions associated with the Relationship Enhancement model.

Reference’s

• Schlein, S. P. (1971). Training dating couples in empathic and open communication: An experimental evaluation of a potential preventative mental health program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: Pennsylvania State University.
• Schlein, A., & Guerney, B. G. (1971). Relationship enhancement. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.
• Guerney, B. G. (1977). Basic skills of relationship enhancement programs. In Guerney, B. G. (ed.), Relationship Enhancement, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 25–53.
• Rankin, E. A., & Campbell, N. D. (1983). Perception of relationship changes during the third trimester of pregnancy. Issues in Health Care of Women, 6, 351-359.
• Vanhook, Patricia McKenzie, “Comeback of Appalachian Female Stroke Survivors: The Interrelationships of Cognition, Function, Self-Concept, Interpersonal, and Social Relationships.” (2007). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2246. The original instrument can be accessed online: http://dc.etsu.edu/etd/2246.

Items of the Relationship Change Scale (RCS)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. My satisfaction with myself in this relationship is:
2. My satisfaction with my partner in this relationship is:
3. I think my partner considers me a satisfactory mate:
4. I think my partner considers him/herself a satisfactory mate:
5. The strength of our relationship with each other is:
6. I am aware of my partner’s needs and desires in our relationship:
7. I understand my own feelings about our relationship
8. I understand my own needs and desires in our relationship:
9. My ability to understand my partner’s feelings is:
10. Our ability to communicate is:
11. My sensitivity towards my partner as a person is:
12. My concern and warmth toward my partner is:
13. My self-expression and openness in relation to my partner is:
14. My ability to understand my partner’s likes and dislikes is:
15. My ability to listen well to my partner is:
16. My trust in my partner is:
17. My feeling of intimacy with my partner is:
18. My confidence in our relationship is:
19. Our ability to handle disagreements constructively is:
20. Our satisfaction with our sexual relationship is:
21. My ease in talking with my partner is:
22. My ability to express positive feelings toward my partner is:
23. My ability to constructively express negative feelings towards my partner is:
24. My willingness to share my personal concerns with my partner is:
25. My capacity to believe and accept positive feelings my partner expresses toward me is:
26. My capacity to deal constructively with negative feelings my partner expresses toward me is:
27. My understanding of the kind of relationship I want to have in the future with my partner is: