Search Here

The Development of the Relationship Flourishing Scale developed from the study of the romantic relationship quality of humans. It is a 12-item system to measure the quality of the relationship. Therefore, to judge the way complicated, a long-term relationship more than their satisfaction, they developed the RFS.

Though there are a lot of instruments to measure the quality of a relationship. But most of them are just focus on the hedonic (pleasure of happiness) part of the satisfaction. However, some authors said that there are also eudaimonic part of life (human flourishing) that we need to consider.

Three studies of the RFS prove its construct validity like its content, convergent and incremental. It's accumulative validity and independence show that it states additional details about deeper and richer aspects of relationship quality. It is beyond from hedonic relationship quality measures.

Introduction to the development

The developer of the system stated that:

• First, adults need to satisfy their physical and physiological craving. The satisfaction of this part is very important to the romantic relationship. Hence, are the strong intuition to the happiness of each couple.
• Next, very large amount of time and effort have been given to the measure and relationship quality. For over the last four decades, it has a lot of improvements in the quality of the measurements.
• Then, some scholars have agitated that focus on the assessment of their fulfillment with relationship may be overly limited and perhaps short.
• Furthermore, the ontological individualism explains by Bella, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler, and Tipton (1985). They stated that the most basic reality of human is that we are unique individuals with happiness as the primary concern.

The conclusion of the process

In conclusion, the developer of the system concluded that the theoretically patterned RFS seems to have very good educational moral for the study on eudaimonic parts of romantic relationships. It includes the meaning of the relationship, shared goals of the partners, giving to the partners, personal development. The results are constant with Aristotelian theory and advises that hedonic evaluation does not include the deeper meaning of romantic relationships.