Content uploaded by Thomas Niederkrotenthaler
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Thomas Niederkrotenthaler on Jul 28, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing Crisis 2016
DOI: 10.1027/0227-5910/a000407
Research Trends
Relationship Satisfaction and
Risk Factors for Suicide
Benedikt Till1,2, Ulrich S. Tran2, and Thomas Niederkrotenthaler1
1Suicide Research Unit, Institute of Social Medicine, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
2Department of Basic Psychological Research and Research Methods, School of Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria
Abstract. Background: Previous studies suggest that troubled romantic relationships are associated with higher risk factors for mental health.
However, studies examining the role of relationship satisfaction in suicide risk factors are scarce. Aims: We investigated differences in risk
factors for suicide between individuals with high relationship satisfaction, individuals with low relationship satisfaction, and singles. Further-
more, we explored patterns of experiencing, and dealing with, conflicts in the relationship and examined associations with suicide risk factors.
Method: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed relationship status, relationship satisfaction, specific types of relationship conflicts, and
suicide risk factors (i.e., suicidal ideation, hopelessness, depression) with questionnaires among 382 individuals in Austria. Results: Risk factors
for suicide were higher among singles than among individuals in happy relationships, but lower among those with low relationship satisfaction.
Participants reporting a high number of unsolved conflicts in their relationship had higher levels of suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depres-
sion than individuals who tend to solve issues with their partner amicably or report no conflicts. Conclusion: Relationship satisfaction and re-
lationship conflicts reflect risk factors for suicide, with higher levels of suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression reported by individuals
who mentioned unsolved conflicts with their partner and experienced low satisfaction with their relationship.
Keywords: suicidal ideation, romantic relationship, relationship satisfaction, relationship conflicts
An individual’s suicide is not determined by one single
stressor Wassermann, . Suicidal behavior is consid-
ered to be the result of a combination of several risk factors
Mann et al., , including biological, social, psycholog-
ical, and cultural inuences Sonneck, Kapusta, Tomandl,
& Voracek, . Support from social relationships has
been found to be an essential determinant of the mainte-
nance of both physical and mental health Holt-Lunstad,
Birmingham, & Jones, ; House, Umberson, & Landis,
; Logan, Hall, & Karch, ; Rook, ; Whisman
& Baucom, , and social isolation has been identied
as a major risk factor for morbidity and mortality compara-
ble to well-established contributors such as smoking, obe-
sity, and high blood pressure Holt-Lunstad et al., ;
House et al., ; Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton, . So-
cial support from a spouse appears particularly important,
exceeding the positive impact of support from children or
friends on an individual’s well-being Antonucci, Lansford,
& Akiyama, ; Okabayashi, Liang, Krause, Akiyama, &
Sugisawa, ; Okun & Lockwood, . Thus, suicidal
behavior may be reected in whether or not an individual
is currently living in a happy romantic relationship.
Happiness in a romantic relationship is known to be an
important contributor to an individual’s global happiness
and life satisfaction Glenn & Weaver, ; Markey, Mar-
key, & Gray, and one of the most powerful predic-
tors of mental health Gove, Hughes, & Style, ; Logan
et al., . Several studies have demonstrated that indi-
viduals who are married or live in marriage-like relation-
ships are in better mental and physical health Gove et al.,
; Holt-Lunstad et al., ; Kolves, Ide, & De Leo,
, happier, and less inclined to suicide Batterham et
al., ; Gove et al., ; Kolves et al., and have
lower morbidity and mortality Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton,
than individuals who are single. Accordingly, the
loss of a spouse is known to have the potential to induce
negative mental or physical health changes Kiecolt-Gla-
ser & Newton, . Many authors argue that spouse and
family provide personal private satisfactions that make life
meaningful and rewarding for adults Gove et al., ;
Stack, . It is also believed that support from a spouse
can protect from the harmful eects of stress, highlight-
ing that romantic relationships may serve as an eective
means for psychological well-being Coyne & DeLongis,
; Markey et al., .
Accordingly, several studies Batterham et al., ;
Stack, ; Wyder, Ward, & De Leo, demonstrat-
ed that rates of suicide and suicide attempts are higher
among divorced or separated women and men in nearly all
age groups compared with married individuals. The preva-
lence of divorce was also found to be the strongest predic-
tor for suicide rates in many countries Stack, . More-
over, divorced people have higher levels of depression,
morbidity, nancial pressure, and risk of alcohol abuse
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality
2
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing
Crisis 2016
Stack, . Of note, a study using data from nation-
al surveys Stack & Eshleman, showed that married
persons are happier than individuals who cohabit but are
not married. Stack and Eshleman concluded that
marriage may aect happiness through the promotion of
nancial satisfaction and the improvement of health. More
recent research Whisman & Uebelacker, suggests
that cohabiting individuals experience more distress than
married couples, but do not dier in terms of suicidal idea-
tion or perceived health.
However, many researchers point out that being in a ro-
mantic relationship per se is not necessarily protective for
mental or physical health Carr, Freedman, Cornman, &
Schwarz, ; Gove et al., ; Kazan, Calear, & Bat-
terham, ; Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton, . Troubled
relationships are a prime source of stress and may also lim-
it the ability to seek support in other relationships Coyne
& DeLongis, ; Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton, . In
several studies e.g., Carr et al., ; Glenn & Weaver,
, psychological distress and low life satisfaction were
associated with unhappiness in the relationship, and sev-
eral authors e.g., Antonucci et al., ; Beach, Fincham,
& Katz, ; Whisman & Uebelacker, ; Whisman,
Uebelacker, Tolejko, Chatav, & McKelvie, report-
ed an association between depression and discord in the
relationship, while trust in a spouse was associated with
high life satisfaction. Furthermore, several studies demon-
strated higher risk factors for physical and mental health,
including higher levels of anxiety and depression, among
individuals who reported low relationship quality than
among those with high relationship quality e.g., Gallo,
Troxel, Matthews, & Kuller, ; Grewen, Girdler, &
Light, ; Leach, Butterworth, Olesen, & Mackinnon,
; Robles & Kiecolt-Glase, . Low-quality inti-
mate partner relationships Arcel, Mantonakis, Petersson,
Jemos, & Kaliteraki, , interpersonal conict Choi et
al., ; Logan et al., , and negative life events re-
lated to a romantic partner Bagge, Glenn, & Lee, ;
Logan et al., are also considered to be precipitat-
ing factors to suicide. The ndings that low-quality rela-
tionships, often characterized by conict, problems, and
arguments, contribute to an increased risk of suicidality
is also evidenced by the fact that these factors can create
an environment of abuse and violence, which often lead to
an increased risk of suicide Kazan et al., . Stressful
romantic relationships were also found to be associated
with increased mortality risk Lund, Christensen, Nilsson,
Kriegbaum, & Rod, .
In a recent study Ivan, Koyanagi, Tyrovolas, & Haro,
, negative partner interactions in a romantic relation-
ship were found to be associated with increased likelihood
of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation in a national-
ly representative sample in Ireland, while high perceived
support from the spouse was associated with low scores of
depression and low perceived stress among married indi-
viduals from US American college sample Dehle, Larsen, &
Landers, . A study among married and cohabiting US
American adults demonstrated that individuals in discord-
ant relationships experienced higher levels of distress, per-
ceived their health as poorer, and were more likely to report
suicidal ideation than people who were not in discordant re-
lationships Whisman & Uebelacker, . An association
between poor romantic relationship quality and increased
risk of depression was also found in a longitudinal study
among US American adults Teo, Choi, & Valenstein,
. Research also shows that individuals in troubled mar-
riages often report lower happiness and life satisfaction than
singles do Glenn & Weaver, .
In a review of literature on marital integration and sui-
cide, Stack noted that in a majority of suicide cas-
es it was determined that the relationship quality of mar-
riages was deteriorating in the year before the suicide. It is
also interesting to note that in a longitudinal study, Bruce
and Kim found that divorce increased the risk of a
major depression in men not only by a factor of times
compared with happily married men, but also by a factor of
times compared with unhappily married men.
Despite evidence for an association of relationship sta-
tus and quality with physical and mental health, research
on the association of relationship satisfaction with suicid-
ality is scarce Kazan et al., . Most of the few extant
studies used aggregate data to assess associations between
suicide and divorce rates e.g., Stack, , or fo-
cused on associations between mental health and rela-
tionship quality or specic partner interactions, but not
relationship satisfaction e.g., Arcel et al., ; Ivan et al.,
. While these terms are often used interchangeably
Fincham & Rogge, , relationship satisfaction refers
more to the subjective evaluation of one’s actual relation-
ship with regard to the prototype of a good relationship,
whereas relationship quality is commonly referred to as
the objective assessment of the relationship in terms of the
presence or absence of specic characteristics or qualities
Hassebrauck & Fehr, . Furthermore, to the best of
our knowledge, there are no studies available that explored
risk factors for suicide with regard to specic types or areas
of conicts in romantic relationships e.g., sexuality, com-
munication, nances, etc.. Some relationship conicts
may be more relevant for personal distress than others.
The present study aimed to explore dierences in terms of
risk factors for suicide i.e., suicidal ideation, hopelessness,
depression between individuals with high and with low
relationship satisfaction as well as in individuals who are
currently single. We hypothesized that scores for suicidal
ideation, hopelessness, and depression are lowest among
individuals in happy romantic relationships, higher among
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality 3
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing Crisis 2016
singles, and highest among individuals in unhappy rela-
tionships. Furthermore, we investigated whether suicide
risk factors are linked to specic types or areas of conicts
in relationships.
Method
Participants
A total of participants, including females and
males, living in Austria at the time of data collection
were recruited by undergraduate psychology students at
the University of Vienna for course credit. Mean age was
years SD . In terms of highest completed
school level, n of the participants had compul-
sory education, n completed apprenticeship
training, n completed intermediate techni-
cal and vocational school, n were second-
ary/high school graduates, and n completed
college or university. Compared with the Austrian popula-
tion, individuals with college and high school education
were over-represented in our sample Austrian population:
compulsory education, apprenticeship,
intermediate technical and vocational school,
high school, and college; Statistik Austria,
.
Measures
Relationship Status
We asked the participants to indicate whether they were
currently in a romantic relationship: yes , no .
Relationship Assessment Scale
This scale includes seven items e.g., “In general, how sat-
ised are you with your relationship?” that are rated on a
-point scale ranging from low satisfaction to high
satisfaction to measure general relationship satisfaction
Hendrick, . This scale was only completed by par-
ticipants in romantic relationships.
Problem List
This questionnaire consists of self-report items that
represent dierent areas of potential conict in ro-
mantic relationships e.g., sexuality, communication, or
nances. Participants rate the intensity of each potential
problem with no conicts in this area; conicts in this
area, but we can usually solve them; conicts in this area,
no solutions, frequent arguments; or conicts in this area,
but we rarely talk about it. All items on this scale are analyz-
ed individually; thus, no sum score is calculated Hahlweg,
. This scale was only completed by participants in
romantic relationships.
Suicide Probability Scale
This self-report measure assesses suicidal ideation with
-items e.g., “I feel people would be better o if I were
dead” that are rated on a -point scale ranging from
none or a little of time to most or all at the time. A total
weighed score was calculated based on the manual of the
questionnaire Cull & Gill, .
Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS)
The BHS is a -item scale that assesses hopelessness
Beck & Steer, and is a robust predictor of suicidal
behavior Beck, Brown, Berchick, Stewart, & Steer, ;
McMillan, Gilbody, Beresford, & Neilly, . All items
e.g., “My future seems dark to me” were rated on a
-point scale ranging from very false to very true.
Erlanger Depression Scale
This scale includes eight self-report items e.g., “I want
to cry” that are rated on a -point scale ranging from
completely wrong to exactly right to assess symptoms of
depression Lehrl & Gallwitz, .
Data Analysis
For each variable, sum scores across all respective items
were calculated. We split our sample into one group with
high relationship satisfaction n , Mdn , IQR
, Min. , Max. and one group with low relation-
ship satisfaction n , Mdn , IQR , Min.
, Max. by the median Mdn of the Relation-
ship Assessment Scale scores Hendrick, . These two
groups were contrasted with those participants who were
currently not in a relationship n . See Table for an
overview of the groups’ means and standard deviations in
terms of suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression.
Mean dierences between the three groups in each de-
pendent measure were examined with F tests analysis of
variance, and signicant dierences between individual
groups were investigated with Tukey tests.
Ratings of items identifying areas of potential conict in
romantic relationships were subjected to latent class anal-
ysis to classify participants into distinct groups, based on
their observed response patterns. LatentGOLD was
used for this analysis, treating item ratings as nominal cat-
egories. Latent class analysis is specically suited to nomi-
nal data and avoids problems inherent in traditional factor
analysis, such as having to rotate factors and having to as-
sume continuous observed variables Garson, . We
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality
4
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing
Crisis 2016
planned to t models with one, two, three, and four latent
classes to the data. However, models with four or more la-
tent classes required the estimation of more parameters
than were testable with regard to overall model t result-
ing in a negative number of degrees of freedom. Hence,
no model with four or more latent classes was nally t to
the data. Model t was assessed with the Bayesian infor-
mation criterion BIC, the likelihood-ratio goodness of t
statistic L, and percentages of classication see Breslau,
Reboussin, Anthony, & Storr, ; Garson, . The
model with the best data t was kept as nal model. Latent
class analysis also computes the probability of assignment
to each of the latent classes for each participant. Based
on the highest probability, participants are then assigned
to one of the latent classes. Mean assignment probabili-
ties so-called posterior mean assignment probabilities
of class members in turn are informative with regard to
classication reliability. High posterior mean assignment
probabilities are indicative of high classication reliabili-
ty, which suggests that a large majority of the individuals
can be assigned to a particular class with high probability.
Posterior mean assignment probabilities are reported for
the nal model. Dierences in terms of suicidal ideation,
hopelessness, and depression between latent classes were
then assessed with analyses of variance using F tests. Tuk-
ey tests were conducted to investigate signicant dier-
ences between individual groups.
Results
The average duration of the participants’ relationships was
years SD and ranged from less than month
to years. There was no dierence between individuals
with high and low relationship satisfaction in terms of rela-
tionship duration, t , p ., and there was no
association between relationship duration and suicidality,
r , p ., hopelessness, r ., p .,
and depression, r , p ..
The analyses of variance revealed a signicant dier-
ence between the three groups high relationship satis-
faction, low relationship satisfaction, no relationship in
terms of suicidal ideation, F, , p .,
hopelessness, F, , p ., and depression,
F, , p .. Inspection of the means and
contrast tests indicated that suicidal ideation was lower
among individuals with high relationship satisfaction than
among those with low relationship satisfaction p .
and among individuals who were currently not in a rela-
tionship p .. Hopelessness p . and depression
p . were higher among individuals who were current-
ly not in a relationship than among individuals with high
relationship satisfaction. By contrast, hopelessness p
. and depression p . were lower among singles
than among individuals with low relationship satisfaction.
Overall, suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression
were lowest among individuals with high relationship sat-
isfaction, higher among individuals who were currently
not in a relationship, and highest among individuals with
low relationship satisfaction.
Overall, temperament n , , communication
n , , habits n , , sexuality n ,
, and housekeeping n , were the areas
of relationship conicts where respondents reported most
frequently unsolved or unspoken conicts. Assault was the
least frequently reported area with such conicts n ,
. Sadly, this still corresponded to eight individuals
who were currently in a violent relationship. Table pro-
vides an overview of the frequencies of conicts in all areas
of potential conicts in a romantic relationship assessed in
the present study.
A latent class model with three clusters tted best based
on model t indices in order to dierentiate clusters of
conict areas. See Table for an overview of the t indi-
ces of the latent class models. The latent class analysis re-
vealed that participants could be dierentiated less with
regard to conicts in specic areas of relationships, but
rather with regard to the overall quantity and quality of
conicts in the relationships: Participants of Cluster n
, ; mean posterior assignment probability
had a high probability of reporting no conicts in any area
of their relationship indicated by a rating of on all or most
items of the problem list Hahlweg, . Thus, we con-
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for suicide risk factors among participants with high and low relationship satisfaction and participants currently not
in a relationship
High relationship satisfaction
(n = 104)
Low relationship satisfaction
(n = 117)
No relationship
(n = 156)
Suicide risk factors MSDMSDMSD
Suicidal ideation (α = 0.89) 42.64 8.03 51.69 18.10 49.85 12.70
Hopelessness (α = 0.89) 45.39 11.28 55.49 15.65 50.92 13.24
Depression (α = 0.82) 4.43 3.45 8.19 6.22 6.58 4.61
Not e. Values are means (M), standard deviations (SD), and Cronbach’s α of the variables estimated with SPSS.
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality 5
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing Crisis 2016
ceptualized Cluster as the no conicts class. Participants
of Cluster n , ; mean posterior assignment
probability tended to report conicts in some areas
of their relationships, but also reported that these conicts
were usually amicably solved as indicated by predominant
ratings of or on the items of the problem list. On the
basis of this observation, we conceptualized Cluster as
the conicts with solutions class. Participants of Cluster
n , ; mean posterior assignment probability
had a high probability of reporting conicts in the
relationship that caused frequent arguments or remained
unaddressed as indicated by frequent ratings of and on
the items of the problem list. We conceptualized this clus-
ter as the conicts without solutions class. Devotion of the
partner Item , communication Item , lack of accept-
ance or support by the partner Item , and demands by
the partner Item contributed most to the separation
of the three clusters, as these areas of conict were among
the most frequently reported relationship problems in
Clusters and .
The analyses of variance revealed a signicant dier-
ence between the three clusters in terms of suicidal idea-
tion, F, , p ., hopelessness, F,
, p ., and depression, F, ,
p .. Inspection of the means and contrast tests in-
dicated that suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depres-
sion were higher among participants reporting unsolved
conicts in their relationship Cluster than among par-
ticipants of Cluster suicidal ideation p ., hope-
lessness p ., depression p . and Cluster
suicidal ideation p ., hopelessness p .,
depression p . who showed similar scores suicid-
al ideation p ., hopelessness p ., depression
p .. See Table for an overview of the cluster means
and standard deviations in terms of suicidal ideation,
hopelessness, and depression. Of note, analysis of cross-
tabs revealed a signicant correlation between being in an
unhappy relationship and Cluster . Individuals who re-
ported unsolved conicts in their relationship had a higher
probability of experiencing low satisfaction with their part-
ner j ., n , p ..
Table 2. Overview of conflict areas in relationships among study participants (n = 226)
Conflict type No conflicts Conflicts solved Conflicts unsolved No talk about conflict
Finances 169 (75.8%) 37 (16.6%) 14 (6.3%) 3 (1.3%)
Professional life 160 (71.1%) 41 (18.2%) 18 (8.0%) 6 (2.7%)
Housekeeping 100 (44.2%) 91 (40.3%) 29 (12.8%) 6 (2.7%)
Parenting 125 (56.6%) 67 (30.3%) 16 (7.2%) 13 (5.9%)
Leisure activities 86 (38.1%) 111 (49.1%) 20 (8.8%) 9 (4.0%)
Social activities 134 (59.3%) 67 (29.6%) 16 (7.1%) 9 (4.0%)
Temperament 108 (47.8%) 74 (32.7%) 34 (15.0%) 10 (4.4%)
Devotion 120 (53.1%) 75 (33.2%) 16 (7.1%) 15 (6.6%)
Attractiveness 170 (75.6%) 46 (20.4%) 4 (1.8%) 5 (2.2%)
Tru st 175 (77.4%) 37 (16.4%) 7 (3.1%) 7 (3.1%)
Jealousy 126 (55.8%) 75 (33.2%) 16 (7.1%) 9 (4.0%)
Freedom 127 (56.2%) 74 (32.7%) 10 (4.4%) 15 (6.6%)
Sexuality 126 (56.0%) 63 (28.0%) 13 (5.8%) 23 (10.2%)
Extramarital relationships 194 (87.0%) 17 (7.6%) 6 (2.7%) 6 (2.7%)
Family 128 (56.6%) 65 (28.8%) 22 (9.7%) 11 (4.9%)
Individual habits 86 (38.1%) 101 (44.7%) 33 (14.6%) 6 (2.7%)
Communication 104 (46.4%) 81 (36.2%) 26 (11.6%) 13 (5.8%)
Wish for a child 180 (80.7%) 25 (11.2%) 7 (3.1%) 11 (4.9%)
Lack of acceptance/support 145 (64.4%) 57 (25.3%) 13 (5.8%) 10 (4.4%)
Demands 126 (56.0%) 76 (33.8%) 17 (7.6%) 6 (2.7%)
Illness/handicap 179 (79.2%) 36 (15.9%) 4 (1.8%) 7 (3.1%)
Alcohol/drug use 163 (72.1%) 42 (18.6%) 11 (4.9%) 10 (4.4%)
Assaults 207 (91.6%) 11 (4.9%) 5 (2.2%) 3 (1.3%)
Note. Values are frequencies (n) and percentages (%) of conflict types across all potential areas of relationship conflicts.
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality
6
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing
Crisis 2016
Discussion
The results of the present study show that relationship sta-
tus and relationship satisfaction are both reected in risk
factors for suicide. In our study, suicidal ideation, hope-
lessness, and depression were higher among singles than
among individuals in happy romantic relationships, but
lower than among those in unhappy relationships. These
ndings are concordant with evidence of previous studies
that people in romantic relationships are generally happier,
less depressed, and in better mental health than individu-
als who are single e.g., Carr et al., ; Glenn & Weaver,
; Gove et al., ; Holt-Lunstad et al., or di-
vorced or live separated Batterham et al., ; Kolves et
al., ; Stack, , , ; Wyder et al., ,
and that this association is inuenced by relationship qual-
ity, with levels of happiness being lower among individuals
in unhappy relationships than among individuals in happy
relationships and in singles e.g., Arcel et al., ; Bagge
et al., ; Choi et al., ; Gallo et al., ; Glenn
& Weaver, ; Grewen et al., ; Leach et al., ;
Logan et al., ; Lund et al., ; Whisman & Uebe-
lacker, , . A theory that may explain the asso-
ciation between low relationship satisfaction and suicidal-
ity is the interpersonal theory of suicidal behavior Joiner,
; Van Orden et al., . According to this theory, an
individual must have both the desire and the ability to die
by suicide in order to complete suicide. The desire to die is
developed when people perceive themselves as a burden
to family, friends, or society and when they feel socially al-
ienated, also referred to as low belongingness Joiner, ;
Van Orden et al., . Living in an unhappy relationship
may generate or exacerbate a feeling of social alienation
and may intensify perceived burdensomeness and result
in increased suicidality Kazan et al., . Accordingly,
relationship problems were associated with increased sui-
cide risk in previous studies Stack, .
The nding of the present study suggests that being in
a romantic relationship can positively contribute to life
satisfaction and protect from suicidal ideation, but may
also constitute a major stressor when individuals become
dissatised with their relationship. Although individuals in
romantic relationships may have numerous psychological
and social advantages over singles, these benets may be
limited to individuals in happy relationships Coyne & De-
Longis, ; Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton, , as risk fac-
tors for suicide were higher among individuals in unhappy
relationships than among singles. It is also important to
note that many epidemiological studies investigating risk
factors for suicide control for individuals’ relationship
status, but are unable to include data on relationship sat-
isfaction e.g., Agerbo, Nordentoft, & Mortensen, ;
Niederkrotenthaler, Floderus, Alexanderson, Rasmussen,
& Mittendorfer-Rutz, . The present study highlights
that relationship status per se is not a sucient indicator
for suicidality.
In our study, we also identied three dierent types of
relationships in terms of quantity and quality of conicts
between the partners i.e., relationships with solutions to
conicts, relationships without solutions to conicts, re-
lationships without conicts. Individuals who frequently
experience conicts with their partners and have no solu-
tions for their conicts reported higher levels of suicidal
ideation, hopelessness, and depression than did individu-
Table 3. Fit of the latent class models
Model BIC L2df p Classification error, %
1-Cluster 9710.27 7088.97 157 < .001 –
2-Cluster 9352.96 6352.22 87 < .001 0.78
3-Cluster 9320.28 5940.10 17 < .001 3.01
Note. BIC = Bayes information criterion. L2 = likelihood ratio test statistic. Cell entries list the fit of alternative 1-, 2-, and 3-cluster models with regard to
three indices of model fit. Lower values of BIC, L2, and classification error indicate a better model fit.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics for suicide risk factors among participants of the three clusters of relationship conflicts
Cluster 1:
no conflicts
(n = 95)
Cluster 2:
conflicts with solutions
(n = 87)
Cluster 3:
conflicts without solutions
(n = 44)
Suicide risk factors MSDMSDMSD
Suicidal ideation 42.37 8.24 45.74 9.53 60.93 23.67
Hopelessness 46.08 11.89 50.11 11.15 62.49 19.19
Depression 4.91 4.56 5.80 4.03 10.76 7.17
Note. Values are means (M) and standard deviations (SD) of the variable estimated with SPSS.
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality 7
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing Crisis 2016
als who rarely have conicts with their partners or amica-
bly solve their conicts. Individuals experiencing unsolved
conicts with their partner were also less satised with
their relationship. Fincham and Beach noted that
marital conict has profound implications for individual
well-being and mental health, including increased proba-
bility of developing major depression, eating disorders, or
addictions. However, the ndings of the present study sug-
gest that conicts in relationships are per se not necessarily
detrimental; only conicts that are not adequately solved
by the partners appear to convey a clear negative eect.
Unsolved issues in a relationship likely increase the num-
ber of arguments and disputes between partners and may
lead to continuous dissatisfaction and frustration, which
may subsequently increase risk factors for suicide. Simi-
larly, withdrawal during conict by either or both partners
was associated with more negativity in relationships, which
correlated with low relationship quality and thoughts about
divorce in a large sample of an American survey Stanley,
Markman, & Whitton, . The strong and consistent
association between intimate partner violence and suicid-
ality was also recently highlighted by Kazan et al. .
These ndings highlight that positive communication and
the ability to handle conicts constructively are essential
components for relationship satisfaction. The provision of
a safe place to address issues in treatment for couples as
well as eorts to help couples develop reliable methods for
talking safely and openly at home has been identied as a
central aspect of couple therapy in previous research Stan-
ley et al., .
In the present study it seemed that, overall, whether
couples were able to solve their issues was more relevant
for their relationship satisfaction and well-being than the
particular area of the conicts. However, communication
problems and disagreements in terms of the partner’s dis-
played devotion, support, and demands contributed most
to the separation of the three clusters, suggesting that
relationship issues related to these topics are most detri-
mental for relationship satisfaction among those conicts
that were assessed in the present study. Future research on
relationship satisfaction should particularly pay attention
to how partners rate solutions to conicts related to com-
munication and disagreements in terms of the partner’s
displayed devotion, support, and demands.
The present study has some limitations. First, the par-
ticipants were not representative of the total population,
with an overrepresentation of female and young individu-
als who had nished secondary or higher education. Thus,
the ndings of the present study may not generalize to the
general public. Furthermore, owing to the cross-sectional
and correlational design of this study, causality related to
associations between relationship satisfaction and suicide
risk factors cannot be assessed. A further limitation of the
study may be that some items of the scale used to assess
suicidal ideation are related to the concept of burdensome-
ness Joiner et al., , a key determinant of suicidality
in Joiner’s interpersonal theory of suicidal behavior Joiner,
; Van Orden et al., , which may explain the as-
sociation between low relationship satisfaction and suicid-
ality. Future studies on the associations between relation-
ship satisfaction and suicidality may want to exclude items
related to burdensomeness from their measure of suicidal
ideation and use these items as separate predictor varia-
bles. Another limitation was that the term romantic rela-
tionship was not explicitly explained to the participants and
that there was no opportunity for participants to indicate
that they are currently living in open or multiple relation-
ships. Moreover, we did not collect data on participants’
sexual orientation. These factors may inuence the prev-
alence of dierent types of conicts and their associations
with relationship satisfaction and suicidality. Therefore,
the results of the present study should be interpreted with
caution with regard to generalization to individuals living
in nontraditional romantic relationships. Finally, no data
were collected assessing which particular type of relation-
ship married, engaged, seriously dating, etc. the partici-
pants were currently involved in. However, recent research
suggests that associations of relationship satisfaction and
conicts with suicide risk factors do not vary with regard to
type of relationship Whisman & Uebelacker, .
Conclusion
Our ndings indicate that individuals’ relationship status
and their satisfaction with their partner may be associat-
ed with risk factors for suicide. Suicidal ideation, hope-
lessness, and depression were higher among singles than
among individuals in happy relationships, but lower than
among those with low relationship satisfaction. The pres-
ent study highlights that being single may be more bene-
cial in terms of psychological well-being and suicide risk
than staying in an unhappy relationship. Furthermore,
risk factors for suicide were higher among partners who
reported unsolved conicts with their partners, compared
with those who rarely have conicts or tend to solve their
conicts amicably. These ndings suggest that well-func-
tioning relationships may be a protective factor for sui-
cide, while unsolved conicts and dissatisfaction in the
relationship may be linked to increased suicide risk. From
the standpoint of the goal of attaining a high level of psy-
chological well-being, it is a dilemma that humans depend
so heavily upon romantic relationships for their happiness,
which are known to be particularly fragile Glenn & Weav-
er, . At least, this seems to be true for young, edu-
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality
8
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing
Crisis 2016
cated females, who represented the majority of our study
sample.
The ability to amicably solve conicts seems to be a key
factor for happiness and life satisfaction, as unsolved re-
lationship conicts were associated with low relationship
satisfaction and high levels of risk factors for suicide in
the present study. Public health interventions may bene-
t from focusing on romantic relationship satisfaction and
dysfunction in order to prevent a range of mental health
problems Ivan et al., , including suicidal ideation.
Couple therapy and other strategies to improve relation-
ship satisfaction Jacobson & Addis, ; Jacobson,
Christensen, Prince, Cordova, & Eldridge, may have
the potential to lead to improvements in couple interaction
and mental well-being. Further investigations examining
the role of social relationships on risk factors for suicide
are warranted, especially studies that use a longitudinal
approach to assess the impact of relationship satisfaction
on suicidality and suicidal behaviors. Furthermore, more
research is necessary to evaluate associations between re-
lationship satisfaction and suicide risk in dierent socio-
demographic groups and to investigate dierences with
regard to sexual orientation, since young, educated female
populations were overrepresented in the study sample
and no data on sexual orientation were collected. Intimate
partner relationships need to be emphasized more in su-
icide research. Finally, as low relationship satisfaction is
associated with increased suicide risk, follow-up studies
exploring how to prevent suicide among individuals in un-
happy relationships are warranted.
References
Agerbo, E., Nordentoft, M., & Mortensen, P. B. (2002). Familial, psy-
chiatric, and socioeconomic risk factors for suicide in young peo-
ple: Nested case-control study. British Medical Journal, 325, 74.
Antonucci, T. C., Lansford, J. E., & Akiyama, H. (2001). Impact of pos-
itive and negative aspects of marital relationships and friend-
ships on well-being of older adults. Applied Developmental Sci-
ence, 5, 68–75.
Arcel, L. T., Mantonakis, J., Petersson, B., Jemos, J., & Kaliteraki, E.
(1992). Suicide attempts among Greek and Danish women and
the quality of their relationships with husbands or boyfriends.
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 85, 189–195.
Bagge, C. L., Glenn, C. R., & Lee, H.-J. (2013). Quantifying the impact
of recent negative life events on suicide attempts. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 122, 359–368.
Batterham, P. J., Fairweather-Schmidt, A. K., Butterworth, P.,
Calear, A. L., Mackinnon, A. J., & Christensen, H. (2014). Tempo-
ral effects of separation on suicidal thoughts and behaviours.
Social Science & Medicine, 111, 58–63.
Beach, S. R. H., Fincham, F. D., & Katz, J. (1998). Marital therapy in
the treatment of depression: Toward a third generation of thera-
py and research. Clinical Psychology Review, 18, 635–661.
Beck, A. T., Brown, G., Berchick, R. J., Stewart, B. L., & Steer, R. A.
(1990). Relationship between hopelessness and ultimate sui-
cide: A replication with psychiatric outpatients. American Jour-
nal of Psychiatry, 147, 190–195.
Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1988). Manual for the Beck Hopelessness
Scale. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Breslau, N., Reboussin, B. A., Anthony, J. C., & Storr, C. L. (2005). The
structure of posttraumatic stress disorder: Latent class analy-
sis in 2 community samples. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62,
1343–1351.
Bruce, M. L., & Kim, K. M. (1992). Differences in the effects of di-
vorce on major depression in men and women. American Jour-
nal of Psychiatry, 149, 914–917.
Carr, D., Freedman, V. A., Cornman, J. C., & Schwarz, N. (2014). Hap-
py marriage, happy life? Marital quality and subjective well-be-
ing in later life. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 930–948.
Choi, K. H., Wang, S. M., Yeon, B., Suh, S. Y., Oh, Y., Lee, H. K., & Lee,
K. U. (2013). Risk and protective factors predicting multiple sui-
cide attempts. Psychiatry Research, 3, 957–961.
Coyne, J. C., & DeLongis, A. (1986). Going beyond social support:
The role of social relationships in adaptation. Journal of Con-
sulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 454–460.
Cull, J. G., & Gill, W. S. (1988). Suicide Probability Scale (SPS). Los
Angeles, CA: WPS.
Dehle, C., Larsen, D., & Landers, J. E. (2001). Social support in mar-
riage. American Journal of Family Therapy, 29, 307–324.
Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (1999). Conflict in marriage: Impli-
cations for working with couples. Annual Review of Psychology,
50, 47–77.
Fincham, F. D., & Rogge, R. (2010). Understanding relationship
quality: Theoretical challenges and new tools for assessment.
Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2, 227–242.
Gallo, L. C., Troxel, W. M., Matthews, K. A., & Kuller, L. H. (2003).
Marital status and quality in middle-aged women: Associa-
tions with levels and trajectories of cardiovascular risk factors.
Health Psychology, 22, 453–463.
Garson, G. D. (2009). Statnotes: Topics in multivariate analysis: La-
tent class analysis. Retrieved from http://faculty.chass.ncsu.
edu/garson/PA765/latclass.htm
Glenn, N. D., & Weaver, C. N. (1981). The contribution of marital hap-
piness to global happiness. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
43, 161–168.
Gove, W. R., Hughes, M., & Style, C. R. (1983). Does marriage have
positive effects on the psychological well-being of the individu-
al? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 122–131.
Grewen, K. M., Girdler, S. S., & Light, K. C. (2005). Relationship qual-
ity: Effects on ambulatory blood pressure and negative affect in
a biracial sample of men and women. Blood Pressure Monitor-
ing, 10, 117–124.
Hahlweg, K. (1996). Fragebogen zur Partnerschaftsdiagnostik
(FDP). Partnerschaftsbogen PFB, Problemliste PL und Frage-
bogen zur Lebensgeschichte und Partnerschaft FLP [Inventory
for marital assessment (FDP). Partnership Questionnaire PFB,
Problem List PL, and Biography and Partnership Questionnaire
FLP]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
Hassebrauck, M., & Fehr, B. (2002). Dimensions of relationship
quality. Personal Relationships, 9, 253–270.
Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfac-
tion. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50, 93–98.
Holt-Lunstad, J., Birmingham, W., & Jones, B. Q. (2008). Is there
something unique about marriage? The relative impact of mar-
ital status, relationship quality, and network social support on
ambulatory blood pressure and mental health. Annals of Be-
havioral Medicine, 35, 239–244.
House, J. S., Umberson, D., & Landis, K. R. (1988). Structures and
processes of social support. Annual Review of Sociology, 14,
293–318.
Ivan, S. Z., Koyanagi, A., Tyrovolas, S., & Haro, J. M. (2015). The asso-
ciation of relationship quality and social networks with depres-
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality 9
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing Crisis 2016
sion, anxiety, and suicidal ideation among older married adults:
Findings from a cross-sectional analysis of the Irish longitudi-
nal study on aging (TILDA). Journal of Affective Disorders, 179,
134–141.
Jacobson, N. S., & Addis, M. E. (1993). Research on couples and
couple therapy: What do we know? Where are we going? Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 85–93.
Jacobson, N. S., Christensen, A., Prince, S. E., Cordova, J., & El-
dridge, K. (2000). Integrative behavioral couple therapy: An ac-
ceptance-based, promising new treatment for couple discord.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 351–355.
Joiner, T. E. (2005). Why people die by suicide. Cambridge, MA: Har-
vard University Press.
Joiner, T. E., Van Orden, K. A., Witte, T. K., Selby, E. A., Ribeiro, J. D.,
Lewis, R., & Rudd, M. D. (2009). Main predictions of the interper-
sonal–psychological theory of suicidal behavior: Empirical tests
in two samples of young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psycholo-
gy, 118, 634–646.
Kazan, D., Calear, A. L., & Batterham, P. J. (2016). The impact of in-
timate partner relationships on suicidal thoughts and behav-
iours: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 190,
585–598.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Newton, T. L. (2001). Marriage and health:
His and hers. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 472–503.
Kolves, K., Ide, N., & De Leo, D. (2012). Fluctuations of suicidality in
the aftermath of a marital separation: 6-Month follow-up ob-
servations. Journal of Affective Disorders, 142, 256–263.
Leach, L. S., Butterworth, P., Olesen, S. C., & Mackinnon, A. (2013).
Relationship quality and levels of depression and anxiety in a
large population-based survey. Social Psychiatry and Psychiat-
ric Epidemiology, 48, 417–425.
Lehrl, S., & Gallwitz, A. (1983). Erlanger Depressions-Skala EDS
[Erlangen depression scale EDS]. Vaterstetten, Germany: Vless.
Logan, J., Hall, J., & Karch, D. (2011). Suicide categories by patterns
of known risk factors: A latent class analysis. Archives of Gener-
al Psychiatry, 68, 935–941.
Lund, R., Christensen, U., Nilsson, C., J. Kriegbaum, M., & Rod, N.
H. (2014). Stressful social relations and mortality: A prospective
cohort study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health,
68, 720–727.
Mann, J. J., Apter, A., Bertolote, J., Beautrais, A., Currier, D., Hass, A.,
… Hendin, H. (2005). Suicide prevention strategies – a system-
atic review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 294,
2064–2074.
Markey, C., Markey, P., & Gray, H. (2007). Romantic relationships
and health: An examination of individuals’ perceptions of their
romantic partners’ influences on their health. Sex Roles, 57,
435–445.
McMillan, D., Gilbody, S., Beresford, E., & Neilly, L. (2007). Can we
predict suicide and non-fatal self-harm with the Beck Hope-
lessness Scale? A meta-analysis. Psychological Medicine, 37,
769–778.
Niederkrotenthaler, T., Floderus, B., Alexanderson, K., Rasmus-
sen, F., & Mittendorfer-Rutz, E. (2012). Exposure to parental
mortality and markers of morbidity, and the risks of attempt-
ed and completed suicide in offspring: An analysis of sensitive
life periods. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66,
233–239.
Okabayashi, H., Liang, J., Krause, N., Akiyama, H., & Sugisawa, H.
(2004). Mental health among older adults in Japan: Do sources
of social support and negative interaction make a difference?
Social Science & Medicine, 59, 2259–2270.
Okun, M. A., & Lockwood, C. M. (2003). Does Level of assessment
moderate the relation between social support and social neg-
ativity?: A meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology,
25, 15–35.
Robles, T. F., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K. (2003). The physiology of mar-
riage: Pathways to health. Physiology & Behavior, 79, 409–416.
Rook, K. S. (1984). The negative side of social interaction: Impact
on psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 46, 1097–1108.
Sonneck, G., Kapusta, N., Tomandl, G., & Voracek, M. (Eds.). (2012).
Krisenintervention und Suizidverhütung [Crisis intervention and
suicide prevention]. Vienna, Austria: Facultas.
Stack, S. (1990). New micro-level data on the impact of divorce on
suicide, 1959–1980: A test of two theories. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 52, 119–127.
Stack, S. (1992). Marriage, family, religion, and suicide. In R. W.
Maris, A. L. Berman, J. T. Maltsberger, & R. I. Yufit (Eds.), Assess-
ment and prediction of suicide (pp. 540–552). New York, NY: Guil-
ford.
Stack, S. (2000). Suicide: A 15-year review of the sociological liter-
ature part II: Modernization and social integration perspectives.
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 30, 163–176.
Stack, S., & Eshleman, J. R. (1998). Marital status and happiness:
A 17-nation study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60, 527–536.
Stanley, S. M., Markman, H. J., & Whitton, S. W. (2002). Communi-
cation, conflict, and commitment: Insights on the foundations
of relationship success from a national survey. Family Process,
41, 659–675.
Statistik Austria. (2011). Educational attainment of the Austrian
population between 25 and 64 years, from 1971 to 2012 [Data
file]. Retrieved from http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/
bildung_und_kultur/bildungsstand_der_bevoelkerung/020912.
html
Teo, A. R., Choi, H., & Valenstein, M. (2013). Social relationships and
depression: Ten-year follow-up from a nationally representative
study. PLOS ONE, 8, e62396.
Van Orden, K. A., Witte, T. K., Cukrowicz, K. C., Braithwaite, S. R., Sel-
by, E. A., & Joiner, T. E. (2010). The interpersonal theory of suicide.
Psychological Review, 117, 575–600.
Wassermann, D. (2001). Suicide – an unnecessary death. London,
UK: Dunitz.
Whisman, M. A., & Baucom, D. (2012). Intimate relationships and
psychopathology. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review,
15, 4–13.
Whisman, M. A., & Uebelacker, L.A. (2006). Impairment and dis-
tress associated with relationship discord in a national sample
of married or cohabiting adults. Journal of Family Psychology,
20, 369–377.
Whisman, M. A., & Uebelacker, L.A. (2009). Prospective associa-
tions between marital discord and depressive symptoms in mid-
dle-aged and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 24, 184–189.
Whisman, M. A., Uebelacker, L. A., Tolejko, N., Chatav, Y., & McKelvie,
M. (2006). Marital discord and well-being in older adults: Is the
association confounded by personality? Psychology and Aging,
21, 626–631.
Wyder, M., Ward, P., & De Leo, D. (2009). Separation as a suicide risk
factor. Journal of Affective Disorder, 116, 208–213.
Received November 5, 2015
Revision received February 24, 2016
Accepted February 24, 2016
Published online July 22, 2016
About the authors
Benedikt Till, PD DSc, is a psychologist and Assistant Professor at the
Suicide Research Unit, Institute of Social Medicine, Center for Public
Health, Medical University of Vienna, Austria. He works in the field of
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
B. Till et al.: Relationship Satisfaction and Suicidality
10
© 2016 Hogrefe Publishing
Crisis 2016
media psychology, health communication, and suicide research and is
board member of the Wiener Werkstaette for Suicide Research.
Ulrich S. Tran, PD DSc, is a clinical psychologist and Senior Lecturer
of Methods in Psychology at the Department of Basic Psychological
Research and Research Methods, School of Psychology, University of
Vienna, Austria. He is a board member of the Wiener Werkstaette for
Suicide Research.
Thomas Niederkrotenthaler, MD PhD MMS, is Associate Professor at
the Suicide Research Unit of the Institute of Social Medicine, Vienna,
Austria. He is currently co-chair of the Council of National Represent-
atives to IASP, and founding chairman of the Wiener Werkstaette for
Suicide Research (http://www.suizidforschung.at).
Benedikt Till
Suicide Research Unit
Institute of Social Medicine
Center for Public Health
Medical University of Vienna
Kinderspitalgasse 15
A-1090 Vienna
Austria
Tel. +43 1 40160-34615
Fax +43 1 40160-934882
E-mail benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at
http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/pdf/10.1027/0227-5910/a000407 - Benedikt Till <benedikt.till@meduniwien.ac.at> - Friday, July 22, 2016 3:38:11 AM - Bibliothek der MedUni Wien IP Address:193.171.175.136
