Financial Conflict Messages and Marital Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Financial Communication Satisfaction

Conflict over money is one of the most commonly cited topics of marital disagreements (Oggins, 2003). However, little empirical research has examined how marital couples communicate about financial issues, specifically, and how these financial communication messages contribute to, or detract from, marital satisfaction. Knowledge about how couples communicate regarding financial issues is of significance to conflict scholars because it would allow us to understand the potential detriments of certain financial conflict message patterns and how these patterns ultimately affect one’s marital satisfaction. Married individuals (not marital dyads) were recruited online to participate in an online survey about their financial communication patterns within his or her marriage. In the present study of 326 married individuals, we found that constructive financial conflict messages were positively associated with financial harmony, marital satisfaction, and financial communication satisfaction. Destructive financial conflict messages, the demand-withdraw financial conflict message pattern, and mutually avoiding financial conflict were each negatively associated with financial harmony, marital satisfaction, and financial communication satisfaction. In addition, financial communication satisfaction mediated the relationship between each of the financial conflict message patterns and marital satisfaction. The current study lays empirical groundwork for developing a theoretical framework for understanding marital interaction patterns and the effects these patterns have on marital satisfaction.

Thank you for your patience, compassion, and for teaching me what it feels like to be iii unconditionally loved. I love your kind heart. Papa-You have been my number one fan since the day I was born and I love you so much for that. Thank you for picking me up from school when I was sick, making me hot coca when my throat was scratchy, making Kibbe for me when my tummy was hungry, letting me sit in your lap during MSU games, cheering me on at every tennis match, and always allowing me to win at Euchre. Living life without you has been very difficult. Not a day goes by that I don't miss you or think about you. A piece of my heart will always be with you and I cherish our time together more than you know. Everything I do in life is to make you proud. I miss you immensely, Papa. I love you past the stars and galaxies, and way beyond the miles it takes to heaven. To my puppy, Bentley-Thank you for being the only one to move to Normal with me. I appreciate your snuggles and kisses so very much. I am really grateful for your long naps during the day, which allowed me to finish this thesis. has identified money as a main source of conflict within marriages (e.g., Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983;Oggins, 2003). Because payment obligations occur routinely and cannot be ignored, it is not unusual for financial disagreements to occur frequently in marriages and lead to heated arguments between marital partners (Dew & Dakin, 2011). Despite the importance of financial issues, marital couples are often reluctant to communicate about them (Atwood, 2012).
Financial conflict carries a negative reputation compared to other types of marital disagreements (Britt, Huston, & Durband, 2010). For example, Papp, Cummings, and Goeke-Morey (2009) found that conflict over money was more likely to remain unresolved as compared to other marital conflict issues. Additionally, "husbands and wives reported that they and their partners expressed more depressive behavior expressions (i.e., physical distress, withdrawal, sadness, and fear) during conflict about money relative to other topics" (Papp, Cummings, et al., 2009, p. 99). Marital disagreements about money seem to be particularly potent. Dew, Britt, and Huston (2012) examined how financial disagreements were associated with marital dissolution and divorce. Using data from the National Survey of Families and Households, the researchers found that financial disagreements were the strongest predictors of divorce relative to other types of marital problems, such as chores, time spent together, sex, and in-laws. Of particular interest, the researchers highlighted the importance of the financial argument's intensity contributing to a higher likelihood of divorcing; that is, the more intense the financial arguments were, the more likely the couple would divorce. This is consistent with Gottman's (1994) evidence that the way in which couples communicate during conflict is more strongly associated to marital dissolution than the mere frequency of having those disagreements. This literature raises the question of how marital partners are specifically communicating about financial issues. If financial conflicts can erode marital relationships, then it seems reasonable to suggest better communication about finances would seem to help minimize the negative consequences. Several studies have acknowledged the key to managing finances is better communication (e.g., Romo, 2011Romo, , 2014Romo, , 2015Romo & Vangelisti, 2014). For example, Archuleta, Britt, Tonn, and Grable (2011) argued: It may be that the ways couples cope with financial stressors impact financial satisfaction more than the actual stressors, meaning if couples are willing to work together and continue to communicate about the financial stressor(s), then it may lower anxiety in couple relationships and have a positive impact on their perception of financial satisfaction. (p. 573) Unfortunately, little empirical work to date has directly addressed the specific manner in which marital couples communicate about financial issues. Therefore, the current study is designed to explore how methods of handling financial disagreements contribute to, or detracts from, marital satisfaction. In addition, satisfaction with communicating about financial issues in marriage is predicted to contribute to marital satisfaction.
Destructive conflict behaviors involve active confrontation with a negative tone.
These behaviors have also been referred to as distributive (Sillars, 1980a), negative (Wilmarth et al., 2014), and anti-social (Roloff, 1976). Destructive conflict behaviors include competitive fighting, controlling behaviors, or being passive aggressive. Insults, criticisms, and defensiveness also represent manifestations of destructive conflict (e.g., Gottman, 1979Gottman, , 1994. Patterns of destructive conflict typically involve reciprocation of negative affect between partners (Gottman, 1994) and escalation of conflict intensity, which typically leaves the conflicting partners dissatisfied with the aftermath (Deutsch, 1973).
Avoidance is a passive and nonconfrontational pattern of conflict and is characterized by "people's reluctance to truly engage in a potentially conflict-inducing topic" (Afifi, McManus, Steuber, & Coho, 2009, p. 357). Avoidance is manifested in a variety of ways, including not directly discussing the problem or issue with the person, hinting, joking, letting the issue resolve itself, topic shifts, noncommittal questions and statements, evasive remarks, and direct and implicit denial (Sillars, 1980a).
In addition to the constructive, destructive, and avoidance conflict messages, the literature identifies a fourth distinctive conflict pattern of demand-withdraw. The demand-withdraw pattern is a commonly reoccurring interaction pattern where "one spouse pressures the other with demands, complaints, and criticisms, while the partner withdraws with defensiveness and passive inaction" (Christensen & Shenk, 1991, p. 458).
This pattern of communication combines elements of both avoidance and destructive confrontation. Demand-withdraw would seem to be quite different in its form and function compared to mutual avoidance of a conflict topic, and it has been distinguished from other destructive conflict patterns such as criticize-defend (Futris, Campbell, Nielsen, & Burwell, 2010;Gottman, 1994).
Knowledge about how couples manage conflict generally can be applied to the specific domain of financial disagreements. In the section that follows, it is proposed that financial harmony in a marriage predisposes the communication messages couples use when they have financial disagreements.

Financial Harmony and Financial Conflict Messages
Financial harmony refers to how "in sync" marital spouses' beliefs and practices are regarding money (Rick, Small, & Finkel, 2011). In other words, financial harmony represents a lack of conflict between partners about financial issues. Financial disharmony occurs when couples have frequent and distressing disagreements about financial issues. When spouses exhibit dissimilar beliefs and attitudes in their financial discussions, then they are more likely to have marital conflict over these issues (Luo & Klohnen, 2005). Rick and colleagues (2011) found that spouses who had dissimilar spending patterns (i.e., one partner was a "spendthrift," while the other partner was a "tightwad") tended to have more conflict about finances, which in turn predicted diminished marital well-being.
No research, to date, has examined how financial harmony (or lack thereof) is associated with the various types of conflict communicative messages when financial disagreements arise. However, we can logically make some assumptions about the potential relationship between the two. When spouses are in financial harmony they are generally in agreement with how to manage money, which predisposes them to communicate in ways that resolve differences that arise. They may also be more likely to communicate in constructive ways because they already have a preconceived notion of their spouse's beliefs about money, and because their spouse's beliefs are in line with theirs, they are constructively and proactively dealing with their financial issues.
When couples are not in sync and do not agree with how to handle finances, even before the conflict becomes a communicative event, individuals may already know their spouse's view is contrary to their own. This, in turn, may lead individuals to communicate in destructive ways as they push their position on the financial issue that is in contention. This leads to unresolved issues, which in turn, exacerbates differences leading to more destructive communication tendencies. In a large-scale study using data from the National Survey of Families and Households, the frequency of financial disagreements in marital relationships predicted engaging in heated arguments more than calm discussion, in managing marital disagreements (Dew & Dakin, 2011). Notably, this study assessed communication about any marital disagreements, not communication during financial disagreements.
In regards to the demand-withdraw pattern, when one individual is demanding to discuss a financial issue and the other spouse circumvents the discussion, it is logical to assume that these individuals do not agree on how they are handling finances. This pattern of financial conflict is at the core of partners being at odds with one another regarding finances. Caughlin and Vangelisti (1999)  In terms of conflict avoidance, mutual avoidance may in fact be a reflection of spouses being financially in sync with each other. Alternatively, they could be so out of sync that they do not even discuss the financial issues with each other, or partners may have decided to "agree to disagree" about certain financial issues. Therefore, mutual avoidance of conflict issues may or may not reflect financial harmony. Since the effects of financial harmony and mutually avoiding financial conflict messages is ambivalent, a research question is posed: RQ 1 : What is the relationship between financial harmony and mutually avoiding financial conflict messages?

Financial Conflict Messages and Marital Satisfaction
Previous research has documented how specific conflict messages are related to marital or relational satisfaction. However, scant scholarly attention has been devoted to understanding how marital partners are communicating about a specific conflict topic, such as finances, and the impact these conflict messages would have on marital satisfaction. The following section will review literature on the different types of conflict messages (i.e., constructive, destructive, demand-withdraw, and mutually avoiding) affecting a person's satisfaction in his or her relationship.

Constructive and Destructive Financial Conflict Messages
Several studies have consistently demonstrated that constructive conflict messages are positively associated with relational satisfaction, whereas destructive messages are negatively associated with relational satisfaction (e.g., Canary & Cupach, 1988;Canary, Cupach, & Serpe, 2001;Gottman, 1994;Sillars, 1980b;Ting-Toomey, 1983a). For example, Ting-Toomey (1983b) coded 34 marital couples' verbal exchanges of conflict when spouses were engaging in disagreements with each other. She observed the constructive (labeled as integrative communicative acts) and destructive messages (labeled as disintegrative communicative acts) that were conveyed during the conflicting discussion. Discourse that reflected confirming accounts, such as "It seems what you're saying is, you would like us to spend more time together" (p. 72); coaxing messages, such as "You're cute when you're angry" (p. 72); compromising tactics, such as making deals; and statements expressing agreement with the spouse were all coded as constructive messages. The destructive messages that were coded contained discourse that was confronting, such as "You're acting like a dumb fool again" (p. 72); complaining to the spouse, defending, and disagreements. The researcher found a positive association between constructive messages and marital satisfaction. Additionally, she found a negative association between destructive conflict messages and marital satisfaction. Sillars (1980a)  persuading, requesting, and coercive compliance-gaining techniques. "Explicit acknowledgment and discussion of conflict which sustains a neutral evaluation of the partner and does not seek concessions" (p. 188) was coded as constructive. These tactics were seen as solving the problem where participants mutually discussed the issue of contention. The results revealed that constructive messages were positively associated with conflict resolution and relational satisfaction. Additionally, those who used

The Demand-Withdraw Financial Conflict Message Pattern
Considerable evidence has supported the notion that couples who exhibit demandwithdraw patterns of conflict experience more dissatisfaction in their marriage (e.g., Christensen & Shenk, 1991;Caughlin, 2002;Caughlin & Huston, 2002;Caughlin & Scott, 2010;Eldridge, Sevier, Jones, Atkins, & Christensen, 2007;Futris et al., 2010;Heavey, Christensen, & Malamuth, 1995). Papp, Kouros, and Cummings (2009)  expressing put downs; and rejecting the spouse. Conversely, withdraw tactics were characterized by respondents who expressed defensiveness, which was defined as "trying to avoid blame or responsibility by justifying yourself" (p. 291). Additionally, changing the topic and physically and/or emotionally removing one's self from the interaction were also characterized as withdraw tactics. Results revealed that engaging in the demandwithdraw pattern was positively related to the experience of negative emotions (i.e., anger and fear) and a greater likelihood of engaging in negative conflict tactics (i.e., destructive messages), and negatively related to marital satisfaction. Couples who were highly satisfied within their marriage were less likely to report the demand-withdraw pattern.
Schrodt, Witt, and Shimkowski (2014) conducted a meta-analysis of 74 studies that examined the demand-withdraw pattern and relational outcomes. The majority of the studies in this meta-analysis utilized the Communication Patterns Questionnaire (CPQ) or the Couples Interaction Rating System (CIRS) to assess demand-withdraw patterns. "The CPQ asks partners to rate on a nine-point scale the degree to which 35 symmetrical and asymmetrical interaction patterns occur in their relationships" (Schrodt et al., 2014, p. 32) during various phases, whereas the CIRS is a coding scheme couples use to rate their partner's behaviors during an entire specific interaction they just engaged in with their spouse. The meta-analysis revealed that the demand-withdraw pattern showed a "moderate and meaningful" (p. 47) relationship to a variety of negative relational outcomes. More specifically, the demand-withdraw pattern provided statistically significant results with being negatively associated with relational satisfaction, exhibiting an effect size of r = .36 across the 74 empirical reports. The demand-withdraw pattern was also associated with an increase in violence and aggression and mental health symptoms. Additionally, distressed (and/or clinical) couples experienced the average effect of the demand-withdraw pattern to a greater extent than nondistressed couples.
A study not included in Schrodt et al.'s (2014) Wilmarth, 2012). Wilmarth and colleagues found that married couples experiencing financial distress (i.e., the lack of financial wellness) were more likely to report demandwithdraw communication patterns in their marriage. Moreover, the demand-withdraw tendencies were negatively associated with marital quality. The demand-withdraw pattern of communication mediated the negative association between financial distress and marital quality. This finding was subsequently replicated by Barton, Futris, and Nielsen (2015) with a different sample. It is noteworthy that these studies measured "respondent's perception of their own and their spouse's typical communication behaviors when issues or problems arise" (Barton et al., 2015, p. 540). People's typical day-to-day manner of handling disagreements with a spouse may or may not correspond to the way in which financial issues are managed in a marriage. Therefore, the current study will extend prior research by assessing the ways in which individuals manage disagreements about financial issues in particular. With that, the researcher hypothesizes that when couples engage in the demand-withdraw pattern when discussing financial obligations it will negatively affect their marital satisfaction. Specifically, it is predicted: The demand-withdraw financial message pattern is negatively associated with marital satisfaction.

Mutually Avoiding Financial Conflict
Scholars have identified avoidance as a conflict pattern that can have either negative or positive effects on a relationship (e.g., Fitzpatrick, Fallis, & Vance, 1982;Roloff & Ifert, 2000;Wang, Fink, & Cali, 2012). Roloff and Ifert (2000) identified five circumstances under which conflict avoidance can be beneficial. First, certain types of couples may benefit more directly from conflict avoidance. For example, sometimes it is essential to wait until one's partner calms down from a disagreement or else volatile behaviors can manifest. Second, avoidance entails coping devices, such as positive affect.
"Couples must find something positive in their relationships to balance the negative provocation" (p. 161). Third, avoidance is appropriate when the topic is of little importance to both partners and it is only occasionally used as a conflict strategy. Fourth, avoidance is viewed more positively when the individual chooses to engage in avoidance rather than being coerced. And, finally, when individuals are competent communicators they have the ability to know when avoidance is effective and appropriate based on the context of the situation.
Although there are specific times avoidance can be particularly beneficial to a relationship, substantial evidence has linked chronic conflict avoidance to relational dissatisfaction. For example, Smith, Heaven, and Ciarrochi (2008) found that compared to constructive and destructive conflict messages, couples that consistently used avoiding conflict messages reported lower levels of relational satisfaction. When couples are not able to resolve their issues, the damage lingers, which in turn can diminish the satisfaction individuals feel in their relationship. Additionally, Afifi and colleagues (2009) suggested that avoidance and relational dissatisfaction is bidirectional. "That is, when people avoid talking about conflict-inducing topics, it makes them dissatisfied in their relationships. At the same time, when people are dissatisfied with their relationships, they likely engage in greater avoidance with their partner" (p. 360).
One specific study that investigated avoidance as a conflict strategy in terms of marital satisfaction was reported by Noller, Feeney, Bonnell, and Callan (1994). Noller and colleagues examined 33 couples' communication patterns and their marital satisfaction over the course of their first 21 months of marriage. "Couples were assessed on three occasions, 4 to 6 weeks before marriage, after 1 year of marriage and after about 21 months of marriage" (p. 238). The participants were videotaped discussing a problem that they believed to be salient in their relationship. After each couple discussed their issue, they would re-watch their videotape, stopping it every time they were aware their partner was engaging in a conflict strategy. "The descriptions of the strategies were audiotaped and then transcribed for content coding" (p. 238). In terms of avoidance, results revealed that couples low in marital satisfaction reported engaging in more avoidance conflict behaviors compared to highly satisfied couples. Compared to couples who avoid discussing their marital issues, highly satisfied couples reported being more involved when discussing their concerns and engaged in negotiating behaviors to resolve their disputes.
An additional concept, stonewalling, has also been studied in the avoidance literature. Stonewalling, which occurs when one completely withdraws during a conflicting episode, has been linked to marital dissatisfaction (Gottman, 1994).
Stonewalling consists of behaviors such as avoidance, cold silence, and lack of expression and care. Additionally, it conveys emotional and physical distance and dissatisfaction (Gottman, 1994). Two factors make stonewalling detrimental to a relationship: "(1) when the behaviors become habitual, that is they are more common than uncommon; and (2) when the occurrence of negative behaviors is grossly disproportionate to positive behaviors" (Cupach et al., 2010, p. 132).
As indicated earlier, mutual avoidance may signal that partners are or are not in harmony with regard to financial issues. "The paradox of avoidance is that one is not often aware of it if his or her partner engaged in it. Further, avoidance often leads to interpersonal misperceptions, for example that the conflict has been resolved or effectively managed" (Canary & Cupach, 1988, p. 321). However, if partners routinely avoid discussing a topic as important as finances when they harbor disagreement, then it would likely be dysfunctional for the relationship. Given the equivocal nature of conflict avoidance, a research question is posed: RQ 2 : What is the relationship of mutually avoiding financial conflict with marital satisfaction?

Financial Communication Satisfaction as a Mediator
One reason that constructive communication is associated with positive relational outcomes such as marital satisfaction is because partners feel more satisfied with the interaction. According to Hecht, Sereno, and Spitzberg (1984; see also Hecht, 1978), "communication satisfaction is the positive emotion we feel after successful and fulfilling communicative interactions" (p. 376). Several studies have found an association between constructive conflict behavior and communication satisfaction (e.g., Canary & Spitzberg 1987Newton & Burgoon, 1990 To qualify for this study, participants had to be at least 18 years of age and currently married for a minimum of six months. Before participating, respondents were told that the study explores the way in which spouses communicate about day-to-day financial issues. They were assured that their responses were anonymous to the researchers. Additionally, they were assured that participation in this study was completely voluntary and they were free to not answer any question or discontinue participation at any time. After they agreed to the informed consent electronically, participants were then directed to the questionnaire.
The survey contained six sections. The first section contained items that measured the participant's perception of how in sync they are with their marital partner in terms of financial decisions and practices. Next, participants were asked to assess how they and their spouse discuss and deal with financial problems or topics within their marriage. In

Measurements Financial Wellness
Financial wellness is synonymous with financial health (Joo, 1998). According to Wilmarth (2012), "financial wellness has been framed as a function of an individual's personal characteristics, objective attributes, perceived attributes, and attributes of their financial domain" (p. 9). Financial wellness includes components of financial satisfaction and the perception of financial well-being. Since financial wellness is negatively associated with the occurrence of financial conflict (Wilmarth, 2012;Wilmarth et al., 2014) and positively associated with marital satisfaction (Aniol & Snyder, 1997;Archuleta et al., 2011;Conger et al., 1990), it is included in this study as a control variable. Financial wellness was assessed using the Personal Financial Wellness (PFW) scale (Prawitz et al., 2006), which consisted of eight self-report items that subjectively measure one's financial distress and financial wellness within one's marriage. Items

Financial Harmony
Financial harmony was assessed using Rick et al.'s (2011) 10-item measure.
Items included "When it comes to our finances, my spouse and I see eye to eye," "I am satisfied with my spouse's attitudes toward money," and "My spouse is satisfied with my attitudes towards money." Reverse-scored items included "Money is a constant source of conflict with my spouse," "The way my spouse and I handle our finances is in serious need of improvement," and "It is hard for me and my spouse to discuss finances without getting upset at each other." Agreement was rated on a Likert-type scale ranging from one to seven (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = neither disagree nor agree, 7 = strongly agree).

Financial Conflict Messages
Financial conflict messages were assessed using Christensen and Heavey's (1990) communication Destructive financial conflict messages were characterized when both spouses mutually blame, accuse, or criticize each other. A total of three items assessed destructive messages and they included "Both spouses blame, accuse, or criticize each other when conflicting over financial obligations" and "You criticize while your spouse defends him or herself." These items produced very good reliability (α = .81).
The demand-withdraw financial conflict pattern is manifested when one spouse insists on discussing the conflicting financial matter, while the other spouse evades the conversation. Four items were used to assess the pattern and items included "Your spouse pressures, nags, demands you, while you withdraw, become silent, and refuse to discuss the financial matter further" and "You try to start a discussion about the financial problem, while your spouse tries to avoid the financial discussion." Across 21 studies using the CPQ-SF, reliabilities ranged from .50 to .85 (Futris et al., 2010). However, the measure of demand-withdrawal in these studies typically included criticize-defend items (which were treated separately in the current study). In the current study, the demandwithdraw financial conflict pattern provided minimally acceptable reliability (α = .67).
Finally, mutually avoiding financial messages typified when both spouses circumvent talking about finances. The CPQ-SF contained only one item assessing mutual avoidance: "Both you and your spouse will avoid discussing the financial topic." In addition to this item, two new items were devised for the current study to assess mutual avoidance: "Both you and your spouse steer clear of discussing financial issues" and "Both you and your spouse shy away from discussing financial disagreements." The items produced very good reliability (α = .87).

Marital Satisfaction
Marital satisfaction was measured using Hendrick's (1988) relationship assessment scale (RAS). The seven-item scale was adapted to reflect marital relationships, specifically. Items included "In general, how satisfied are you with your marriage," "How well does your spouse meet your needs," and "How often do you wish you hadn't got into this marriage?" (Reverse scored). Items were assessed along a 7-point Likert-type scale. The scale produced very good reliability (α = .90).

Financial Communication Satisfaction
Six items were devised to construct a scale to measure participants' satisfaction with financial communication with their spouse. Items included "I am satisfied with the way in which we communicate about finances in my marriage," "Our interactions about financial issues are productive," and "I am happy with the way we negotiate financial disagreements." The six items were assessed along a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = neither agree nor disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The scale produced excellent reliability (α = .97).

Data Analysis
Hypotheses 1-10 and research questions 1-3 were tested by computing secondorder partial correlation coefficients, controlling for the potentially confounding effects of financial wellness and income. Financial wellness has previously been associated with both conflict behavior and relational satisfaction (e.g., Wilmarth et al., 2014). Similarly, income may influence marital satisfaction insofar as lower income can translate into a stressor in a marital relationship. Hypothesis 11 was tested using Hayes' (2013) PROCESS macro, which is a "computational tool for path analysis-based moderation and mediation analysis" (p. 419). This permits a test of the proposed mechanism by which financial conflict messages influence marital satisfaction, specifically through the mediating variable of financial communication satisfaction (Hayes, 2009;Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Mediation analyses were performed for each of the four different financial conflict messages discussed in the literature review: constructive, destructive, demandwithdraw, and mutual avoidance.

RESULTS
The previous chapter detailed the research methodology used in the current study.
The following chapter will highlight the results found in regards to the hypotheses presented and the research questions proposed in the literature review.

Variables Associated with Financial Conflict Messages
In order to test hypotheses 1-10 and research questions 1-3, second-order partial correlation coefficients were computed, with income and financial wellness serving as control variables. One-tailed probabilities were employed for hypotheses and two-tailed probabilities were used for research questions. Zero-order correlations and descriptive statistics are reported in Table 1. Note. All correlations were significant at p < .001, one-tailed test; FH = financial harmony; CON = constructive financial conflict messages; DES = destructive financial conflict messages; DW = the demand-withdraw financial conflict pattern; MA = mutually avoiding; FCS = financial communication satisfaction; MS = marital satisfaction.

Financial Harmony
Hypotheses 1-3 and research question 1 concerned the relationships between financial harmony and financial conflict messages. As predicted, financial harmony was positively association with constructive financial conflict messages, pr(302) = .59, p < .001, thus supporting hypothesis 1. Consistent with hypotheses 2 and 3, financial harmony was negatively associated with destructive financial conflict messages, pr (302) = -.63, p < .001, and the demand-withdraw financial conflict message pattern, pr(302) = -.69, p < .001. In response to research question 1, financial harmony was also negatively associated with mutually avoiding financial conflict messages, pr(302) = -.62, p < .001.
All these correlations are considered to be strong relationships.

Marital Satisfaction
Hypotheses 4-6 and research question 2 pertained to the relationships between financial conflict messages and marital satisfaction. Constructive financial conflict messages were positively associated with marital satisfaction, pr(302) = .42, p < .001.

Financial Communication Satisfaction
Hypotheses 7-9 and research question 3 explored the associations between financial conflict messages and financial communication satisfaction. As predicted, constructive financial conflict messages were positively associated with financial communication satisfaction, pr(302) = .76, p < .001, which is considered to be a strong relationship. Destructive financial conflict messages were negatively and moderately associated with financial communication satisfaction, pr(302) = -.57, p < .001. The demand-withdraw financial conflict message pattern was negatively and strongly associated with financial communication satisfaction, pr(302) = -.72, p < .001. These findings support hypotheses 7-9. In response to research question 3, mutually avoiding financial conflict messages showed a strong, negative relationship with financial communication satisfaction, pr(302) = -.67, p < .001.

Financial Communication Satisfaction and Marital Satisfaction
Hypothesis 10 predicted a positive association between financial communication satisfaction and marital satisfaction. The partial correlation revealed a significant, moderate relationship between these variables, pr(302) = .49, p < .001, supporting the hypothesis.

Financial Communication Satisfaction as a Mediator
Hypothesis 11 predicted that financial communication satisfaction would mediate the association between financial conflict messages and marital satisfaction. Hayes' (2013) PROCESS macro for SPSS was employed to test this hypothesis. It permits testing indirect effects using ordinary least squares path analysis. An indirect effect on marital satisfaction, as carried by the mediator of financial communication satisfaction, was tested separately for each of the four financial communication conflict message predictors. In each case, a bias-corrected bootstrap confidence interval (95%) based on 10,000 bootstrap samples was computed. Unstandardized path coefficients are reported in text, tables, and figures. Effect sizes for indirect effects were estimated with κ 2 (Preacher & Kelley, 2011) and R 2 med (Fairchild, MacKinnon, Toborga, & Taylor, 2009 Figure 1 and Table 2, the association between dealing with financial discussions constructively and marital satisfaction was mediated by financial communication satisfaction.     Table 3 Model  Figure 3 and Table 4).  Table 4 Model   Table 5 Model These meditational effects were replicated in models including financial wellness and income as covariates, with all four indirect effects remaining significant. Since the influence of the covariates was negligible, the models without covariates are reported in order to provide reliable effect size estimates. κ 2 and R 2 med have not yet been generalized to models with covariates (Hayes, 2013, p. 192).

DISCUSSION
This chapter will discuss the results. Following the review of all research questions and hypotheses, limitations of the study and areas for future research are presented.

Summary of Findings
The current study provides empirical evidence on how marital spouses are communicating about financial obligations within their marriage. More specifically, the current study opens the doors to understanding how financial harmony (or lack thereof) is related to the financial conflict messages utilized during financial disagreements and which financial conflict messages contribute to, or detract from, financial communication satisfaction and marital satisfaction. On a global level, the findings validate that the way in which couples are communicating about finances is related to marital satisfaction.
Although others have studied communication and marital outcomes (e.g., Albrecht, 1979;Canary & Cupach, 1988;Canary et al., 2001;Futris et al., 2010;Gottman, 1994;Sillars, 1980aSillars, , 1980bTing-Toomey, 1983a, 1983bWilmart, 2014;Wilmart et al., 2014), previous research has not studied the conflict message patterns about financial issues in particular until now. This is the first study of its kind to specifically examine the effects of the different financial conflict messages influencing one's marital satisfaction.
Additionally, the current study adds a unique variable, financial communication satisfaction, which mediates the effects of financial conflict messages on marital satisfaction.

Hypotheses 1-3
Financial harmony plays an important role in the financial conflict messages communicated when financial disagreements occur. Perceptions of shared financial beliefs with one's marital partner are positively associated with engaging in constructive financial conflict messages. Destructive financial conflict messages and the demandwithdraw financial conflict pattern are related to a lack of financial harmony. These findings suggest financial harmony predisposes people to communicate in a certain way due to their expectations of how their spouse will handle the financial issue in question.
For example, when spouses' beliefs are similar in terms of how to handle financial obligations, people are more likely to communicate by openly and calmly discussing the financial concern because they are not worried about a potential argument arising.
However, when a spouse already knows that they and their marital partner disagree with how to handle the financial concern, they are more likely to communicate dysfunctionally (i.e., destructive, demand-withdraw, mutual avoiding), which aggravates their disparities, triggering more dysfunctional communication. By engaging in these dysfunctional forms of financial conflict messages, the financial issue is left unresolved and resentments are likely to linger. Dysfunctional financial conflict messages make it hard for individuals to discuss the financial concern productively, which ultimately contributes to a decrease in relational satisfaction (Gottman, 1979).
Although not explicitly hypothesized, financial harmony was positively associated with financial communication satisfaction (see Table 1). That is, the more in sync marital partners are in regards to their financial beliefs, the more satisfied they are with the financial communication occurring in their marriage. Financial harmony was also positively related to marital satisfaction (see Table 1). The more in sync martial partners beliefs are about money, the more satisfied they are in their marriage. This finding is consistent with Luo and Klohnen's (2005)

Hypotheses 7-10
The current study also predicted that financial conflict messages would affect financial communication satisfaction. Supporting the hypotheses, constructive financial conflict messages and marital satisfaction were both positively related to financial communication satisfaction. Destructive financial conflict messages and the demandwithdraw financial conflict pattern were negatively related to financial communication satisfaction. These effects were robust even when controlling for financial wellness and income. When couples are compromising with each other over the financial issue, in addition to openly discussing the financial concern, individuals within the marriage feel more pleased about the interaction with their spouse regarding the financial problem.
When couples are being hostile, threatening, shouting at each other regarding the financial dispute, spouses are more likely to be frustrated by the interaction and disappointed with the outcome. In similar fashion, when one spouse is demanding change in the other spouse, and the other spouse avoids the financial issue, evidently the demanding spouse is going to be dissatisfied that the avoiding spouse did not change their stance on the financial concern. The avoiding spouse is likely to harbor resentment and feel annoyance over being continually nagged about the financial issue under dispute.

Research Questions 1-3
As acknowledged in the literature review, scholars have documented equivocal findings in terms of avoiding conflict and marital satisfaction. There are situations in which avoidance is a benefit for the relationship and situations where avoidance is detrimental (e.g., Fitzpatrick et al., 1982;Roloff & Ifert, 2000;Wang et al., 2012).
However, data from the current study indicate that when it comes to marital financial issues, mutually avoiding financial conflict is negatively related to financial harmony, financial communication satisfaction, and marital satisfaction. In regards to mutually avoiding financial conflict and financial harmony, avoiding financial conflict does not appear to be a reflection of spouses being in sync with each other regarding financial matters. It is more of a reflection of not being financially harmonized.
Additionally, the current findings support mutually avoiding financial conflict is similar to the effects that destructive financial conflict messages exert on marital satisfaction and financial communication satisfaction. One logical explanation for this finding lies in the importance of money. Avoidance should be used when the topic is of little importance to both individuals (Roloff & Ifert, 2000). Financial issues are significant in a marriage for a variety of different reasons. One thing that makes money in a marriage important is one spouse has the ability to make a unilateral decision that has the potential to affect both spouses (Stanley, Markman, & Whitton, 2002). Another explanation for mutually avoiding financial conflict being dysfunctional is because the current study assessed communication tendencies in general when discussing finances.
Although avoiding a discussion in a particular episode of financial conflict may be desirable, mutual avoidance as a chronic pattern of managing financial issues is inimical to marital relationships.
Avoiding conversations about financial topics or engaging in destructive financial conflict messages within a marriage could lead marital partners to engage in acts of financial infidelity. According to Klontz and Klontz (2009), financial infidelity is defined as "deliberately and surreptitiously keeping a major secret about one's spending or finances from one's partner" (p. 180). If couples argue or disagree about how to handle certain financial obligations, a spouse may be more inclined to hide or lie about certain financial purchases and/or behaviors to avoid conflict (Medintz, Caplin, Feldman, & McGrit, 2005). Additionally, when a person knows that his or her spouse will be overly aggressive (i.e., engage in destructive communication or the demand-withdraw pattern), people are more likely to engage in deceptive communication or avoidance strategies (Cloven & Roloff, 1993;Cole, 2001;Solomon & Samp, 1998).

Limitations and Additional Avenues of Research
Several limitations were present in the current study that need to be addressed.
One important limitation lies in the demographics of the participants. The participants were predominately white women, middle-class, and satisfied with their marriage.
Although the study had a wide range of participants in terms of age, the majority of the participants were similar in the other demographic variables. Additionally, participants in this sample had a relatively high median household income, falling between $100,000 to $149,000. This is over two-times the median household income in the United States (DeNavas-Walt & Proctor, 2015). A more diverse sample would have been desirable.
It is also important to acknowledge that divorced individuals were unable to participate in this study. It would be interesting and noteworthy to analyze data from divorced couples to see if financial communication was a determinant of their divorce.
Previous research has made the argument that couples who reported disagreeing about finances on a weekly basis had a higher likelihood of divorcing Dew et al., 2012). However, we already know that the way in which couples communicate during conflict is more strongly associated with marital dissolution than the mere frequency in engaging in conflict (Gottman, 1994 Another important phenomenon that needs to be considered is the financial socialization effect (Danes, 1994). This suggests that children are socialized to treat money as private information, and views about how one should save, spend, and manage money are shaped by observations of how parents deal with these financial decisions (Romo, 2014). Solheim, Zuicker, and Levchenko (2011) analyzed this financial socialization effect when studying college students' narratives. These narratives gave a descriptive base about the various financial concepts students learned from their parents.
Many college students learn about their parents' financial habits by observing their parents' financial behaviors while they were growing up. Students reported modeling these same financial behaviors. If children mirror their parent's financial behaviors when they become adults, it would seem logical to suggest that when children grow up they could mirror how their parents communicate about financial obligations. If parents communicate functionally or dysfunctionally about financial issues and children witness this at a young age, it can set a precedent for how they will communicate about financial concerns with their parents as they are growing up and with their spouse when they marry. Besides the financial communication patterns children can learn from their parents, they could also observe their parents engaging in financial infidelity to avoid potential financial conflict. Romo (2015) found that individuals who did not "learn about finances from their parents and/or lacked financial communication skills with their romantic partner reported less success in managing uncertainty, regardless of income" (p. 330). Furthermore, participants who lacked adequate knowledge about finances and how to communicate about them, found themselves at apparent relational and financial disadvantages. This suggests that our beliefs about how money should be dealt, spent, and managed starts forming at a very young age as we watch our parents communicate about financial obligations. Even if parents have differing beliefs about money, discussing these issues constructively is key. This will teach children to openly and productively discuss finances with their spouse when they grow up. How can marital partners discuss financial concerns constructively if they do not agree with how to handle the financial issue? This undoubtedly warrants further investigation by communication scholars due to the impact dysfunctional financial conflict messages have on not only marital satisfaction but on children acquiring the same financial message patterns as they mature.

Conclusion
The findings of the present study contribute to the significant literature on the role of financial issues in marriage. However, compared to previous research, the current study looks at the way in which couples are communicating about financial obligations being a predictor of one's financial communication satisfaction and marital satisfaction.
Additionally, the current study suggests that before even engaging in a financial conversation with a spouse, the perception of financial (dis)harmony will predispose a spouse to communicate in a certain way based on their expectations of how their partner would handle the financial issue in question. The different financial conflict messages discussed in the current study are important factors of marital satisfaction regardless of one's financial wellness or one's income. Communicating constructively about financial issues within a marriage acts to buffer against the negative relational consequences of financial disagreements.
APPENDIX A

Financial Communication Survey
Financial issues are among the most important issues spouses face in a marriage. It is not uncommon for spouses to disagree about some financial matters. This study explores the communication patterns between marital partners when discussing financial matters. In the section that follows, we will ask about you and your spouse's beliefs about money. In the subsequent section, we will ask about the communication patterns you and your spouse typically engage in when discussing finances, and how satisfied you are with the financial communication occurring in your marriage. The survey will end with questions about your marriage and your feelings about your financial circumstances, and some brief demographic questions.

I. Beliefs about Finances
Marital partners can be more or less compatible with each other when it comes to views about money and finances. The following statements pertain to the degree that you and your partner are harmonious or conflicted about financial matters in your marriage. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. 4 = Somewhat dissatisfied 7 = Somewhat satisfied 10 = Completely satisfied 3. How do you feel about your current financial situation? 1 = Overwhelmed 4 = Sometimes feel worried 7 = Not worried 10 = Feeling comfortable 4. How often do you worry about being able to meet normal monthly living expenses? 1 =All of the time 4 = Sometimes 7 = Rarely 10 = Never 5. How confident are you that you could find the money to pay for a financial emergency that costs about $1,000? 1 =No confidence 4 = Little confidence 7 = Some confidence 10 = High confidence 6. How often does this happen to you? You want to go out to eat, go to a movie or do something else and don't because you can't afford it? 1 =All of the time 4 = Sometimes 7 = Rarely 10 = Never 7. How frequently do you find yourself just getting by financially and living paycheck to paycheck? 1 =All of the time 4 = Sometimes 7 = Rarely 10 = Never 8. How stressed do you feel about your personal finances in general? 1 = Overwhelming stress 4 = High stress 7 = Low stress 10 = No stress at all

VI. Demographics Questions:
This last section of the survey will ask for descriptive information about you and your spouse. In addition, the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center provides a tip sheet with "Strategies for Couples Dealing with Financial Strain." (http://www.healthymarriageinfo.org/couples/resources-forcouples/download.aspx?id=300) Cut and paste either of these web links and paste into your browser.