Get started
Work

Trait Mindfulness and Relationship Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis of Individual and Dyadic Effects

Year: 2026
Type: preprint
Abstract: Mindfulness refers to intentionally paying attention to the present moment, on purpose, and without judgment (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). It is related to a host of benefits, including autonomy (Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013), emotion regulation (Raugh & Strauss, 2023), well-being (Johnson et al., 2024), and relationship satisfaction (McGill et al., 2016; Quinn-Nilas, 2020). Among romantic partners, trait mindfulness has been associated with greater romantic relationship satisfaction, a relation supported by previous meta-analyses (McGill et al., 2016; Quinn-Nilas, 2020). While McGill et al. (2016) include a limited number of studies (k = 10, N = 3,359) and conclude a positive relation (r = .27), Quinn-Nilas (2020) expands the analysis to a larger dataset (k = 28, N = 5,541), using mixed-effects models to rigorously assess publication bias and moderators (e.g., age, gender), and finds a small but consistent positive correlation (r = .24), suggesting that individuals who are more mindful tend to report higher relationship satisfaction. Complementing the meta-analysis, Voldstad et al. (2025) analyse the effects of mindfulness-based interventions on relationship satisfaction across 28 randomised controlled trials involving 6,097 participants, finding a small effect (g = 0.21) with low heterogeneity. The study also illustrates that longer mindfulness-based interventions and lower baseline satisfaction are associated with greater improvements in relationship satisfaction. Although trait mindfulness is consistently linked to greater romantic relationship satisfaction, Karremans et al. (2017) posit that the association may be indirect. In their theoretical model, mindfulness enhances romantic relationship satisfaction through four core processes, namely improved awareness of automatic responses, emotion regulation, executive control, and self-other connectedness. However, empirical synthesis of these mediating pathways remains limited. The present meta-analysis uses meta-analytic structural equation modelling (MASEM) to test the indirect effects of emotion regulation proposed by Karremans et al. (2017). We focus specifically on emotion regulation, which have received more theoretical and empirical attention in the study of mindfulness (e.g., Garland et al., 2015; Ng et al., 2025; Teper et al., 2013). Specifically, emotion regulation is a key pathway through which mindfulness is associated with psychological and relational outcomes (Raugh & Strauss, 2023). In the study, we adopt the five-family model of emotion regulation strategies (Gross, 2015; McRae & Gross, 2020), which categorises strategies into situation selection, situation modification, attentional deployment, cognitive change, and response modulation. First, situation selection refers to engaging in or avoiding situations that are expected to evoke either positive or negative emotional responses, such as avoidance and approach behaviours. Second, situation modification involves actively altering aspects of an external situation to change its emotional impact, such as through direct request and physical environment changes. Third, attentional deployment entails strategically directing attention to modulate emotional responses, such as distraction and rumination. Fourth, cognitive change involves altering one’s appraisal of a situation to change its emotional impact, such as cognitive reappraisal and acceptance. Fifth, response modulation refers to directly adjusting experiential, behavioural, or physiological components of emotional responses after the emotion has fully developed, such as expressive suppression and physiological interventions. Although certain physiological interventions, such as deep breathing exercises, are associated with mindfulness practice, in this study, we only include them as response modulation strategies when they are measured independently of mindfulness to avoid conceptual overlap. Guided by the five-family model of emotion regulation strategies (Gross, 2015; McRae & Gross, 2020), we aim to ensure consistency in classification and reduce conceptual ambiguity, while providing a theoretical foundation for exploring how trait mindfulness may shape individuals’ emotion regulation strategies and foster relational and psychological outcomes. Understanding moderator effects is vital for testing the boundary conditions under which trait mindfulness relates to relationship satisfaction, thereby enhancing the theoretical precision and practical relevance (Borenstein et al., 2021; Hansen et al., 2022). Based on Karremans et al.’s (2017) model and prior meta-analytic evidence (Quinn-Nilas, 2020; Voldstad et al., 2025), we aim to test the effects of moderator variables following four categories (i.e., demographic variables, relational distress, relationship status, and measurement differences). First, demographic variables such as age, gender, and country of sample may moderate the association between trait mindfulness and relationship satisfaction. For instance, older adults have higher levels of trait mindfulness than younger adults (Shook et al., 2017), and women tend to report higher levels of mindfulness than men, even following mindfulness interventions (Gupta & Rawat, 2024; Rojiani et al., 2017). Additionally, the culture embedded in different countries may shape individuals’ experiences of mindfulness, emotion regulation, and relationship satisfaction (Kirmayer, 2015; Matsumoto et al., 2018). Thus, the relation between trait mindfulness and romantic relationship satisfaction may differ across age groups, genders, and country of sample. Second, relational distress in romantic relationships may play a moderating role. For instance, mindfulness appears to be more beneficial to relationship well-being during periods of relationship distress (Karremans et al., 2017), with empirical findings indicating that mindfulness interventions have stronger effects among couples experiencing higher levels of distress (Voldstad et al., 2025). Third, relationship stages (e.g., dating, cohabiting, or married) may also moderate the association between trait mindfulness and relationship satisfaction. Notably, prior research suggests that couples at different stages of romantic relationships may vary in the levels of commitment and relationship satisfaction (Rhoades et al., 2012). Finally, differences in how trait mindfulness and relationship satisfaction are conceptualised and measured may moderate their association. For example, relationship satisfaction instruments such as the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1987) and the Couples Satisfaction Index (Funk & Rogge, 2007) focus on different relational dimensions. The Dyadic Adjustment Scale includes multidimensional aspects (i.e., dyadic consensus, satisfaction, cohesion, and affectional expression), whereas the Couples Satisfaction Index measures relationship satisfaction unidimensionally. Similarly, trait mindfulness is assessed using different instruments that differ in scope. For example, the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (Brown & Ryan, 2003) is a measure of mindful awareness, whereas the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (Baer et al., 2006) evaluates mindfulness via five facets, including observing, describing, acting with awareness, nonjudging, and nonreactivity. The conceptual differences may alter the strength of the relation between trait mindfulness and romantic relationship satisfaction. Taken together, prior research (e.g., Quinn-Nilas, 2020) has established a positive relation between trait mindfulness and relationship satisfaction. The current study builds on the foundation by incorporating more recent cross-sectional and longitudinal studies to test emotion regulation as a pathway for the association between trait mindfulness and relationship satisfaction in romantic couples. By integrating empirical findings and testing theoretically grounded mediation pathways, this study aims to inspire future investigation of more targeted mindfulness-based interventions for improving relational well-being. Research Questions: RQ1. What is the strength of the association between trait mindfulness and romantic relationship satisfaction in the included studies? RQ2. What is the magnitude of the indirect effect of trait mindfulness on relationship satisfaction through emotion regulation? RQ3. Do study-level characteristics (i.e., age, gender, country of sample, relational distress, relationship stages, and measurement) moderate the direct or indirect paths across trait mindfulness, emotion regulation, and relationship satisfaction?
Language: English
Field: Psychology
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W7161361429
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: 10