Background: Subjective accounts of divorce seeking individuals is a useful complement to sociological and psychological causes of divorce at both individual and community level. Regarding the increasing trend of divorce worldwide, the need for a questionnaire measuring subjective reasons of divorce is felt more and more. 
Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop and validate perceived causes of a divorce questionnaire in Iranian society.
Methods: This was an instrument development study that carried out in 2016, based on extensive literature reviews and interviews with individuals referring to “Family Intervention Centers to Reduce Divorce” in Kerman, Fars and Alborz provinces (Iran). At first, 38 items expressing the perceived reasons for divorce were extracted; then, 29 items were used in the questionnaire according to the experts’ judgment. After that, the questionnaire was given to 570 participants. The structural validity was evaluated using two methods: exploratory factor analysis via principle axis factoring, and known group comparisons by paired-samples t-test. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was also examined by calculating the Cronbach's alpha and corrected item-total correlation. SPSS version 20 was used for statistical analysis.
Results: The mean age (± SD) of women and men was 32.3 (±8.9) and 36.8 (±10.6), respectively. Based on an expert panel, content validity of 29 items was approved. Using principle axis factoring and varimax rotation, two components were extracted. These two factors were called “instrumental/external reasons” and “expressive and relationship-centered reasons.” Factor loading of all 29 items was higher than 0.32. Cronbach's alpha of the two subscales was 0.84 and 0.85, respectively. Corrected item-scale coefficient of all items was more than 0.2.
Conclusions: According to the acceptable validity and reliability of the Perceived Reasons for Divorce Seeking Questionnaire, it can be used to ascertain people`s reasons for divorce seeking.


Keywords: Divorce, Questionnaire, Separation, Social problems


» HTML Fulltext    » PDF Fulltext    » doi: 10.19082/7071

Current Issue

In the second issue of the journal Electronic Physician for 2019, we have several papers including four Randomized Controlled Trials, a model development study, a case report, an editorial, a letter to editor (LTE), and several original research including two studies with qualitative approach. Authors of this issue are from nine countries: Iran, The Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, India, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Jordan. Read more...


The 6th World Conference on Research Integrity (WCRI) is to be held on June 2-5, 2019 in Hong Kong.

The WCRI is the largest and most significant international conference on research integrity. Since the first conference in Lisbon in 2007, it has given researchers, teachers, funding agencies, government officials, journal editors, senior administrators, and research students opportunities to share experiences and to discuss and promote integrity in research. Read more:


TDR Clinical Research and Development Fellowships

Call for applications

Deadline for submission: 7 March 2019, 16:00 (GMT)

TDR provides fellowships for early- to mid-career researchers and clinical trial staff (e.g. clinicians, pharmacists, medical statisticians, data managers, other health researchers) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to learn how to conduct clinical trials. Read more:

Meta-Analysis Workshops in New York, USA, and London, UK, in April and May 2019

Don't miss this exceptional opportunity to learn how to perform and report a Meta-analysis correctly. Two Meta-analysis workshops are organized in April and May 2019 by Dr. Michael Borenstein in New York, USA (April 08-10, 2019) and London, UK (May 27-29).

About the Instructor

Dr. Michael Borenstein, one of the authors of Introduction to Meta-Analysis, is widely recognized for his ability to make statistical concepts accessible to researchers as well as to statisticians. He has lectured widely on meta-analysis, including at the NIH, CDC, and FDA. Read more: