SOP Files/Buying... · Web viewTable SI.1b.1 Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables (Study 1b)...

of 42 /42
Supplemental Information Studies 1a and 2a Relationship Satisfaction. Beyond the four-item relationship satisfaction scale (described in-text), respondents completed a 14-item measure of relationship commitment, reporting their relationship commitment on a scale from 1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely (e.g., “I feel committed to maintaining my relationship with my partner”; α = 0.95; Rusbult et al., 1998). Respondents then completed a six-item measure of their partners’ commitment to their relationship on a scale from 1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely (e.g., “I feel like my partner is very involved in our relationship”; α = 0.95; Gable & Poore, 2008). Finally, respondents completed a five-item measure assessing how much they appreciated their partner on a scale from 1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely (e.g., “I feel very lucky to have my partner in my life”; α = 0.98; Gable & Poore, 2009). All items in our 4-item relationship satisfaction measure, relationship commitment, partner commitment, and appreciation were highly correlated (α = 0.98). Therefore, we conducted regression analyses testing our study hypotheses with both the four-item relationship

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of SOP Files/Buying... · Web viewTable SI.1b.1 Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables (Study 1b)...

SOP

Supplemental Information

Studies 1a and 2a

Relationship Satisfaction. Beyond the four-item relationship satisfaction scale (described in-text), respondents completed a 14-item measure of relationship commitment, reporting their relationship commitment on a scale from 1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely (e.g., “I feel committed to maintaining my relationship with my partner”; α = 0.95; Rusbult et al., 1998). Respondents then completed a six-item measure of their partners’ commitment to their relationship on a scale from 1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely (e.g., “I feel like my partner is very involved in our relationship”; α = 0.95; Gable & Poore, 2008). Finally, respondents completed a five-item measure assessing how much they appreciated their partner on a scale from 1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely (e.g., “I feel very lucky to have my partner in my life”; α = 0.98; Gable & Poore, 2009). All items in our 4-item relationship satisfaction measure, relationship commitment, partner commitment, and appreciation were highly correlated (α = 0.98). Therefore, we conducted regression analyses testing our study hypotheses with both the four-item relationship satisfaction scale and the longer composite as outcome variables in Studies 1a and 2a. Analyses with the four-item scale were not substantively different from analyses with the long-form scale (See Tables SI.1a.3 and SI.2a.3).

Time-Saving Purchases Follow-up Items. In Studies 1a and 2a, if participants reported that they spent money on time-saving purchases together with their partner in a typical month, we proceeded to ask them a series of questions about these time-saving purchases. We asked respondents how much time they saved through these purchases in a typical month (ranging from 0 minutes to 50 hours or more) and we asked respondents how much money they spent on these purchases in a typical month (ranging from $0 to More than $2500). We also asked participants to report the percentage of time from these purchases that saved themselves time and not their partner, that saved their partner time and not themselves, and which saved both themselves and their partner time (responses to these three questions were required to add up to 100%). Participants then reported the percentage of purchases in a typical month that were made by their partner for their own benefit, the percentage of purchases that were made for themselves for their own benefit, and the percentage of purchases that were purchased by themselves for their partners’ benefit. Once again, the responses to these questions were required to add up to 100%. Lastly, participants were asked whether they made these time-saving purchases together (1=made these purchases separately, 7=made these purchases together) and whether they agreed with their partner about what time-saving purchases to buy (1=Completely Disagree to 7=Completely Agree).

Across both Studies 1a and 2a, we examined associations between the variables described above and our four-item relationship satisfaction outcome measure (See Tables SI.1a.6 and SI.2a.6). Across studies, we found consistent evidence that time-saving purchases was linked to greater relationship satisfaction most when couples made these purchases together with their partner, and when couples agreed on which of these time-saving purchases to make each month. In Study 1a, time-saving purchases that only saved the respondents’ time and not the partners’ time were linked to lower relationship satisfaction. In Study 2a, time-saving purchases that only benefited the respondent (and not the partner) were associated with lower relationship satisfaction. However, these set of results were not replicated across studies and were relatively weak statistically and therefore these results should be interpreted with caution.

Table SI.1a.1

Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables (Study 1a)

Variables

M

SD

Observed Range

# items

N

α

1. Relationship satisfaction

5.77

1.17

1.00-7.00

4

423

.923

2. Stress

0.00

0.64

-1.07-1.80

18

423

.915

3. General conflict

2.36

1.12

1.00-6.00

4

423

.890

4. Financial conflict

2.12

0.91

1.00-5.00

6

423

.938

5. Work-life conflict

2.87

1.45

1.00-7.00

8

423

.931

6. Time-saving

0.261

0.44

0-1

1

423

--

7. Material

0.781

0.41

0-1

1

423

--

8. Experiential

0.601

0.49

0-1

1

423

--

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0)

1 These values represent the proportion of entries in which respondents reported making each purchase type.

Table SI.1a.2

Correlations among Study Variables (Study 1a)

Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1. Relationship satisfaction

-

-.49***

-.49***

-.39***

-.28***

.10*

.22***

.21***

-.04

-.13**

.04

-.04

.15**

2. Stress

.54***

.81***

.82***

.07

-.22***

-.23***

-.09

.08

-.03

.03

-.26***

3. General conflict

-

.32***

.16**

-.00

-.28***

-.27***

-.06

.04

-.02

-.01

-.22***

4. Financial conflict

-

.44***

.05

-.12*

-.16**

-.07

.12*

-.08

.09

-.20***

5. Work-life conflict

-

.09

-.15**

-.13**

-.07

.03

.03

-.02

-.17***

6. Time-saving

-

-.13**

-.01

-.05

-.08

-.06

-.09

.04

7. Material

-

.43***

.18***

.12*

.08

.05

.20***

8. Experiential

-

.09

-.08

.07

-.12*

.34***

9. Age

-

.08

-.03

.25***

.23***

10. Gender

-

-.10*

.12*

-.03

11. Work hours/week

-

-.12*

.13*

12. Children

-

.10*

13. HH income

-

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

* p < .050, ** p < .010, *** p < .001.

Table SI.1a.3

Regression Analyses of Long-Form Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Time-Saving Purchases, Stress, and the Interactive Effect of Time-Saving Purchases and Stress (Study 1a)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.41 (0.05)

101.10

<.001

5.39 (0.05)

114.18

<.001

5.01 (0.22)

22.96

<.001

Time-saving

0.22 (0.10)

2.12

.034

.10

0.28 (0.09)

3.03

.003

0.13

0.29 (0.09)

3.13

.002

0.14

Stress

-0.78 (0.08)

-10.36

<.001

-0.52

-0.71 (0.08)

-8.97

<.001

-0.47

Time-saving X stress

0.30 (0.14)

2.10

.037

0.11

0.31 (0.14)

2.18

.030

0.11

Material

0.34 (0.11)

2.98

.003

0.15

Experiential

0.06 (0.10)

0.63

.528

0.03

Age

-0.08 (0.04)

-1.83

.069

-0.08

Gender

-0.11 (0.08)

-1.32

.187

-0.06

Work hours/week

0.02 (0.09)

0.18

.856

0.01

Children

0.04 (0.04)

1.15

.251

0.05

HH income

002 (0.02)

1.35

.177

0.07

Model statistics

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

4.51(1,421)

.034

.01

43.03(3,419)

<.001

.24

15.25

<.001

.27

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.1a.4

Supplementary Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Time-saving Purchases, Income, and the Interactive Effect of Time-Saving Purchases and Income (Study 1a)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.41 (0.05)

101.10

<.001

5.70 (0.07)

86.15

<.001

5.51 (0.02)

25.26

<.001

Time-saving

0.22 (0.10)

2.12

.034

.10

0.23 (0.13)

1.78

.076

0.09

0.27 (0.13)

2.11

.036

0.14

HH income

0.07 (0.03)

2.87

.004

0.17

0.05 (0.03)

1.79

.074

-0.47

Time-saving X HH income

-0.02 (0.04)

-0.49

.624

-0.03

-0.02 (0.04)

-0.42

.678

0.11

Material

0.61 (0.15)

3.95

<.001

0.15

Experiential

0.19 (0.13)

1.44

.152

0.03

Age

-0.09 (0.06)

-1.62

.107

-0.08

Gender

-0.31 (0.11)

-2.75

.006

-0.06

Work hours/week

-0.01 (0.13)

-0.09

.928

0.01

Children

-0.00 (0.05)

-0.07

.943

0.05

Model statistics

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

4.51(1,421)

.034

.01

4.51(3,412)

.004

.03

5.53(9,406)

<.001

.11

Note. Income was centered on the grand mean. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.1a.5

Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Amount Spent on Time-saving Services (Study 1a)

Model 1

Model 2

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.85 (0.26)

22.97

<.001

5.23 (0.45)

11.68

<.001

Amount spent on time-saving

0.01 (0.04)

0.20

.843

.02

-0.01 (0.04)

-0.29

.770

-0.03

Material

0.62 (0.25)

2.50

.014

0.31

Experiential

-0.35 (0.22)

-1.56

.123

-0.18

Age

0.08 (0.10)

0.87

.385

0.10

Gender

-0.17 (0.19)

-0.92

.362

-0.09

Work hours/week

0.01 (0.20)

0.05

.957

0.01

Children

-0.04 (0.09)

-0.42

.675

-0.04

HH income

0.03 (0.03)

0.94

.350

0.10

Model statistics

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

0.04(1,104)

.843

.00

1.37(8,95)

.220

.10

Note. Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.1a.6

Series of Linear Regression Models of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Follow-up Questions for Respondents who Reported Buying Time in Study 1a (N = 105)

Predictors

B (SE)

f-Value of model

p-value

R2

1. How much time do these purchases save per month?

-0.01 (0.04)

F(1, 104)=0.03

0.858

0.001

2. What % of this time saves YOU time and not your partner?

-0.01 (0.003)

F(1, 104)=5.46

0.021

0.050

3. What % of this time saves YOUR PARTNER time and not you?

-0.001 (0.004)

F(1,104)=0.05

0.826

0.001

4. What % of this time saves BOTH YOU and YOUR PARTNER?

0.01 (0.003)

F(1, 104)=3.79

0.054

0.035

5. What % of these purchases are purchased by you for your own benefit?

-0.003 (0.004)

F(1, 104)=0.45

0.505

0.004

6. What % of these purchases are purchased by your partner for your benefit?

-0.004 (0.004)

F(1, 104)=0.79

0.375

0.008

7. What % of these purchases are purchased by you for your partners benefit?

0.004 (0.003)

F(1, 104)=1.54

0.218

0.015

8. To what extent do you make these purchase decisions together with your partner?

0.16 (0.065)

F(1, 104)=6.31

0.014

0.057

9. To what extent do you and your partner agree about making these purchases?

0.26 (0.07)

F(1, 104)=13.96

<0.001

0.118

Note. N = 105 participants who provided follow-up information on their time-saving purchases out of 112 participants who indicated that they made time-saving purchases.

Table SI.1b.1

Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables (Study 1b)

Variables

M

SD

Observed Range

ICC

1. Relationship satisfaction

4.79

1.16

1-6

0.58

2. Stress

2.75

1.37

1-6

0.49

3. Control

3.67

1.59

1-6

0.48

4. Seriousness

2.52

1.38

1-6

0.63

5. Time-saving

0.191

0.39

0-1

0.11

6. Material

0.281

0.45

0-1

0.14

7. Experiential

0.101

0.30

0-1

0.07

Note. N = 66-71 at the between-person level and N = 1871-1873 at the within-person level. Means, standard deviations, and ranges were calculated over all person-days. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0).

1 These values represent the proportion of entries in which respondents reported making each purchase type.

Table SI.1b.2

Between- and Within-Person Correlations among Study Variables (Study 1b)

Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1. Relationship satisfaction

-

-.34**

.23

-.16

-.11

.11

.04

-.23

-.05

-.05

-.11

-.04

2. Stress

-.29***

-

-.45***

.89***

-.06

-.11

-.01

-.10

-.07

.02

.06

-.27*

3. Control

.19***

-.45***

-

-.45***

.10

-.01

.01

.19

.09

.10

.12

.09

4. Seriousness

-.24***

.67***

-.42***

-

-.12

.04

-.03

-.11

-.12

.06

.04

-.30*

5. Time-saving

.07**

-.03

.03

-.03

-

.28*

.53***

.14

-.23

.08

.03

.08

6. Material

.05*

-.01

.00

-.03

.08***

-

.19

.02

-.08

.24*

-.05

.00

7. Experiential

.04

-.03

.01

-.03

.05*

.05*

-

-.07

-.27*

.05

-.01

.17

8. Age

-

.03

.19

.51***

.29*

9. Gender

-

-.02

.10

.16

10. Work hours/week

-

.17

.32**

11. Children

-

.29*

12. HH income

-

Note. N = 66-71 at the between-person level and N = 1871-1873 at the within-person level. Missing data at the between-person level occurred because five individuals did not report household income. Missing data were handled using pairwise deletion. Sample-size weighted between-person correlations are presented above the diagonal and pooled within-person correlations are presented below the diagonal. These were computed using the statsBy function in the psych package in R (Revelle, 2017; R Core Team, 2017). Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children; HH income = household income.

* p < .050, ** p < .010, *** p < .001.

Table SI.1b.3

Multilevel Regression Analyses of Between- and Within-Person Effects of Daily Time-Saving Purchases and Household Income on Relationship Satisfaction (Study 1b)

Fixed effects

B (SE)

t

p

Intercept

4.75 (0.11)

44.20

<.001

Time-saving (w)

0.13 (0.05)

2.52

.014

Time-saving (b)

0.69 (0.82)

0.83

.408

HH income (b)

0.02 (0.04)

0.48

.630

Time-saving (w) * HH income (b)

0.01 (0.02)

0.58

.564

Time-saving (b) * HH income (b)

0.68 (0.24)

2.78

.008

Random effects

Variance

χ2

p

Intercept

0.76

1987.75

<.001

Time-saving

0.02

53.42

>.500

Level 1 residual

0.58

Note. Within-person predictors were group-mean centered and are for the same timepoint as the outcome, relationship satisfaction. Between-person predictors are grand-mean centered. Df for t-values ranged from 62-64. Df for χ2 values ranged from 52-54. w= within-person effect; b = between-person effect.

Table SI.1b.4

Multilevel Regression Analyses with all Interactive Effects of Between- and Within-Person Associations of Daily Time-Saving Purchases and Stress in Predicting Relationship Satisfaction (Study 1b)

Fixed effects

B (SE)

t

p

Intercept

4.73 (0.10)

45.86

<.001

Time-saving (w)

0.12 (0.05)

2.68

.010

Time-saving (b)

1.58 (2.33)

0.68

.500

Stress (w)

0.22 (0.03)

-7.39

<.001

Stress (b)

-0.22 (0.14)

-1.55

.126

Time-saving (w) X stress (b)

0.10 (0.04)

2.74

.008

Time-saving (b) X stress (w)

-0.13 (0.20)

-0.61

.543

Time-saving (w) X stress (w)

-0.01 (0.06)

-0.14

.889

Time-saving (b) X stress (b)

-0.73 (0.83)

-0.88

.384

Random effects

Variance

χ2

p

Intercept

0.76

1801.64

<.001

Time-saving

0.03

49.24

.271

Stress

0.04

147.55

<.001

Time-saving X stress

0.07

71.24

.008

Level 1 residual

0.46

Note. Within-person predictors were group-mean centered and are for the same timepoint as the outcome, relationship satisfaction. Between-person predictors are grand-mean centered. Df for t-values ranged from 67-70. Df for χ2 values ranged from 42-45. w= within-person effect; b = between-person effect.

Table SI.1b.5

Multilevel Regression Analyses of Between- and Within-Person Associations of Daily Time-Saving Purchases, Stress, and Relationship Satisfaction when excluding all late entries (Study 1b)

Null Model

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Fixed effects

B (SE)

t

p

B (SE)

t

p

B (SE)

t

p

B (SE)

t

p

Intercept

4.74 (0.11)

43.51

<.001

4.74 (0.11)

43.62

<.001

4.73 (0.10)

45.85

<.001

4.77 (0.09)

54.02

<.001

Time-saving (w)

0.16 (0.05)

2.94

.005

0.14 (0.05)

2.82

.007

0.13 (0.05)

2.66

.010

Time-saving (b)

-0.53 (0.69)

-0.77

.442

-0.62 (0.67)

-0.93

.354

0.20 (0.70)

0.28

.777

Stress (w)

-0.22 (0.03)

-7.24

<.001

-0.18 (0.04)

-4.82

<.001

Stress (b)

-0.29 (0.11)

-2.76

.008

-0.73 (0.22)

-3.39

.002

Time-saving (w) X stress (b)

0.10 (0.04)

2.29

.025

0.09 (0.04)

2.18

.033

Controllability (w)

0.04 (0.02)

1.84

.070

Controllability (b)

0.14 (0.09)

1.63

.108

Seriousness (w)

-0.06 (0.03)

-2.14

.036

Seriousness (b)

0.53 (0.22)

2.43

.019

Material (w)

0.04 (0.05)

0.84

.402

Material (b)

-0.12 (0.62)

-0.20

.844

Experiential (w)

0.04 (0.06)

0.72

.474

Experiential (b)

1.02 (0.98)

1.03

.307

Age (b)

-0.33 (0.10)

-3.50

.001

Gender (b)

-0.61 (0.22)

-2.69

.010

Work hours/week (b)

0.09 (0.20)

0.45

.655

Children (b)

0.01 (0.08)

0.18

.859

HH income (b)

0.01 (0.04)

0.27

.788

Random effects

Variance

χ2

p

Variance

χ2

p

Variance

χ2

p

Variance

χ2

p

Intercept

0.82

2195.99

<.001

0.82

1956.30

<.001

0.74

2013.43

<.001

0.57

877.50

<.001

Time-saving

0.02

62.45

.355

0.01

52.67

>.500

0.02

34.19

>.500

Stress

0.04

193.78

<.001

0.04

71.22

.001

Controllability

0.01

48.97

.132

Seriousness

0.02

37.28

>.500

Material

0.03

47.69

.160

Experiential

0.04

33.81

>.500

Level 1 residual

0.57

0.57

0.48

0.46

Note. Within-person predictors were group-mean centered and are for the same timepoint as the outcome, relationship satisfaction. Between-person predictors are grand-mean centered. Df for t-values ranged from 54-70. Df for χ2 values ranged from 28-70. w= within-person effect; b = between-person effect.

Table SI.1b.6

Multilevel Regression Analyses of Between- and Within-Person Associations of Daily Time-Saving Purchases, Stress, and Relationship Satisfaction when Controlling for Number of Completed Entries and whether the Entry was Completed Late (Study 1b)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Fixed effects

B (SE)

t

p

B (SE)

t

p

B (SE)

t

p

B (SE)

t

p

Intercept

4.73 (0.11)

44.50

<.001

4.73 (0.11)

44.70

<.001

4.72 (0.10)

46.90

<.001

4.76 (0.09)

53.86

<.001

Late completion (w)

-0.08 (0.06)

-1.24

.219

-0.05 (0.07)

-0.76

.452

-0.03 (0.07)

-0.44

.659

-0.05 (0.07)

-0.72

.474

Number completed (b)

0.02 (0.01)

1.71

.091

0.03 (0.01)

1.94

.057

0.02 (0.01)

1.23

.222

0.01 (0.02)

0.51

.612

Time-saving (w)

0.14 (0.05)

2.62

.011

0.12 (0.05)

2.65

.010

0.11 (0.04)

2.37

.021

Time-saving (b)

-0.80 (0.64)

-1.24

.218

-0.77 (0.65)

-1.18

.242

0.05 (0.74)

0.07

.946

Stress (w)

-0.22 (0.03)

-7.28

<.001

-0.19 (0.04)

-5.25

<.001

Stress (b)

-0.26 (0.10)

-2.52

.015

-0.62 (0.26)

-2.41

.020

Time-saving (w) X stress (b)

0.10 (0.04)

2.63

.011

0.08 (0.03)

2.46

.017

Controllability (w)

0.04 (0.02)

1.74

.086

Controllability (b)

0.15 (0.08)

1.79

.079

Seriousness (w)

-0.06 (0.03)

-1.98

.052

Seriousness (b)

0.42 (0.24)

1.73

.089

Material (w)

0.04 (0.05)

0.87

.388

Material (b)

-0.17 (0.66)

0.25

.802

Experiential (w)

0.01 (0.06)

0.16

.874

Experiential (b)

0.94 (0.98)

0.96

.342

Age (b)

-0.33 (0.10)

-3.48

.001

Gender (b)

-0.52 (0.23)

-2.30

.026

Work hours/week (b)

0.09 (0.19)

0.44

.661

Children (b)

0.02 (0.08)

0.27

.792

HH income (b)

0.01 (0.04)

0.15

.886

Random effects

Variance

χ2

p

Variance

χ2

p

Variance

χ2

p

Variance

χ2

p

Intercept

0.78

1319.76

<.001

0.78

1176.68

<.001

0.73

1309.50

<.001

0.58

396.48

<.001

Late completion

0.01

36.67

>.500

0.02

25.64

>.500

0.01

28.68

>.500

0.04

15.67

>.500

Time-saving

0.02

53.99

.016

0.01

40.71

.167

0.02

23.02

.287

Stress

0.04

112.21

<.001

0.04

49.50

.001

Controllability

0.01

44.15

.003

Seriousness

0.01

23.85

.300

Material

0.04

18.69

>.500

Experiential

0.04

22.31

.382

Level 1 residual

0.57

0.56

0.48

0.45

Note. Within-person predictors were group-mean centered and are for the concurrent timepoint (time t) compared to the outcome, relationship satisfaction. Between-person predictors are grand-mean centered. Df for t-values ranged from 53-70. Df for χ2 values ranged from 9-40. w= within-person effect; b = between-person effect.

Table SI.2a.1

Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables (Study 2a)

Variables

M

SD

Observed Range

# items

N

alpha

1. Relationship satisfaction

5.76

1.34

1.00-7.00

4

597

.93

2. Quality time

4.94

1.54

1-7

1

596

-

3. Stress

0.00

0.64

-1.27-1.89

18

590

.92

4. General conflict

2.66

1.29

1.00-6.00

4

596

.88

5. Financial conflict

2.63

1.16

1.00-5.00

6

590

.95

6. Work-life conflict

3.56

1.68

1.00-7.00

8

590

.95

7. Time-saving

0.421

0.49

0-1

1

594

-

8. Material

0.831

0.38

0-1

1

597

-

9. Experiential

0.641

0.48

0-1

1

597

-

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0)

1These values represent the proportion of entries in which respondents reported making each purchase type.

Table SI.2a.2

Correlations among Study Variables (Study 2a)

Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1. Relationship satisfaction

-

.43***

-.17***

-.26***

-.20***

.01

.14**

-.02

.06

-.11**

-.13**

-.04

-.06

.02

2. Quality time

-

-.06

-.15***

-.08

.05

.17***

.04

.19***

-.02

-.14**

-.04

-.07

.03

3. Stress

-

.47***

.78***

.84***

.36***

.00

.08*

-.24***

-.12**

-.06

.04

-.05

4. General conflict

-

.17***

.14**

.09*

-.06

-.03

-.10*

-.04

-.00

.01

-.03

5. Financial conflict

-

.44***

.19***

.05

.06

-.14***

-.03

-.06

.04

-.12**

6. Work-life conflict

-

.42***

-.00

.11*

-.25***

-.17***

-.05

.03

.02

7. Time-saving

-

.04

.30***

-.20***

-.26***

.03

.00

.09*

8. Material

-

.38***

-.03

.10*

.05

.09*

.00

9. Experiential

-

-.11**

-.09*

.04

-.10*

.13**

10. Age

-

-.03

.07

.17***

.18***

11. Gender

-

-.07

-.06

-.08*

12. Work hours/week

-

-.01

.02

13. Children

-

.07

14. HH income

-

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

* p < .050, ** p < .010, *** p < .001.

Table SI.2a.3

Regression Analyses of Long-Form Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Time-saving Purchases, Stress, and the Interactive Effect of Time-saving Purchases and Stress (Study 2a)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.39 (0.06)

97.29

<.001

5.25 (0.06)

94.24

<.001

5.32 (0.27)

19.67

<.001

Time-saving

0.36 (0.09)

4.25

<.001

0.17

0.48 (0.09)

5.49

<.001

0.23

0.32 (0.10)

3.39

.001

0.15

Stress

-0.76 (0.09)

-8.14

<.001

-0.47

-0.80 (0.10)

-8.41

<.001

-0.50

Time-saving X stress

0.83 (0.13)

6.23

<.001

0.35

0.84 (0.14)

6.25

<.001

0.36

Material

0.01 (0.12)

0.04

.969

0.00

Experiential

0.21 (0.10)

2.18

.030

0.10

Age

-0.07 (0.04)

-1.90

.058

-0.08

Gender

-0.22 (0.09)

-2.56

.011

-0.11

Work hours/week

-0.13 (0.09)

-1.51

.132

-0.06

Children

-0.03 (0.03)

-0.76

.448

-0.03

HH income

0.02 (0.02)

1.29

.197

0.05

Model statistics

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

18.29(1,592)

<.001

.03

28.39(3,585)

<.001

.13

11.12(10,558)

<.001

.17

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2a.4

Supplementary Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Time-saving Purchases, Income, and the Interactive Effect of Time-saving Purchases and Income (Study 2a)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.60 (0.07)

77.71

<.001

5.59 (0.07)

75.97

<.001

6.15 (0.24)

25.25

<.001

Time-saving

0.38 (0.11)

3.42

.001

0.14

0.39 (0.11)

3.47

.001

0.14

0.26 (0.12)

2.08

.038

0.10

HH income

-0.02 (0.04)

-0.68

.500

-0.04

-0.01 (0.04)

-0.31

.758

-0.02

Time-saving X HH income

0.05 (0.05)

1.07

.286

0.07

0.04 (0.05)

0.86

.389

0.06

Material

-0.01 (0.16)

-0.09

.931

-0.00

Experiential

0.06 (0.13)

0.48

.634

0.02

Age

-0.07 (0.05)

-1.39

.164

-0.06

Gender

-0.28 (0.12)

-2.38

.018

-0.10

Work hours/week

-0.14 (0.12)

-1.17

.241

-0.05

Children

-0.05 (0.05)

-1.10

.271

-0.05

Model statistics

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

11.70(1,592)

.001

.02

4.49(3,573)

.004

.02

2.62(9,564)

.006

.04

Note. Income was centered on the grand mean. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2a.5

Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Amount Spent on Time-Saving Services (Study 2a)

Model 1

Model 2

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.89 (0.18)

33.13

<.001

6.15 (0.53)

11.72

<.001

Amount spent

0.01 (0.03)

0.25

.805

0.02

-0.02 (0.03)

-0.82

.412

-0.06

Material

-0.10 (0.28)

-0.36

.720

-0.03

Experiential

0.14 (0.25)

0.55

.581

0.04

Age

-0.13 (0.08)

-1.48

.141

-0.10

Gender

-0.42 (0.18)

-2.44

.015

-0.16

Work hours/week

-0.16 (0.17)

-0.91

.366

-0.06

Children

-0.05 (0.07)

-0.69

.489

-0.05

HH income

0.04 (0.03)

1.36

.176

0.09

Model statistics

F(df)

p

R2

F(df)

p

R2

0.06(1,250)

.805

.00

1.47(8,238)

.168

.05

Note. Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2a.6

Series of Linear Regression Models of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Follow-up Questions for Respondents who Reported Buying Time in Study 2a (N = 250)

Predictors

B (SE)

F-Value of model

p-value

R2

1. How much time do these purchases save per month?

0.02 (0.02)

F(1, 250) = 1.00

.318

.004

2. What % of this time saves YOU time and not your partner?

-0.001 (0.001)

F(1,249) = 0.05

.832

.001

3. What % of this time saves YOUR PARTNER time and not you?

-0.01 (0.004)

F(1, 249) = 1.24

.266

.005

4. What % of this time saves BOTH YOU and YOUR PARTNER?

-0.003 (0.003)

F(1, 249) = 1.10

.296

.004

5. What % of these purchases are purchased by you for your own benefit?

-0.006 (0.004)

F(1, 249) = 2.92

.089

.012

6. What % of these purchases are purchased by your partner for your benefit?

0.005 (0.003)

F(1, 249) = 2.33

.128

.010

7. What % of these purchases are purchased by you for your partners benefit?

0.000 (0.003)

F(1, 249) = 0.002

.968

.000

8. To what extent do you make these purchase decisions together with your partner?

0.27 (0.06)

F(1, 249) = 23.51

<.001

.086

9. To what extent do you and your partner agree about making these purchases?

0.32 (0.07)

F(1, 249) = 20.64

<.001

.077

Note. N = 250 participants who provided follow-up information on their time-saving purchases out of 252 participants who indicated that they made time-saving purchases.

Table SI.2a.7

Indirect Effect of Time-Saving Purchases on Relationship Satisfaction through Quality Time at Average Stress with Additional Interactive Effects (Study 2a)

Quality Time

Relationship Satisfaction

Predictors

B (SE)

z

p

β

B (SE)

z

p

β

Intercept

-0.38 (0.08)

-4.53

<.001

5.23 (0.07)

78.89

<.001

Time-saving

0.63 (0.13)

4.81

<.001

0.20

0.38 (0.11)

3.57

<.001

0.14

Stress

-0.81 (0.14)

-5.70

<.001

-0.34

-0.69 (0.12)

-5.81

<.001

-0.33

Quality time

0.30 (0.04)

6.92

<.001

0.34

Time-saving X stress

1.00 (0.20)

4.92

<.001

0.29

0.55 (0.17)

3.17

.002

0.18

Quality time X stress

-0.02 (0.05)

-0.37

.710

-0.02

Time-saving X quality time

0.06 (0.07)

0.91

.362

0.04

R2

0.08

0.23

Indirect = 0.19 [0.10, 0.28]

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0).

Table SI.2a.8

Indirect Effect of Time-saving Purchases on Relationship Satisfaction through Quality Time at Average Stress with Covariates (Study 2a)

Quality Time

Relationship Satisfaction

Predictors

B (SE)

z

p

β

B (SE)

z

p

β

Intercept

-0.10 (0.40)

-0.25

<.001

6.34 (0.32)

19.62

<.001

Time-saving

0.44 (0.14)

3.12

.002

0.14

0.33 (0.11)

2.93

.003

0.12

Stress

-0.78 (0.14)

-5.50

<.001

-0.32

-0.74 (0.12)

-6.35

<.001

-0.35

Quality time

0.32 (0.03)

9.64

<.001

0.36

Time-saving X stress

0.94 (0.20)

4.67

<.001

0.27

0.52 (0.16)

3.15

.002

0.17

Material

0.03 (0.17)

-0.18

.858

-0.01

-0.09 (0.14)

-0.62

.537

-0.02

Experiential

0.42 (0.14)

2.96

.003

0.13

-0.13 (0.12)

-1.10

.271

-0.05

Age

0.01 (0.06)

0.15

.884

0.01

-0.17 (0.05)

-3.64

<.001

-0.14

Gender

-0.31 (0.13)

-2.47

.014

-0.10

-0.20 (0.10)

-1.96

.050

-0.07

Children

-0.08 (0.05)

-1.56

.118

-0.06

-0.02 (0.04)

-0.42

.677

-0.02

FTE

-0.19 (0.12)

-1.55

.121

-0.06

-0.09 (0.10)

-0.91

.363

-0.03

Income

-0.01 (0.03)

-0.18

.855

-0.01

0.01 (0.02)

0.24

.807

0.01

R2

0.11

0.26

Indirect = 0.13 [0.05, 0.23]

Note. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2b.1

Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables (Study 2b)

Females

Males

Variables

# items

M

SD

Observed Range

α

M

SD

Observed Range

α

1. Relationship satisfaction

4

5.73

1.31

1.00-7.00

0.94

5.78

1.22

1.00-7.00

0.92

2. Quality time

1

4.95

1.46

1-7

--

5.02

1.47

1-7

--

3. Stress

18

0.00

0.66

-1.19-1.90

0.93

0.00

0.67

-1.16-2.08

0.93

4. General conflict

4

2.58

1.26

1.00-6.00

0.90

2.45

1.09

1.00-6.00

0.85

5. Financial conflict

6

2.59

1.16

1.00-5.00

0.95

2.44

1.16

1.00-5.00

0.95

6. Work-life conflict

8

3.31

1.70

1.00-7.00

0.95

3.37

1.73

1.00-7.00

0.95

7. Support received

5

3.74

0.88

1.00-5.00

0.89

3.84

0.88

1.00-5.00

0.90

8. Support provided

5

3.83

0.68

1.00-5.00

0.80

3.81

0.73

1.00-5.00

0.81

9. Time-saving

1

0.331

0.47

0-1

--

0.311

0.46

0-1

--

10. Material

1

0.831

0.38

0-1

--

0.761

0.43

0-1

--

11. Experiential

1

0.581

0.49

0-1

--

0.501

0.50

0-1

--

Note. N = 193.Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0).

1These values represent the proportion of entries in which respondents reported making each purchase type.

Table SI.2b.2

Correlations among Study Variables (Study 2b)

Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1. Relationship satisfaction

.74***

.39***

-.26***

-.42***

-.17*

-.09

.68***

.48***

.18*

.07

.21**

-.02

.06

.04

-.01

2. Quality time

.40***

.65***

-.11

-.18*

.01

-.11

.45***

.33***

.18*

.12

.23**

.09

.07

.15

.13

3. Stress

-.24***

-.10

.66***

.52***

.77***

.87***

-.22**

-.22**

.16*

-.07

-.01

-.26***

.02

-.18*

.00

4. General conflict

-.38***

-.19**

.60***

.69***

.17*

.27***

-.38***

-.25***

.09

-.09

.06

-.09

.04

-.14

.06

5. Financial conflict

-.19**

.01

.78***

.33***

.51***

.48***

-.09

-.10

.09

.08

.06

-.22**

-.04

-.17

-.04

6. Work-life conflict

-.08

-.09

.85***

.30***

.42**

.57***

-.12

-.18*

.17*

-.14

-.09

-.24**

.04

-.13

.01

7. Support received

.64***

.46***

-.19**

-.39***

-.13

-.04

.48***

.59***

.20**

.12

.15*

.04

-.01

.04

.07

8. Support provided support

.52***

.38***

-.19**

-.38***

-.12

-.06

.54***

.53***

.03

.25***

.18

.14

.07

.05

-.01

9. Time-saving

.08

.17*

.23**

0.10

.17*

.22**

.17*

.11

.54***

-.10

.12

-.26***

.03

-.06

.19*

10. Material

.10

.07

-.16*

-.08

-.11

-.16*

.05

.17*

.11

.62***

.40***

-.00

-.02

-.02

-.03

11. Experiential

.23**

.17*

-.07

-.02

-.11

-.02

.13

.22**

.18*

.34***

.55***

-.08

-.13

.07

.03

12. Age

.02

.00

-.25***

-.17*

-.15*

-.24**

.09

.02

-.21**

-.04

-.10

.83***

.04

.37***

.07

13. Work hours/ week

.04

-.13

.09

.04

.06

.09

-.02

-.06

-.01

.01

-.05

.03

.17***

-.11

.15*

14. Children

.01

-.04

-.05

.03

-.09

-.03

.04

.09

-.09

.06

.06

.26***

-.01

.90***

-.05

15. HH income

.07

.08

-.05

-.02

-.05

-.05

.09

-.01

.13

-.01

.03

.13

-.00

-.08

.96***

Note. N = 193 couples. Correlations for the female partner reports are above the diagonal, correlations for the male partner reports are below the diagonal, and cross-partner correlations are presented on the diagonal. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0).

* p < .050, ** p < .010, *** p < .001.

Table SI.2b.3

Multilevel Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Time-Saving Purchases, Stress, and the Interactive Effect of Time-Saving Purchases and Stress (Study 2b)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.65 (0.08)

72.62

<.001

5.26 (0.19)

27.40

<.001

5.59 (0.08)

74.72

<.001

5.32 (0.18)

29.03

<.001

Time-saving

0.34 (0.14)

2.47

.014

0.13

0.28 (0.14)

1.98

.048

0.10

0.42 (0.14)

3.09

.002

0.16

0.34 (0.14)

2.41

.016

0.12

Stress

-0.72 (0.12)

-6.18

<.001

-0.38

-0.71 (0.12)

-5.99

<.001

-0.38

Time-saving X stress

0.60 (0.20)

3.03

.002

0.19

0.57 (0.20)

2.89

.004

0.18

Material

0.03 (0.17)

0.20

.843

0.01

-0.10 (0.16)

-0.62

.534

-0.03

Experiential

0.54 (0.14)

3.93

<.001

0.21

0.49 (0.13)

3.73

<.001

0.20

Age

0.05 (0.06)

0.87

.383

0.05

-0.02 (0.06)

-0.32

.750

-0.02

Gender

0.05 (0.13)

0.37

.710

0.02

0.04 (0.12)

0.30

.764

0.02

Work hours/week

0.13 (0.10)

1.38

.168

0.07

0.18 (0.09)

1.90

.058

0.09

Children

-0.03 (0.04)

-0.80

.426

-0.04

-0.03 (0.04)

-0.95

.341

0.05

HH income

0.00 (0.03)

0.05

.962

0.00

-0.00 (0.03)

-0.12

.902

-0.01

Model statistics

R2

SE

p

R2

SE

p

R2

SE

p

R2

SE

p

0.02

0.01

.214

0.07

0.03

.007

0.11

0.03

<.001

0.15

0.03

<.001

Note. N = 386 individuals nested within 193 couples; All continuous variables were centered on the grand mean for the overall sample. Maximum likelihood was used to estimate the model parameters. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0). Gender= male (1), female (0). Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2b.4

Supplementary Multilevel Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Time-saving Purchases, Income, and the Interactive Effect of Time-saving Purchases and Income (Study 2b)

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.65 (0.08)

72.62

<.001

5.66 (0.08)

72.17

<.001

5.25 (0.19)

27.39

<.001

Time-saving

0.34 (0.14)

2.47

.014

0.13

0.34 (0.14)

2.39

.017

0.13

0.28 (0.14)

1.92

.055

0.10

HH income

0.01 (0.03)

0.34

.733

0.02

-0.00 (0.03)

-0.11

.911

-0.01

Time-saving X HH income

-0.02 (0.06)

-0.24

.810

-0.01

0.02 (0.06)

0.32

.749

0.02

Material

0.03 (0.17)

0.19

.852

0.01

Experiential

0.55 (0.14)

3.94

<.001

0.22

Age

0.05 (0.06)

0.87

.387

0.05

Gender

0.05 (0.13)

0.38

.706

0.02

Work hours/week

0.14 (0.10)

1.40

.162

0.07

Children

-0.03 (0.04)

-0.78

.437

-0.04

Model statistics

R2

SE

p

R2

SE

p

R2

SE

p

0.02

0.01

.214

0.02

0.01

.209

0.07

0.03

.007

Note. N = 386 individuals nested within 193 couples; All continuous variables were centered on the grand mean for the overall sample. Maximum likelihood was used to estimate the model parameters. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0). Gender= male (1), female (0). Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2b.5

Regression Analyses of Relationship Satisfaction as a Function of Amount Spent on Time-Saving Services (Study 2b)

Model 1

Model 2

Predictors

B (SE)

t

p

β

B (SE)

t

p

β

Intercept

5.76 (0.07)

89.24

<.001

5.34 (0.19)

28.41

<.001

Amount spent

0.04 (0.02)

2.04

.041

0.10

0.03 (0.02)

1.33

.184

0.07

Material

0.02 (0.17)

0.14

.891

0.01

Experiential

0.55 (0.14)

3.94

<.001

0.22

Age

0.04 (0.06)

0.69

.491

0.04

Gender

0.05 (0.13)

0.35

.723

0.02

Work hours/week

0.13 (0.10)

1.37

.172

0.07

Children

-0.03 (0.04)

-0.86

.390

-0.04

HH income

0.01 (0.03)

0.19

.848

0.01

Model statistics

R2

SE

p

R2

SE

p

0.01

0.01

.305

0.06

0.02

.011

Note. Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0); Gender = female (1), male (0); Work hours/week = 31-40 hours (0), 40+ hours (1); Children = number of children living in the home; HH income = household income.

Table SI.2b.6

Indirect Effect of Time-Saving Purchases on Relationship Satisfaction through Quality Time at Average Stress including Additional Interactive Effects (Study 2b)

Quality Time

Relationship Satisfaction

Predictors

B (SE)

z

p

β

B (SE)

z

p

β

Intercept

-0.22 (0.12)

-1.85

.064

5.67 (0.10)

54.33

<.001

Quality time

0.55 (0.16)

3.44

.001

0.18

0.30 (0.05)

6.39

<.001

0.35

Time-saving

-0.57 (0.14)

-4.15

<.001

-0.26

0.29 (0.13)

2.18

.029

0.11

Stress

-0.57 (0.12)

-4.94

<.001

-0.30

Time-saving X stress

0.76 (0.23)

3.26

.001

0.21

0.35 (0.19)

1.80

.072

0.11

Quality time X Time-saving

-0.12 (0.10)

-1.17

.242

-0.06

Stress X quality time

0.07 (0.07)

-0.95

.341

0.05

Model statistics

R2 = 0.08

R2 = 0.21

Indirect = 0.16 (0.06), p < .001, 95%CI[0.07, 0.29]

Note. N = 386 individuals nested within 193 couples; All continuous variables were centered on the grand mean for the overall sample. Maximum likelihood was used to estimate the model parameters. Bayes estimation with 100,000 iterations was used to estimate credible intervals for indirect effect. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0).

Table SI.2b.7

Indirect Effect of Time-Saving Purchases on Relationship Satisfaction through Quality Time at Average Stress with Covariates (Study 2b)

Quality Time

Relationship Satisfaction

Predictors

B (SE)

z

p

β

B (SE)

z

p

β

Intercept

-0.56 (0.22)

-2.55

.011

5.48 (0.18)

31.04

<.001

Quality time

0.28 (0.04)

6.82

<.001

0.32

Time-saving

0.50 (0.17)

2.98

.003

0.16

0.24 (0.13)

1.80

.072

0.09

Stress

-0.47 (0.14)

-3.36

.001

-0.22

-0.44 (0.09)

-4.85

<.001

-0.23

Time-saving X stress

0.68 (0.23)

2.91

.004

0.19

Material

0.06 (0.19)

0.33

.738

0.02

-0.09 (0.15)

-0.61

.539

-0.03

Experiential

0.43 (0.16)

2.72

.007

0.15

0.39 (0.13)

3.08

.002

0.16

Age

0.10 (0.07)

1.36

.172

0.07

-0.05 (0.06)

-0.80

.423

-0.04

Work Hours

-0.03 (0.11)

-0.30

.766

-0.02

0.18 (0.09)

1.99

.046

0.09

Children

-0.02 (0.04)

-0.36

.722

-0.02

-0.02 (0.03)

-0.62

.533

-0.03

Income

0.04 (0.03)

1.30

.194

0.07

-0.02 (0.03)

-0.62

.536

-0.03

Gender

0.09 (0.15)

0.58

.565

0.03

0.03 (0.12)

0.23

.820

0.01

R2

0.11

0.23

Indirect = 0.14 (0.05), p = .001, 95%CI[0.04, 0.25]

Note. N = 386 individuals nested within 193 couples; All continuous variables were centered on the grand mean for the overall sample. Maximum likelihood was used to estimate the model parameters. Bayes estimation with 100,000 iterations was used to estimate credible intervals for indirect effect. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0); Material = material purchase (1), no material purchase (0); Experiential = experiential purchase (1), no experiential purchases (0). Gender= male (1), female (0).

Table SI.2b.8

Indirect Effect of Time-saving Purchases on Relationship Satisfaction through Quality Time at Average Stress Controlling for Support Receipt and Provision (Study 2b)

Quality Time

Relationship Satisfaction

B (SE)

z

p

β

B (SE)

z

p

β

Intercept

-0.12 (0.08)

-1.41

.158

5.74 (0.06)

98.79

<.001

Quality time

0.07 (0.04)

2.00

.045

0.09

Time-saving

0.31 (0.15)

2.03

.042

0.10

0.08 (0.11)

0.77

.440

0.03

Stress

-0.23 (0.13)

-1.71

.090

-0.10

-0.19 (0.08)

-2.56

.011

-0.10

Support receipt

0.54 (0.09)

5.83

<.001

0.33

0.72 (0.07)

10.40

<.001

0.50

Support provision

0.30 (0.11)

2.64

.008

0.14

0.30 (0.08)

3.62

<.001

0.17

Time-saving X stress

0.47 (0.21)

2.14

.032

0.13

R2

0.23

0.47

Indirect = 0.02 (0.02), p = .090, 95%CI[-0.00, 0.06]

Note. N = 386 individuals nested within 193 couples; All continuous variables were centered on the grand mean for the overall sample. Maximum likelihood was used to estimate the model parameters. Bayes estimation with 100,000 iterations was used to estimate credible intervals for indirect effect. Time-saving = time-saving purchase (1), no time-saving purchase (0).

Table SI.3a.1

Differences between Purchases Reflected on in Each Condition (Study 3a)

Material purchase

Time-saving purchase

t-value

These purchases were:

One-time expense

5.57 (2.62)

4.52 (2.68)

t(597) = 4.88, p < 0.001

Better spent on something else

3.17 (1.98)

3.60 (2.30)

t(583.42) = 4.40, p = 0.017

Money well-spent

7.30 (1.73)

7.10 (1.88)

t(596) = 1.39, p = 0.165

Helpful

5.68 (1.15)

5.92 (0.96)

t(578.00) = 2.77, p = 0.006

Fun

4.94 (1.53)

4.45 (1.69)

t(590.99) = 3.66, p < 0.001

High in social status

3.23 (1.50)

3.50 (1.54)

t(597) = 2.18, p = .029

Table SI.3b.1

Differences between Purchases Reflected on in Each Condition (Study 3c)

Shared time-saving purchase

Non-shared time-saving purchase

t-value

These purchases were:

One-time expense

4.66 (2.69)

5.06 (2.58)

t(399) = 1.51, p = 0.398

Better spent on something else

3.47 (2.27)

4.59 (2.56)

t(388.75) = 4.62, p < 0.001

Money well-spent

7.58 (1.56)

6.52 (2.00)

t(368.18) = 5.90, p < 0.001

Helpful

5.91 (0.95)

5.44 (1.26)

t(363.23) = 4.15, p < 0.001

Fun

5.07 (1.53)

4.37 (1.61)

t(399) = 4.44, p < 0.001

High in social status

4.09 (1.53)

3.76 (1.72)

t(388.56) = 2.04, p = .042