The mode of expression used by individuals, in written or spoken word, offers insight into one’s cognitive and emotional processes. Over the past 25 years expressive writing has become an interest to researchers, therapists, and the public. Writing provides a symbolic way of expressing thoughts, feelings, and emotions. Analytical programs provide a way to study the structure and content of written communication. There is little research that includes marital relationships and expressive writing and no known research that includes marital relationships and writing analyses. In relationships, meanings are created to help make sense of situations and interactions. Symbols also include the process of evaluating relationships. The present study uses the Linguistic Inquire and Word Count (LIWC) to analyze the writing samples from participants and the Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI) to measure relationship satisfaction. To more fully understand the relationship between writing and couple satisfaction, this study focused on married couples. This study used a dyadic analysis approach so that partner effects could be analyzed. This study had two main goals: (1) to examine the relationship between first person pronoun use (singular and plural) and marital satisfaction, and (2) to examine the relationship between affective language use (positive and negative) and marital satisfaction. Each of these goals also included exploring possible sex and length of marriage differences. The results from this study indicate that individuals who use more first person plural pronouns (e.g., we) are more likely to report higher marital satisfaction. This indicates that individual perceptions of couple togetherness are related to higher marital satisfaction. Results also indicate that individuals who use more positive affective language are more likely to report higher marital satisfaction. Also, individuals whose partners use more positive affective language are more likely to report higher marital satisfaction. This suggests that positive affect in relationships is linked to higher satisfaction for both spouses. Although negative affective language was not related to marital satisfaction, if individuals used anger language it was negatively associated with marital satisfaction. This reveals the need for more research on the specific effects of anger on relationship satisfaction. Examining relationships from this new perspective may have valuable implications for couple therapy, interventions, and future research.

The purpose of this study was to describe the criteria that students reported using when selecting writing samples for an assessment portfolio. Specifically, the study involved content analysis of student responses to five prompts which asked the students to give selection criteria for writing samples in language arts portfolios prepared for assessment. The population consisted of twelve eighth grade students in three urban middle schools. The students were in classes that were participating in the New Standards Portfolio Assessment Field Trial. In addition to the responses to prompts, students also submitted writing samples to be scored using New Standards rubrics. The writing samples were evaluated to determine if the students successfully selected pieces of their writing to provide evidence of standards attainment. Through the analysis of the student responses to the prompts, two categories of selection criteria were noted. Public standards were the standards that corresponded with the criteria that were presented to the students through their use of New Standards performance standards, portfolio exhibit requirements, and entry slips. Personal standards were criteria that did not correspond to the published criteria presented to the students. Ten sub-categories were identified. These ten sub-categories became the instrument for analysis and tabulation of the students' reported criteria for selecting writing samples for their portfolios. Findings indicated that students were willing to use the public standards and that they used them more frequently than personal standards in justifying selections for the assessment portfolio. However, student identification of appropriate criteria did not guarantee that the writing samples that the student submitted received scores that would indicate standards attainment.