1. Introduction
Marriage is one of the most important events of everybody in life. It is also accompanied by different physical and psychological consequences for both men and women. In line with popular belief, research has shown that marriage is associated with positive psychological outcomes such as higher psychological well-being [1]. For adults, having a happy and stable marriage is the best protector against disease and premature death [2].
The scientific study of marital satisfaction has drawn a lot of attention since 1990, and during this period, many definitions have been proposed for marital happiness. Spanier and Cole argued that marital satisfaction is an indicator of a couple’s interactions in everyday life that embraces satisfaction, solidarity, agreement, and affection of that couple [3]. In other words, marital satisfaction is one of the broadest concepts that shows an amount of happiness and stability of a relationship [4]. Regarding the definition of marital satisfaction and compatibility, Griff states that compatible couples agree with each other, are satisfied with the type and quality of spending their time, and have proper management of their time and financial issues [5].
Researchers have worked for decades to identify important factors in relationships, conflicts, and marital problems. Various studies have focused on the effects of different personal and economic-cultural factors on marital satisfaction. One of the personal factors influencing marital satisfaction is the personality traits of the couples. According to Nakash-Eisikovits et al., character refers to the long-standing pattern of thought, excitement, motivation, and behavior expressed in different environments [6]. Character is also defined as the set of differences influenced by the growth of values, attitudes, personal memories, social relationships, habits, and competencies [7].
There has been an ever-increasing consensus on the higher order of personality structure over the past two decades, as most scholars now believe that the character can be divided into 5 general attributes known as the great 5 personality traits. The model provided by McCrae and Costa is known as the 5-factor model of the character or the 5 great [8]. These factors include flexibility, accountability, pleasure, psychoanalysis, and extraversion [9]. Flexibility reflects the interest of people in recent years and the acquisition of new experiences. Responsiveness is associated with controlling impulses, restraint, power of will, and success. This attribute signifies self-adaptation, action, and success. Neuroticism, which is a stable emotional state, indicates a negative emotional experience such as anger, anxiety, and depression [10].
An extroverted person enjoys being with people, is full of energy, and often experiences positive emotions. Agreeableness implies, in fact, the difference between humans in interpersonal cooperation and social harmony. People are cautious, friendly, gracious, helpless, and willing to compromise with others [11].
One of the objectives of this study is to identify the relationship between personality traits and marital satisfaction, but the question arises whether this relationship is direct or other psychological variables can play a role in this respect. In this study, positive and negative affects are seen as intermediate variables. Positive emotions include pleasure, interest, trust, and awareness, which are part of the behavioral system of livelihoods, and direct the organism toward enjoyable stimuli [12]. If people have a positive emotion, they usually feel enthusiastic, energetic, alert, and optimistic, while people with low positive emotion, usually feel humor, indifference, and fatigue [7]. Negative emotions include fear/anxiety, sadness/depression, and anger/hostility. These emotions are part of a deterrent behavior system, whose primary purpose is to inhibit behaviors that lead to unpleasant outcomes [12].
Heller et al. reported the positive relationship of all five factors of personality with marital satisfaction, but the negative relationship of extraversion, responsiveness, pleasure, and flexibility factors with marital satisfaction [13]. In line with these results, Karney and Bradbury’s longitudinal study showed that low-level psychosis is one of the most important predictors of marital satisfaction [14]. The relationship between psychosis and low marital satisfaction was also found in subsequent studies [15].
A great deal of research has been done on the relationship between personality and emotional dimensions, and most studies have investigated the relationship between extraversion and levels of positive affect, as well as neuroticism and negative emotional levels. For example, according to the Ising theory, neuroticism is associated with negative mood and extraversion with a positive attitude [16]. David et al. showed that positive and negative affects significantly predict extroversion and neuroticism, respectively. The researchers concluded that extroversion tends to make people feel positive, while neuroticism makes people vulnerable to negative emotions [17]. Besides, Costa and McCrae reported that neuroticism is strongly correlated with negative affect [18]. The relationship between positive and negative affects and marital satisfaction also indicates that depression is related to lower marital satisfaction [19]. Also, it showed that positive affect improves marital satisfaction because it causes couples to behave kindly toward each other and people with positive emotions form an ideal image of their spouse because they interpreted their spouse’s behavior with an optimistic view [20].
Based on the findings of the research, we considered the relationship between personality traits, positive and negative affect, as well as marital satisfaction. Moreover, we determined the role of mediating positive and negative affect in the relationship between personality traits and marital satisfaction. Now, the question arises whether positive and negative affects have a mediator role in the relationship between personality traits and marital satisfaction. This mediator role is tested based on the hypothesized model of research (Figure 1).

2. Materials and Methods
This study is developmental research in terms of the aim and a non-experimental and correlational one in terms of data collection and analysis. The proposed theoretical model is presented with regard to the objective of the present research. The research involves the study of structural equations. In the present study, the statistical population included married women residing in the east part of Tehran City (districts 4, 8, 13, 14, and 15) in 2018.
A total of 300 married women were selected as an available sample. Taking into account the estimated sample size in other studies such as Kelin [21] who divided participants into 3 groups of simple, complex and complex patterns, and according to the number of examined variables, this study is a complex and this study is a complex model with a sample size of at least 300 people.
For this purpose, a copy of the research questionnaire was submitted to each of the participants after obtaining consent. The inclusion criteria included being 20-45 years old, having no specific physical or mental health illness, and having the least competency to read and write. The exclusion criteria also included separate living in conditions such asbeing a widow, divorce, marital conflicts, long-term career travel, marriage contracts, and less than 6 months from the time of marriage until the completion of the questionnaire.
Study instruments
Five-factor personality questionnaire
It is a 60-point scale that measures the 5 main factors of the personality: flexibility, accountability, pleasure, psychoanalysis, and extraversion. On this scale, each subject has 12 questions. The questions are answered on a scale from completely disagree to completely agree, and the minimum and the maximum scores are 0 and 240, respectively. The results of McCrae and Costa study showed that the correlation of the short form 5 sub-samples with the long-form ranges from 0.77 to 0.92 [10]. In addition, the internal consistency of the subscales of this questionnaire was 0.86 to 0.86 [22]. In Iran, Haghshenas translated this scale and verified its verbal validity [23]. By standardization of this test, which was carried out by Garousi Farshi on a 2000-person sample, the correlation coefficient of the 5 main factors was found between 0.56 and 0.87, and acceptable reliability was reported for it. The Cronbach alpha coefficients were 0.76, 0.81, 0.73, 0.76, and 0.89 for flexibility, accountability, pleasure, psychoanalysis, and extraversion factors, respectively [24].
Positive and Negative Affect List 
Positive and Negative Affect List (PANAS) is a self-report scale. Questions 1, 3, 5, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, and 19 are related to the negative affects. Questions 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 18, and 20 are related to the PANAS. Watson et al. demonstrated that internal consistency is 0.86 to 0.90 in positive affect and 0.84 to 0.87 in negative affect [25]. PANAS test-retest reliability (1 week) was 0.79 for positive affect and 0.81 for negative affect. PANAS correlation with the Hopkins Symptom Checklist  was 0.74 for negative and -0.19 for positive affect [25]. PANAS correlation with Beck Depression Inventory was 0.65 for negative affects and -0.29 for positive affect. All questions are rated as 1= Very slightly or not at all, 2= A little, 3= Moderately, 4=Quite a bit, and 5= Extremely. The total score is calculated by adding the 10 positive items and the 10 negative items. Scores for both sets of items range from 10 to 50. A higher score indicates a more positive affect on the overall positive score. For the total negative score, a lower score indicates less negative affect [25]. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients in this research were 0.70 for positive affect and 0.71 for negative affect.
Marital Satisfaction Scale
The enrich marital satisfaction scale has 47 questions. It also has marital satisfaction in 12 components of the contractual response, marital satisfaction, personality issues, marital relationship, conflict resolution, financial management, leisure activities, sexual relations, marriage and children, family and friends, the role of gender equality, and religious orientation. This scale is graded based on a Likert-type scale from “totally agree” to “completely disagree.” Fowers and Olson conducted a study on 7261 couples in a national study between 1983 and 1985 to determine the validity and reliability of this questionnaire [26]. The reliability of the test was determined by calculating the reliability of the test in the 4-week interval from 0.97 for the subscale of religious orientation up to 0.65 for the subscale of marital satisfaction. In internal studies, the Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.93 for the test group and 0.04 for the women group [27]. The Cronbach alpha coefficient of marital satisfaction was 0.91 in this study.
To analyze the data, firstly, the correlations among personality traits, marital satisfaction, and positive and negative affects were calculated with a Pearson correlation coefficient in SPSS v. 21. Then, the path analysis was performed with latent variables in AMOS 18.
3. Results
The demographic data analysis in Table 1 shows that most of the sample population was between 30 and 40 years old. Regarding the degree of education, the most frequent is for women with a diploma.

One of the assumptions for structural equation modeling is the normalization of a multivariate distribution. For this purpose, the multi-variable multiplier Mardia is used in the AMOS software. Values larger than 5 for the Mardia coefficient represent the distribution of abnormal data. The value of the Mardia coefficient for the research data is 3.55, which shows the multivariate normalization assumption (Table 2).

According to the goodness of indices, the results of the implementation of the final research model after the required reforms, along with some of the most important indicators of fitting the original model were presented in Table 3.
The Sobel test was used to investigate the effect of mediating positive and negative affect on the relationship between personality traits and marital satisfaction. Sobel argues that this asymptotic ratio has a normal distribution, and when this ratio is greater than ±1.96, for larger specimens, the zero assumption is rejected at the 0.05 level. 
According to Table 4, the hypothesis in relation to the indirect effect of positive and negative affections on marital satisfaction has been confirmed by positive and negative affects with 95% confidence. Also, the direct effect of personality traits on marital satisfaction was significant.
4. Discussion
The results of the path analysis showed that the personality traits indirectly had a significant effect on marital satisfaction. Similar to the present research, studies show that individuals with higher grades in the factors of extroversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and flexibility report higher marital satisfaction. Regarding the results of the relationship between personality traits and marital satisfaction, the mediating role of positive and negative affects were confirmed. In addition, the direct effect of personality traits on marital satisfaction was significant.

Neurotic, characterized by negative emotions and mood changes, is associated with lower levels of proximity [28], greater sensitivity to negative events, fewer positive social interactions [29], higher emotional sensitivity over time in marital relationships, and friendliness [30]. Extroversion, which is the main characteristic of being social and overcoming positive emotions, can lead to positive social exchanges, in which couples behave more socially and, in line with this finding, outsourcing to widespread social networks [31], spending more time with people on these networks [32], and higher levels of self-esteem and intimacy [30]. On the other hand, there are few levels of extroversion associated with social avoidance and the lack of positive emotions [33].
In the study of Esfandiari et al. positive and negative affects were associated with high and low marital satisfaction, respectively [34]. Besharat et al. also showed a negative relationship between positive emotions and marital problems. Positive and negative emotions were also able to predict conflicts and marital dissatisfaction differently [35].
In line with this finding, Florian et al. showed that couples with higher levels of positive reaction experience a higher level of intimacy [36]. Marital researchers believe that positive emotions are negatively related to loneliness, self-harm, and harmful behaviors such as drug and alcohol abuse, high-risk sexual behaviors, and the lack of social communication [37]. Interestingly, what was mentioned above is from the reciprocal predictions of marital satisfaction [38]. Therefore, it is predictable that marital satisfaction will increase with increasing positive emotions. The topic was also reflected in the results of this study.
A lot of research has been conducted on the relationship between personality and emotional dimensions, and most studies have investigated the relationship between extraversion and positive emotional levels, as well as neuroticism and negative emotional levels. For example, David et al. reported that positive and negative affects significantly predict extroversion and neuroticism, respectively [19]. The researchers concluded that extroversion tends to make people feel positive, while neuroticism makes people susceptible to negative emotions. Besides, Costa and McCrae showed that neuroticism is strongly correlated with negative emotions [39].
In terms of positive and negative emotions, evidence suggests that turbulent marital relationships are associated with negative emotions, maladaptive communication practices, and poor listening skills [40]. In a study, Gerber et al. concluded that the negative (humiliation) and positive (interest) emotions created in the positive (love) and negative interactive context (conflict) could predict the quality and the durability of the relationship for both man and woman [41].
One of the limitations of this research is the study sample that was confined to the married women living in the eastern part of Tehran, so generalizing the results should be done cautiously. It is suggested that research on marital satisfaction and its advances in societies such as men and couples referring to counseling centers should be carried out to make it possible to compare the degree of marital satisfaction of personality traits in the different groups.
This study aimed to explain and predict marital satisfaction among married women in the form of a structural equation model. The personality traits on the role of exogenous variables and positive and negative affects on the role of exogenous had a direct and indirect effect as mediating variables on marital satisfaction. These effects were also statistically significant.
5. conclusion
In conclusion, the current research structural model was effective in explaining and predicting the marital satisfaction of married women. The present study showed that positive and negative emotions play a mediating role in the prediction of married women’s marital satisfaction. This variable, on the one hand, is affected by personality traits and communication patterns and, on the other hand, can have an important effect on the marital satisfaction of married women.
Also, considering the descriptiveness of the method of the present research, the researcher may not have been able to provide a complete picture of how the patterns of communication, personality traits, and positive and negative affects influence marital satisfaction. Other factors affecting marital satisfaction, including their physical condition and spouse, socioeconomic status, official and informal social support, and family status, are variables that the researcher could not fully control. On this basis, it is suggested that the relationship between the social and economic bases and marital satisfaction should be explored in future research, as these challenges provide grounds for dissatisfaction with marital life in married women and can be linked to the problems of marital satisfaction.
Ethical Considerations
Compliance with ethical guidelines
All ethical principles were considered in this article. The participants were informed about the purpose of the research and its implementation stages; they were also assured about the confidentiality of their information; Moreover, They were allowed to leave the study whenever they wish, and if desired, the results of the research would be available to them.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for this research, authoring, and or publication.
Authors' contributions
All authors contributed in designing, running, and writing all parts of the research.
Conflict of interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.


References
Ahmetoglu G, Swami V, Chamorro-Premuzic T. The relationship between dimensions of love, personality, and relationship length. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2010; 39(5):1181-90. [DOI:10.1007/s10508-009-9515-5] [PMID]
Bookwala J. Marital quality as a moderator of the effects of poor vision on quality of life among older adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 2011; 66(5):605-16. [DOI:10.1093/geronb/gbr091] [PMID] [PMCID]
Spanier GB. & Cole CL. Toward clarification and investigation of marital adjustment. International Journal of Sociology of the Family. 1976; 6(1):121-46.
Hartley SL, Barker ET, Baker JK, Seltzer MM, Greenberg JS. Marital satisfaction and life circumstances of grown children with autism across 7 years. Journal of Family Psychology. 2012; 26(5):688-97. [DOI:10.1037/a0029354] [PMID] [PMCID]
Greeff AP. Characteristics of families that function well. Journal of Family Issues. 2000; 21(8):948-62. [DOI:10.1177/019251300021008001]
Nakash-Eisikovits O, Dutra L, Westen D. Relationship between attachment patterns and personality pathology in adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2002; 41(9):1111-23. [DOI:10.1097/00004583-200209000-00012] [PMID]
McAdams DP, Olson BD. Personality development: Continuity and change over the life course. Annual Review of Psychology. 2010; 61:517-42. [DOI:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100507] [PMID]
Caspi A, Shiner R. Temperament and personality. In: Rutter M, Bishop DVM, Pine DS, Scott S, Stevenson J, Taylor E, et al, editors. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 5th edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: Blackwell; 2008. [DOI:10.1002/9781444300895.ch14]
McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. A five-factor theory of personality. In: Pervin LA, John OP, editors. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 1999.
McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987; 52(1):81-90. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81]
McCrae RR. Costa PT Jr. Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective. 2th edition. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2003. [DOI.10.4324/9780203428412]
Turiano NA, Mroczek DK, Moynihan J, Chapman BP. Big 5 personality traits and interleukin-6: Evidence for “healthy Neuroticism” in a US population sample. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity. 2013; 28:83-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.bbi.2012.10.020] [PMID] [PMCID]
Heller D, Watson D, Ilies R. The role of person versus situation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin. 2004; 130(4): 574-600. [DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.574] [PMID]
Karney BR, Bradbury TN. The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin. 1995; 118(1):3-34. [DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3]
Caughlin JP, Huston TL, Houts RM. How does personality matter in marriage? An examination of trait anxiety, interpersonal negativity, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000; 78(2):326-36. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.326]
Watson D, Wiese D, Vaidya J, Tellegen A. The two general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal of Personality And Social Psychology. 1999; 76(5):820-38. [DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.76.5.820]
Reeve J. Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist. 2009; 44(3):159-75. [DOI:10.1080/00461520903028990]
Costa PT, McCrae RR. Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1980; 38(4):668-78. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.668]
David JP, Green PJ, Martin R, Suls J. Differential roles of neuroticism, extraversion, and event desirability for mood in daily life: An integrative model of top-down and bottom-up influences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997; 73(1):149-59. [DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.73.1.149] [PMID]
Kronmüller KT, Backenstrass M, Victor D, Postelnicu I, Schenkenbach C. Joest K, et al. Quality of marital relationship and depression: Results of a 10-year prospective follow-up study. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2011; 128(1-2):64-71. [DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2010.06.026] [PMID]
Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 3rd edition. New York: Guilford; 2005.
Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR. The NEO-PI/NEO-FFI manual supplement. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1989.
Haghshenas H. [Persian Version and Standardization of NED Personality Inventory-Revised (Persian)]. International Journal for Psychotherapy, Counseling & Psychiatry (IJPCP). 1999; 4(4):38-48.
Garousi farshi M. [Standardization of Neo’s personality test and analytical analysis of its characteristics and its structure among university students in Iran (Persian)] [PhD dissertation]. Tehran, Tarbiat Modarres University; 2001.
Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988; 54(6):1063-70. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063]
Fowers BJ, Olson DH. Enrich marital satisfaction scale: A brief research and clinical tool. Journal of Family Psychology. 1993; 7(2):176-85. [DOI:10.1037/0893-3200.7.2.176]
Mahdavian F. The effect of education and communication on marital satisfaction and mental health (Persian)] [MA thesis]. Tehran: Islamic Azad University of Roudehen Branch; 1997. 
Wilson GT, Zandberg LJ. Cognitive-behavioral guided self-help for eating disorders: Effectiveness and scalability. Clinical Psychology Review. 2012; 32(4):343-57. [DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2012.03.001] [PMID]
Wagner J, Lüdtke O, Roberts BW, Trautwein U. Who belongs to me? Social relationship and personality characteristics in the transition to young adulthood. European Journal of Personality. 2014; 28(6):586-603. [DOI:10.1002/per.1974]
Hampson SE. Personality processes: Mechanisms by which personality traits “get outside the skin”. Annual Review of Psychology 2012; 63:315-39. [DOI:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100419] [PMID] [PMCID]
Mund M, Neyer FJ. Treating personality-relationship transactions with respect: Narrow facets, advanced models, and extended time frames. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2014; 107(2):352-68. [DOI:10.1037/a0036719] [PMID]
Selfhout M, Burk W, Branje S, Denissen J, Van Aken M, Meeus W. Emerging late adolescent friendship networks and Big Five personality traits: A social network approach. Journal of Personality. 2010; 78(2): 509-38. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00625.x] [PMID]
Wilson RE, Harris K, Vazire S. Personality and friendship satisfaction in daily life: Do every day social interactions account for individual differences in friendship satisfaction? European Journal of Personality. 2015; 29(2): 173-86. [DOI:10.1002/per.1996]
Krueger RF, Markon KE. The role of the DSM-5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically based approach to classifying personality and psychopathology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. 2014; 10:477-501. [DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153732] [PMID]
Esfandiari A. Aghaie H. [Study of marital satisfaction and quality of life in families of employed and housewives in Gorgan (Persian)]. Paper presented at: Second International Conference on Humanities, Psychology and Social Sciences. 25 March 2016; Turky.
Besharat MA, Madani M, Pourhossein R. [Investigating the role of moderating positive and negative emotions in the domain of attachment styles and marital problems (Persian)]. Journal of Psychological Sciences. 2014; 13(49):8-25.
Hirschberger G, Florian V, Mikolincer M. Strivings for romantic intimacy following partner complaint or partner criticism: A terror management perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2003; 20(5):675-87. [DOI:10.1177/02654075030205006]
Bradbury TN, Fincham FD, Beach SRH. Research on the nature and determinants of marital satisfaction: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2004; 62(4):964-80. [DOI:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00964.x]
Johonson AK. Physical and psychological aggression and the use of parenting style: a comparisonof African-American and Caucasian families [MA thesis]. Maryland: University of Maryland; 2006.
Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR. Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1980; 38(4):668-78. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.668] [PMID]
Blechman EA. Delamater AM. Emotions and the family: For better or for worse. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge; 2013. [DOI:10.4324/9781315808130]
Graber EC, Laurenceau JP, Miga E, Chango J, Coan J. Conflict and love: Predicting newlywed marital outcomes from two interaction contexts. Journal of Family Psychology. 2011; 25(4):541-50. [DOI:10.1037/a0024507] [PMID]