Introduction: Marital intimacy, a deep emotional, cognitive, and behavioral bond between spouses, is a key predictor of relationship satisfaction and stability. Drawing on Sternberg’s triangular theory of love, intimacy involves feelings of closeness and emotional bonding, and extends across multiple dimensions: emotional, intellectual, physical, and spiritual. Intimacy is not static but can be strengthened through targeted interventions. Marriage and Relationship Education (MRE) programs have emerged as preventive approaches to enhance relationship quality and reduce divorce rates. These programs aim to equip couples with knowledge and skills such as communication and conflict resolution. However, evidence regarding their effectiveness has been inconsistent, with effect sizes ranging from large to negligible. Historically, MRE has emphasized skill-based training rooted in social learning theory. The Couple Communication Program (CCP), developed by Miller in 1971, is one of the most widely used and researched programs, teaching communication skills through structured group sessions. Despite its popularity, some scholars question whether skill deficits are the primary cause of marital distress. Negative interaction patterns may stem more from destructive attitudes and lack of motivation than from insufficient skills. Fowers (2001) argued that communication skills alone are insufficient without underlying virtues such as kindness, fairness, and self-control. Virtue-based approaches, aligned with positive psychology, focus on character strengths and perspective transformation rather than merely correcting deficits. The Getting Our Hearts Right (GOHR) program, developed by Goddard and Marshall (2013), is a brief, virtue-based intervention that addresses cognitive biases (e.g., egocentrism, confirmation bias, naïve realism) and cultivates three marital virtues: humility, compassion, and positivity. This study compares the effectiveness of GOHR and CCP on marital intimacy at posttest and three-month follow-up.

Methodology: This quasi-experimental study employed a pretest-posttest-follow-up design with a control group. The sample included 45 couples (90 individuals) recruited from family counseling centers in Sabzevar, Iran, in 2024. Inclusion criteria were: both spouses had at least a high school diploma, were in their first marriage, had a marriage duration of 3 to 15 years, and committed to attending all sessions. Eligible couples were randomly assigned to three groups: GOHR (n=15 couples), CCP (n=15 couples), and waitlist control (n=15 couples). The GOHR program was delivered in four weekly two-hour sessions (total 8 hours), including lectures, group discussions, and between-session worksheets. The CCP program consisted of ten weekly 90-minute sessions (total 15 hours), involving skill instruction, role-playing, and homework. Marital intimacy was measured using the 17-item Intimacy Scale (IS) by Walker and Thompson (1983), translated into Persian and validated by Sanaei (2000). Cronbach’s alpha in this study ranged from 0.89 to 0.93. Data were analyzed using split-plot ANOVA and Bonferroni pairwise comparisons.

Findings: Demographic characteristics (age, education, marriage duration, employment, number of children) were comparable across groups. Mean intimacy scores increased from pretest to posttest and were maintained at follow-up in both intervention groups, with the GOHR group showing higher scores than CCP at both time points. The control group remained stable.

Split-plot ANOVA revealed a significant group-by-time interaction for GOHR vs. control (F = 30.15, p = 0.0001, partial η² = 0.52) and for CCP vs. control (F = 22.09, p = 0.0001, partial η² = 0.44). Bonferroni comparisons indicated significant improvements in the GOHR group across all time intervals (pretest to posttest, pretest to follow-up, and posttest to follow-up). GOHR participants showed significantly greater gains in marital intimacy than CCP participants across all time points.

Conclusion: This study found that the GOHR program, which targets marital virtues, was more effective than the CCP program in enhancing marital intimacy. These findings support theoretical frameworks emphasizing the role of character strengths in relationship quality. Virtues such as humility, compassion, and positivity serve as cognitive-affective regulators that mitigate destructive perceptual biases. Humility enables spouses to recognize the limits of their own perspective and remain open to their partner’s viewpoint. Compassion shifts attention from blame to understanding, reducing fundamental attribution bias. Positivity counteracts negativity bias, directing focus toward strengths rather than deficits. The superiority of GOHR over CCP lies in its underlying logic: rather than teaching communication techniques in isolation, it begins with a transformation in perspective. While CCP follows a “skill-behavior-outcome” model, GOHR operates on a “perspective-behavior-outcome” logic. Skills are more likely to be internalized and applied when grounded in virtues. A key limitation of skill-based programs is the “knowing-doing gap”—couples may know what to do but fail to act during emotionally charged conflicts. GOHR addresses this gap by reshaping the interpretive frameworks through which spouses perceive and respond to one another. This study has several limitations. First, the moderating role of marriage duration was not examined. Marital needs and interaction patterns vary across family life stages, and the impact of virtues may differ accordingly. Second, the sample was limited to one city in Iran, which may restrict generalizability. Third, follow-up was limited to three months; longer-term effects remain unknown. Fourth, the study was conducted in a controlled setting; field replications are needed. Fifth, only one dependent variable was assessed; future research should examine broader outcomes such as conflict resolution, forgiveness, and relationship satisfaction. Despite these limitations, this study provides empirical evidence that virtue-based interventions can produce lasting improvements in marital intimacy. The findings challenge the dominant skill-based paradigm in couple education and support the integration of virtue-focused content into MRE programs. Cultivating marital virtues may serve as a foundational step in helping couples build resilient, satisfying relationships.