M Rostami - Department of Counseling, Faculty of Literature, Humanities and Social Sciences, Science Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Sh. Navabinejad - Department of Counseling, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
V Farzad - Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

Aim: Purpose of the study was construction, questionnaire reliability and validation for measurement of patterns and premarital injuries. Method: The research method was the testing. The statistical population was all of the engaged couples from 26 Iran provinces in 2018. Sample were selected through purposive sampling and according to Brown (2006), 550 people including 357 girls and 193 boys who were about to get married have electronically completed the questionnaire of Evaluation of Premarital Patterns and Injuries of Rostami, Navabinejad & Farzad 2018. After deleting 38 unclear questionnaires, 521 people were analyzed by using the content validity index and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Results: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis indicated that 79 items wereclassified into 5 factors; the first factor was the inefficient relationship patterns with the explained variance value of 10.50; the second factor was the inefficient relationship management patterns with the explained variance value of 6.84; the third factor was the value system of the couples with the explained variance value of 6.49; the fourth factor was the schematic mentality with the explained variance value of 6.43, and the fifth factor was the destructive effects of the main family with the explained variance value of 5.19, which represented 35.47% of the total variance of the questionnaire. Except χ2 index that was equal to 1200.65, the fitting indicators of the confirmatory factor analysis were also significant at the level of 0.001. The Cronbach s alpha coefficients were respectively as follows: 0.92 for the inefficient relationship patterns, 0.90 for the inefficient relationship management patterns, 0.91 for the value system of the couples, 0.89 for the schematics mentality, and 0.87 for the destructive effects of the main family, and these values for retest process with a 45-day-interval respectively were; 0.86, 0.87, 0.91, 0.85 and 0.90. Conclusion: The designed questionnaire is valid and reliable. It can be used to diagnose premarital patterns and injuries in order to identify the relationship patterns, the value system of the couples and the schematic mentality of each couple

patterns, injures, premarriage, reliability, validation