In modern society, marital life is increasingly influenced by complex social, economic, and cultural transformations that intensify pressures on couples, rendering conflict an unavoidable component of matrimonial relations. Such conflicts may escalate into domestic violence, infidelity, polygamy, family abandonment, or spousal disappearance (Marlina and Mubarak, 2022), threatening marital continuity and contributing to high divorce rates; (Fachrina and Rinaldi 2013; Øverup et al. 2020; Arjani 2021). National statistics indicate that frequent quarrelling accounts for 62.7% of divorce cases, followed by economic hardship (27.0%), desertion (8.5%), domestic violence (1.3%), and alcohol dependence (0.4%), reflecting broader structural challenges such as socio-psychological stress, communication deficits, financial insecurity, and extended-family involvement (AlHamdani 2019; Sulaeman et al. 2025).

Nonetheless, empirical evidence shows that not all couples experiencing marital conflict choose divorce; many remain together despite chronic disputes due to economic considerations, fear of living alone, stigma associated with divorce, and hope for relational improvement (Dewi and Hartini 2017; Yanasti 2021; Perelli-Harris et al. 2018). Women subjected to domestic violence may also opt to stay due to fear, religious or cultural obligations, attachment to children, or the belief in their husbands’ potential for change (Behzadipour et al. 2021; Nurohim et al. 2021). These findings highlight the interplay of individual, structural, and cultural factors including communication, emotional regulation, commitment, religiosity, social support, and cultural norms that contribute to marital resilience (Amato 2010; Karimi et al. 2020; Latifa et al. 2021; Marici et al. 2025).

Parallels can be drawn with research on resilience in other social contexts, such as academic settings. For instance, Lee-Chua (2022), found that Filipino students who displayed resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic relied heavily on three key sources of support: deep faith, strong family bonds, and close friends or mentors. Similar to marital resilience, these students’ capacity to cope with stress and maintain productivity was not solely an individual trait but was strongly influenced by the surrounding social and cultural ecosystem. This suggests that, whether in educational or familial contexts, resilience is fundamentally communal and contextually grounded, shaped by interactions with supportive networks, cultural norms, and spiritual or moral values.

Despite these insights, much of the existing literature focuses on divorced couples or psychological perspectives, leaving a limited understanding of how couples who remain married negotiate conflict within the interplay of personal agency and sociocultural structures. This gap is particularly salient in Minangkabau society, characterized by matrilineal, matrilocal, and communal systems that position women at the center of lineage and property while assigning husbands the role of sumando or guest (Munir 2015; Sebastian 2022; Nofiardi 2018). In this context, marital issues are often the concern of the extended family, and divorce constitutes a collective social disgrace (sehina semalu). The exogamous marriage system and the limited authority of husbands within the wife’s lineage create distinctive conflict dynamics and resolution mechanisms that differ from those in patrilineal societies (Putri et al. 2024; Warman et al. 2023).

Against this backdrop, this study investigates the social practices of couples who maintain their marriages despite conflicts, using Giddens Structuration Theory as a framework to examine how individual agency, including commitment, emotional regulation, and coping strategies, interacts with cultural norms, family expectations, religious values, and economic structures to sustain marital continuity. Structuration Theory emphasizes the duality of structure, in which social rules and resources simultaneously constrain and enable action (Ritzer and Goodman 2004); Firdaus 2019), providing a useful lens for analyzing the mutual constitution of individual decisions and Minangkabau sociocultural systems. By examining these dynamics, the study aims to address a significant gap in marital conflict research, advance theoretical development in family sociology, and provide practical guidance for counselors, policymakers, and community leaders in fostering culturally sensitive strategies that strengthen marital resilience in the context of modern Minangkabau society.

The academic literature on marital conflict and resilience demonstrates that marriage is a dynamic social institution shaped by psychological, economic, cultural, and structural factors. Marital conflict emerges from the interplay between individual characteristics, communication patterns, emotional regulation, and external pressures such as financial instability, social expectations, and extended-family involvement (Lavner et al. 2016). Empirical studies in Indonesia reinforce these findings, showing that persistent conflict, economic hardship, desertion, and domestic violence remain dominant predictors of divorce.

Parallel research on marital resilience highlights adaptive coping, emotional maturity, collaborative problem-solving, and supportive social environments as central to sustaining marriage. Resilience is not merely the absence of conflict but encompasses proactive strategies and relational resources that enable couples to navigate adversity, maintain commitment, and protect relational stability. Key contributors include financial stability, mutual respect, egalitarian gender relations, and access to counseling or social support.

In the Minangkabau context, the interplay between conflict and resilience is uniquely shaped by matrilineal kinship, adat norms, and communal expectations. Minangkabau marital life emphasizes harmony, deliberation, and collective responsibility, with women positioned at the center of lineage and household authority, while husbands occupy the status of sumando or guest (Navis 2015; Fakhyadi et al. 2025). Contemporary pressures modernization, urbanization, economic change, and evolving gender roles challenge these traditional structures, producing new patterns of marital tension and negotiation.

Based on this literature, the conceptual framework for this study positions marital conflict as a multidimensional phenomenon arising from interrelated internal and external factors, including communication deficits, psychological stress, economic limitations, and normative pressures within the extended family. Marital resilience is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct shaped by adaptive strategies, socio-emotional competencies, culturally embedded values, and access to social support, which collectively facilitate problem-solving and relational stability. In Minangkabau society, the framework integrates the influence of adat principles, matrilineal kinship structures, and contemporary sociocultural transformations, offering a comprehensive lens to examine the dynamic interaction between conflict and resilience. This framework informs the research design, guiding data collection, analysis, and interpretation to understand how couples sustain marital continuity amidst both traditional expectations and modern pressures.

This study adopts a mixed-methods approach, integrating quantitative and qualitative techniques sequentially to achieve a comprehensive understanding of marital conflict and resilience within Minangkabau society. The sequential explanatory design begins with a quantitative survey to map the forms, causes, intensity, and mitigation strategies of marital conflict, followed by qualitative in-depth interviews and structured observations to explore the contextual dynamics and sociocultural nuances of conflict and resilience. This combination allows the research to identify measurable patterns while capturing the complexity of spouses’ emotional experiences, coping strategies, and social interactions that cannot be adequately represented through quantitative data alone. Linking statistical results to qualitative narratives deepens interpretation and enhances the credibility, trustworthiness, and validity of the findings.

In the quantitative phase, 30 respondents were purposively selected based on withdrawn divorce cases documented by the Religious Court of Padang City and family conflict cases reported to the Non Goverment Organization (NGO) “Nurani Perempuan”. The selection criteria ensured that respondents were married couples who remained in their marriages despite significant conflict, allowing the study to focus on resilience rather than dissolution. The qualitative phase involved six informants chosen to reflect variations in conflict severity and categories identified during the survey, providing a comprehensive spectrum of marital experiences from mild disagreements to severe domestic tension. The research was conducted in Padang City, an urban Minangkabau setting characterized by high social mobility, extensive access to information, and complex sociocultural dynamics. This urban context provides an ideal environment to examine contemporary transformations in marital conflict and resilience in a matrilineal society.

This study received ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Universitas Andalas (Approval No. B/215/UN16.08.D/TP.02.02/2025). The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the national guidelines for research involving human participants. Prior to data collection, all participants provided written informed consent after receiving a clear explanation of the study objectives, research procedures, voluntary nature of participation, confidentiality measures, and their right to withdraw from the study at any stage without consequence. To protect participants’ privacy, all identifying information was removed during data processing, and anonymized codes were used throughout the analysis and reporting of the findings.

Data collection employed four complementary techniques. First, structured surveys were administered to capture the forms, triggers, intensity, and mitigation strategies of marital conflict. Second, in-depth interviews explored spouses’ subjective experiences, negotiation processes, emotional regulation, and motivations for maintaining the marriage. Third, structured field observations focused on interaction patterns, non-verbal cues, emotional responses, extended-family involvement, and socio-economic factors shaping conflict dynamics. Fourth, documentation—including withdrawn divorce decisions, NGO case files, and archival records was employed to triangulate and corroborate data. All information was systematically organized into three principal categories: (1) sociodemographic data (age, education, occupation, marital duration, number of children), (2) conflict-related data (forms, causes, intensity, frequency, mitigation strategies), and (3) contextual data (extended-family support, access to counseling or mediation, and cultural norms governing marital relations in Minangkabau society).

Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) and interpreted in the context of Minangkabau social and cultural norms. Qualitative data were analyzed according to the Miles and (Miles et al. 2014) framework, including data reduction through coding, data display using thematic categories, and conclusion drawing/verification. The analytical process was conducted concurrently with data collection to ensure reflexivity, depth, and accuracy.

To ensure research validity and trustworthiness, the study applied both methodological and source triangulation (Lincoln and Guba 1985; Afrizal 2014). Methodological triangulation integrated surveys, interviews, and observations, providing a holistic representation of marital conflict and resilience. Source triangulation drew on multiple perspectives, including respondents, interview informants, court records, NGO documentation, and field notes, reducing reliance on any single data source (Patton 2014). Member checking verified the accuracy of interview transcripts and researcher interpretations (Birt et al. 2016). An audit trail of all research instruments, observation notes, coding summaries, and statistical outputs was maintained to ensure dependability and replicability (Anney 2014). Through this rigorous mixed-methods design, the study meets criteria for credibility, transferability, reliability, and confirmability (Nowel et al. 2017). The integration of descriptive quantitative findings with qualitative insights provides a scientifically robust and socio-culturally grounded understanding of conflict dynamics and marital resilience in urban Minangkabau society

Marital conflicts arise when partners are unable to negotiate differences in perceptions, needs, expectations, and values. Such disagreements often escalate into conflict behaviors, including tension, arguments, verbal abuse, emotional aggression, physical violence, and neglect of household responsibilities, reflecting the complex interplay between individual dispositions and the sociocultural environment of the Minangkabau. The data in Table 1 below are needed to understand the background of respondents who survived the marriage.

The results of the study identified that almost all of the respondents were women who had children. Based on age, respondents were dominated by the age group of 40–60 years. The majority of the education level is in the secondary education category, where most of the respondents, 60% of respondents are not working or are housewives. The majority of respondents’ marriage age was more than 20 years old (56.67%). This data shows a relatively long marriage experience. The monthly distribution of family income shows that most respondents are in the low- to middle-income group.

The patterns of marital conflict behaviors among urban Minangkabau couples, as presented in Table 2, demonstrate a complex interplay of emotional, behavioral, and socio-cultural dynamics. The overwhelmingly high frequency of strong disagreement over desired goals (90%) suggests that couples frequently encounter divergent life plans, unmet expectations, or incompatible aspirations. Verbal abuse, experienced by 86.66% of respondents, emerges as a predominant mode of conflict expression. This aligns with empirical studies in urban family dynamics, where harsh verbal interactions function as both a symptom and a perpetuator of relational strain. Similarly, the neglect of household responsibilities (66.66%) indicates a withdrawal from shared domestic and emotional duties, reflecting both individual coping strategies and systemic challenges in balancing labor division in households affected by urbanization.

Hostility and lack of respect, reported by 63.33%, highlight relational erosion and diminished mutual regard. Meanwhile, psychological/emotional violence (53.33%) manifested through threats, insults, or intimidation—reveals subtle, ongoing mechanisms of control that can have cumulative effects on mental health and relationship satisfaction. Physical violence, reported by 43.33%, represents a critical threshold for intervention, underscoring the necessity for both preventive measures and protective mechanisms within the family and community structures. Infidelity and persistent tense interactions, each affecting 40% of respondents, suggest that relational instability is not limited to overt aggression but also encompasses erosion of trust and ongoing emotional friction.

Table 3 presents the multiple, interrelated causes of marital conflict among respondents, highlighting that the primary source of conflict is differences in desires, needs, and expectations, reported by 26 respondents (86.66%). It corresponds with Table 2, which shows that strong disagreements over life goals were the most prevalent conflict behavior (90%). Such alignment suggests that mismatched life orientations and role expectations are central to marital tension in Minangkabau nuclear families.

Communication problems, reported by 23 respondents (76.66%), represent another key factor, encompassing difficulties in expressing needs, misalignment in communication styles, and misunderstanding partners’ messages. These communication issues directly relate to the high incidence of verbal abuse (86.66%) and psychological violence (53.33%), demonstrating that communication breakdowns often escalate into emotional outbursts. Emotional immaturity, experienced by 23 respondents (76.66%), and undesirable traits or habits of partners (83.33%) further exacerbate relational strain.

Economic problems, reported by 24 respondents (80%), include inadequate income, lack of partner responsibility, and unmet family needs. In the matrilineal context, women maintain household stability, yet husbands are expected to be the primary earners. Despite high-intensity conflicts, couples in this study actively employ strategies to preserve marital cohesion, demonstrating resilience within the constraints of urban Minangkabau society.

This section describes the patterns of marital conflict mitigation employed by urban Minangkabau couples. To illustrate these patterns, quantitative data are first presented in Table 4. Table 4 illustrates how urban Minangkabau couples manage and resolve marital conflicts, highlighting distinct patterns of conflict mitigation within nuclear households. The data show a tendency toward passive and avoidance-based strategies rather than proactive resolution. The most prevalent approaches are remaining silent and yielding (70%) and allowing conflicts to dissipate on their own (60%).

Despite the dominance of avoidance, unstructured negotiation patterns such as arguing (60%) and diverting or avoiding conversations (50%) also emerge, often resulting in one party typically the husband asserting dominance in decision-making. This dynamic suggests that conflicts may remain unresolved over time, potentially intensifying relational tensions. The findings underscore that urban marital resilience is exercised within the constraints of sociocultural norms that favor indirect conflict management and the preservation of short-term stability.

A notable feature of the data is the limited involvement of traditional third parties, such as parents, in-laws, or mamak, reported by only 13.33% of respondents, and the complete absence of professional intervention (0%). This trend indicates a declining role of extended family mediation, a cornerstone of traditional Minangkabau conflict resolution, reflecting the increasing individualization and nuclearization of urban households. Nonetheless, 33.33% of couples actively engage in discussion or deliberation with their spouse.

These findings align with the broader patterns identified in Tables 2 and 3, where high-intensity conflicts, such as verbal abuse (86.66%), neglect of household responsibilities (66.66%), and disagreements over life goals (90%) coexist with adaptive, albeit limited, strategies to maintain marital continuity. Additional causes include lack of quality time together (66.66%), neglect of household duties (60%), and child-rearing disagreements (50%). These reflect structural pressures unique to urban Minangkabau households, in which traditional maternal authority in parenting is partially eroded and paternal involvement remains limited.

From a socio-cultural perspective, these conflict behaviors reflect broader structural and normative factors, including patriarchal influences, matrilineal inheritance norms, and communal expectations for family cohesion. The findings suggest that interventions must be culturally responsive, integrating local values while promoting constructive communication, emotional regulation, and collaborative problem-solving. Programs that incorporate both family stress models and Minangkabau-specific kinship sensitivities could enhance marital resilience, reduce the incidence of domestic violence, and foster healthier relational environments.

Marriage in Minangkabau society functions as a dynamic social institution that not only unites two individuals but also connects two extended families, sustaining the matrilineal lineage. Within this customary system, women inherit property and lineage authority, while husbands assume the role of urang sumando (sons-in-law) and navigate household responsibilities within their wife’s family domain. In urban settings such as Padang City, marital dynamics are increasingly shaped by modernization, economic pressures, changing family structures, and the diminishing role of saparuik as mediators, complicating the negotiation of conflict and resilience.

Marriage in the Minangkabau community functions as a social institution that not only unites two individuals but also connects two extended families, while maintaining the continuity of the matrilineal system. Within this customary framework, women inherit lineage and property, and husbands assume the role of urang sumando (sons-in-law) and enter the wife’s family domain. Consequently, marital relations are constantly situated at the intersection of traditional values and contemporary household practices. In urban areas such as Padang City, modernization, economic pressures, changing family structures, and the declining role of saparuik as mediators have further complicated marital dynamics, making conflict management increasingly challenging.

The relational analysis of the findings from Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 demonstrates that marital conflict within urban Minangkabau nuclear families is a systemic phenomenon shaped by the interplay among triggering factors, psychological–relational dynamics, and conflict manifestations. Differences in life goals, reported by 86.66% of respondents, were strongly associated with prolonged disagreement (90%) and decision-making deadlocks (80%). This pattern aligns with global evidence showing that goal incongruence predicts recurrent conflict and demand–withdraw cycles (Vennum and Fincham, 2011; Schrodt et al. 2014), highlighting the intensified pressures couples face as they transition from traditional matrilineal structures to urban nuclear households.

Such disagreements can be understood through the lens of Gottman’s conflict model, which emphasizes that unresolved goal incongruence often escalates into cycles of negative interaction, especially when emotional attunement is lacking. From a theoretical standpoint, these findings align with Galtung’s (Afrizal 2018) conflict theory: marital conflict extends beyond technical disagreements and represents struggles over power, decision-making, and interpretation of spousal roles. Collins (2009), perspective on familial patriarchal dominance is also relevant, as conflicts often arise when matrilineal structures intersect with modern patriarchal expectations. These behaviors are particularly significant in the Minangkabau matrilineal context, where kinship structures and gendered expectations intersect with modern urban pressures, often creating tensions between traditional obligations and contemporary life challenges.

Communication problems, reported by 76.66% of respondents, were directly linked to high levels of verbal aggression (86.66%) and unresolved conflict (83.33%), reinforcing Gottman’s (1999) cascade model of conflict, which posits that poor communication accelerates the recurrence of conflict. Educational and economic constraints further compound conflict by reducing spouses’ capacities for effective communication and emotional regulation, consistent with findings by (Zhou and Buehler 2017; Cummings et al. 2014). In the absence of traditional mediators such as mamak or elders, couples manage disputes without structural support, leading to escalated verbal and psychological tension. Emotional immaturity, experienced by 76.66% of couples, was associated with psychological (53.33%) and physical aggression (43.33%), consistent with Hines and Douglas (2016), McNulty and Russell (2010), who found that low emotional regulation capacity increases the propensity for aggressive conflict behaviors.

Minor undesirable habits, reported by 83.33% of couples, were linked to increased hostility (63.33%) and disrespect, demonstrating how chronic daily stressors erode emotional attachment (Neff and Karney 2018; Finkenauer et al. 2010). Economic problems, experienced by 80% of respondents, were closely associated with neglect of household duties (66.66%), verbal aggression (86.66%), and physical violence (43.33%), aligning with the Family Stress Model (Kelley et al. 2018; Falconier and Epstein 2011), where financial strain triggers marital tension and maladaptive coping. In urban Minangkabau households, reliance on nuclear-family income without extended-family support exacerbates economic stress and intensifies relational conflicts. Economic imbalance not only strains financial security but also challenges symbolic masculine authority, consistent with (Lavner et al. 2016), who note that economic tension often reflects disputes over role legitimacy. Structural shifts in gender roles and nuclear family responsibilities, without the traditional buffering of extended-family mediation, intensify these conflicts, aligning with (Giddens 2016) structuration theory regarding the interplay between conventional structures and emergent individual agency.

From a socio-cultural perspective, the conflict pattern reflects the intersection between matrilineal inheritance norms, the penetration of patriarchal values, and communal expectations for family integrity and harmony. In practice, urban Minangkabau households show a situation of “matrilineal kinship but patriarchal in communication and household authority”, so that women bear customary and economic responsibilities while dealing with the pattern of male dominance in daily decisions. Thus, marital conflict is not only understood as a couple’s psychological problem, but also as an expression of structural tension between customary obligations, religious demands, and modernization pressures that force couples to adapt to new role configurations (Elfira 2023).

Understanding the causes of conflict informs the study of conflict mitigation. According to (Afrizal 2018), conflict mitigation encompasses efforts to manage relational crises, prevent escalation into violence, and address root causes, including conflict management (maintaining relational stability) and conflict resolution (ending disputes over specific issues).

Table 4 indicates that conflict mitigation strategies in urban Minangkabau couples are predominantly passive or avoidance-oriented. Remaining silent and yielding (70%) and letting conflicts dissipate on their own (60%) reflect short-term stabilization rather than addressing root causes, consistent with Gottman’s (2015) stonewalling concept, which predicts declining marital satisfaction. High frequencies of arguing (60%) and topic avoidance (50%) further reveal unstructured negotiation, often resulting in one-sided dominance, usually by the husband. While the Minangkabau matrilineal system traditionally distributes power differently, contemporary urban households still exhibit patriarchal communication patterns (Williams and Uddin 2020; Elfira 2023).

The low involvement of traditional mediators such as parents, in-laws, or mamak (13.33%) and the absence of professional assistance (0%) highlight the erosion of communal conflict resolution mechanisms, a consequence of urbanization and the individualization of households (Umberson and Thomeer 2020). Nevertheless, 33.33% of couples engage in discussion or deliberation, signaling the emergence of constructive strategies and cultural adaptation toward collaborative conflict resolution, consistent with research on Asian families adopting egalitarian negotiation patterns (Ting-Toomey 2017; Gottman 2015).

From a theoretical perspective, (Giddens 1984) offers a useful lens: couples negotiate between traditional cultural structures that emphasize communal harmony and emerging individualized structures that encourage personal agency and negotiation. Similarly, Galtung’s conflict theory (Afrizal 2018) situates these patterns within broader struggles for authority, control, and relational balance, reflecting a dynamic interplay between sociocultural expectations and the couple’s adaptive strategies (Delatorre and Wagner 2018).

In practical terms, these patterns of conflict mitigation reveal both resilience and vulnerability within urban Minangkabau marriages. Passive approaches in conflict management, such as avoiding confrontation, often result in prolonged conflict durations or exacerbate tensions due to the lack of structured resolution mechanisms (Roberts, 2019; Zalzberg, 2024). Nevertheless, the presence of discussion and deliberation as a mitigation strategy indicates the possibility of developing culturally sensitive interventions that leverage both traditional values and modern communication practices.

Conflict management in Minangkabau nuclear families illustrates a tension between inherited adat norms, evolving gendered communication patterns, and the pressures of modern urban life. These dynamics highlight how marital resilience is enacted in everyday practices, balancing avoidance, negotiation, and strategic adaptation to maintain the integrity of the marriage amid complex social, economic, and cultural transformations. Resilience is influenced by broader family and social systems. Cohesion, flexibility, and strong communication within families act as protective factors, while supportive marital communication compensates for deficiencies in family dynamics (Carr & Kellas, 2018; Walsh, 2016).

Overall, conflict dynamics in urban Minangkabau nuclear families occur at the intersection of collectivist cultural values, patriarchal structures, and urban modernization pressures. While avoidance strategies maintain surface harmony, they are insufficient for addressing deeper relational issues. The gradual shift toward deliberation and negotiation reflects adaptive resilience, as couples integrate traditional values with modern problem-solving strategies to sustain marital continuity. These findings underscore that marital resilience in Minangkabau society is enacted through a combination of avoidance, strategic negotiation, and culturally informed adaptation, balancing traditional expectations with the realities of urban family life.

This study reveals that marital conflict among couples who remain together in urban Minangkabau society, particularly in Padang City, manifests in multiple, interrelated forms, including role conflict, child-rearing disagreements, economic tensions, and conflicts within intimate relationships. These conflicts often escalate through behaviors such as persistent disagreement, tense interactions, verbal, psychological, and physical violence, infidelity, and neglect of household responsibilities. The root causes of these conflicts are complex and cumulative, stemming from the interaction between the traditional matrilineal social structure and emerging patriarchal practices within modern nuclear households. Notably, the involvement of extended family members or professional mediators in resolving conflicts was minimal, indicating that conflict management predominantly occurs within the nuclear family.

The findings carry important practical implications. Family counselors are encouraged to adopt culturally sensitive approaches that consider Minangkabau values, emphasizing constructive communication strategies, emotional regulation, and the potential facilitative role of third parties such as extended family members. Customary institutions, particularly the mamak and ninik mamak, could be revitalized to support couples in navigating conflicts while maintaining traditional social norms and family cohesion. Policymakers and social planners can use these insights to design family education programs and interventions that prevent domestic violence, strengthen relational resilience, and integrate local wisdom with contemporary conflict management strategies.

Conceptually, the study underscores the significance of cultural context in understanding marital conflict. Such conflict is not merely a matter of interpersonal disagreement but reflects the broader dialectic between matrilineal heritage and modern urban household practices. Effective conflict resolution, therefore, requires approaches that respect and incorporate Minangkabau norms, values, and local wisdom, promoting both cultural identity and social harmony within families.

This study also has several limitations. It focuses exclusively on couples who remain married in Padang City, limiting generalizability to other regions or cultural settings. The study does not deeply explore the roles of extended family, professional mediators, or other institutional factors, leaving room for further investigation. Future research is recommended to expand geographically and culturally, examine the involvement of extended family and customary institutions in conflict mitigation, and test culturally sensitive models of marital conflict management. Such studies could assess the scalability and transferability of these strategies, as well as the impact of cultural variations on the effectiveness of conflict resolution and divorce prevention in diverse Minangkabau and broader Indonesian contexts.

During the preparation of this manuscript, AI-assisted tools were used solely for language improvement, grammar checking, literature exploration, and reference support. All processes of data interpretation, analysis, argument development, and the originality of the work were conducted independently by the author. The author fully reviewed and verified all content and takes complete responsibility for the final version of the manuscript.