Guided by attachment theory, a 2-part study was conducted to test how perceptions of relationship-based conflict and support are associated with relationship satisfaction/closeness and future quality. Dating partners completed diaries for 14 days (Part 1) and then were videotaped while discussing a major problem that occurred during the diary study (Part 2). Part 1 reveals that more anxiously attached individuals perceived more conflict with their dating partners and reported a tendency for conflicts to escalate in severity. Perceptions of daily relationship-based conflicts negatively impacted the perceived satisfaction/closeness and relationship futures of highly anxious individuals, whereas perceptions of greater daily support had positive effects. Part 2 reveals that highly anxious individuals appeared more distressed and escalated the severity of conflicts (rated by observers) and reported feeling more distressed. The authors discuss the unique features of attachment anxiety and how changing perceptions of relationship satisfaction/closeness and stability could erode commitment over time.
Data collected from both members of a dyad provide abundant opportunities as well as data analytic challenges. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM; Kashy & Kenny, 2000) was developed as a conceptual framework for collecting and analyzing dyadic data, primarily by stressing the importance of considering the interdependence that exists between dyad members. The goal of this paper is to detail how the APIM can be implemented in dyadic research, and how its effects can be estimated using hierarchical linear modeling, including PROC MIXED in SAS and HLM (version 5.04;Raudenbush, Bryk, Cheong, & Congdon, 2001). The paper describes the APIM and illustrates how the data set must be structured to use the data analytic methods proposed. It also presents the syntax needed to estimate the model, indicates how several types of interactions can be tested, and describes how the output can be interpreted.
The goal of this research was to extend prior work on adult attachment and sexuality, which has tended to focus on samples of adolescents and undergraduate students. A Canadian sample of 116 married couples aged 21–75 years completed self‐report measures of adult attachment, marital, and sexual satisfaction. Results revealed that participants with higher levels of anxiety and avoidance reported lower levels of sexual satisfaction at the individual level. Individuals with more avoidant spouses also reported lower levels of sexual satisfaction. Furthermore, the relationship between sexual and marital satisfaction was stronger for more anxiously attached individuals and those with more anxiously attached spouses. These results suggest that attachment is linked in theoretically predictable ways to marital and sexual satisfaction.
Testing a model suggested by J. Bowlby (1988), this study investigated how a personal vulnerability (attachment ambivalence) interacts with perceptions of deficient spousal support before and during a major life stressor (the transition to parenthood) to predict pre-to-postnatal increases in depressive symptoms. Highly ambivalent women who entered parenthood perceiving either less support or greater anger from their husbands experienced pre-to-postnatal increases in depressive symptoms at 6 months postpartum. The associations between these 2 prenatal interaction terms and pre-to-postnatal increases in depressive symptoms were mediated by perceptions of declining spousal support across the transition period. Moreover, for highly ambivalent women, the association between prenatal and postnatal depression scores was mediated by perceptions of the amount of support available from their husbands.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.