Couple conflict: insights from an attachment perspective

Feeney, Judith A.; Karantzas, Gery C.

doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.04.017

Cited by 91 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They likely employ an emotional cut‐off strategy by not talking about their emotions, by not turning to their loved ones for support, and by withdrawing from their partner (J. A. Feeney & Karantzas, 2017; Wei et al, 2005); they tend to react defensively or withdraw during conflict situations (J. A. Feeney & Karantzas, 2017) and report lower levels of positive and constructive communication patterns (J.…”

Section: Personality–relationship Transactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self–disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within–person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The associations between couple members' personality and their relationship satisfaction can be conceptualized as reciprocal transactions. To better understand these transactions, we focused on both partners' interpersonal vulnerabilities (i.e. neuroticism, low self‐esteem, and insecure attachment); daily emotional, cognitive, and behavioural relationship components (i.e. perceived responsiveness, positive expectations, and self‐disclosure); and relationship satisfaction. Specifically, we examined whether the average levels and within‐person variability of the relationship components mediated the transactions between interpersonal vulnerabilities and relationship satisfaction. Data came from 689 female–male couples aged 18 to 81 years who participated in three measurement occasions across 12 months, including a 14‐day diary phase. We used mediated dyadic bivariate latent change score models to test the level–change and change–change transactions and mediations. The findings partly supported our hypotheses: Couple members with interpersonal vulnerabilities had lower average levels (but not higher within‐person variability) of the relationship components, and less satisfied couple members had lower average levels and higher within‐person variability of these components. The lower average levels but not the variability mediated between a lower level of relationship satisfaction and an increase in avoidant attachment. No other mediations were observed. We discuss the importance of studying daily relationship components for better understanding reciprocal transactions in couples. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

show abstract

Section: Personality–relationship Transactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A. Feeney & Karantzas, 2017; Wei et al, 2005); they tend to react defensively or withdraw during conflict situations (J. A. Feeney & Karantzas, 2017) and report lower levels of positive and constructive communication patterns (J. A. Feeney, 1994; Fitzpatrick, Fey, Segrin, & Schiff, 1993).…”

Section: Personality–relationship Transactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self–disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within–person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, as previously stated, couple communication is very important for maintaining the satisfaction of one's relationship (Brassard et al, 2009;Feeney, & Karantzas, 2017). This association has been signifi cant in both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs (Lavner, Karney, & Bradbury, 2016), and some aspects of couple communication, such as its frequency and confl ict are associated with higher, respectively lower satisfaction (Collins, & Horn, 2019;Johnson, Horne, Hardy, & Anderson, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

What Do Romanian Couples Talk About on a Daily Basis? A Mixed Method Approach

Candel¹,

Turliuc²

2019

RCIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communication plays an important role in the development and maintenance of close relationships. This article presents the results of examinations of daily conversation topics of 99 couples from a period of one week. The data was gathered using an electronic daily diary. The results are based on both qualitative and quantitative analyses. The fi ndings reveal that couple's daily conversations can be categorized into 12 categories: instrumental, leisure, aff ection, catching up, planning, relationship, family, private concerns, confl ict, and children. Further analyses indicated no gender diff erences in the frequency of the topics included into these categories. However, there were diff erences based on the length of the participants' relationships. In addition, some topics were more common on some days of the week. Finally, we examined daily relational satisfaction and how it was related to each category of the conversation. This study presents a novel view on Romanian couples' day-to-day life and off ers new insights for the psychologists, sociologists and social workers that are interested in the research and intervention on romantic and family relationships.

show abstract

“…The differences between attachment anxiety and avoidance that emerged on Root 2 reflect the conceptual distinction of these two attachment dimensions. Theoretically, highly avoidant individuals tend to distance themselves from troubling emotional entanglements with others (Feeney & Karantzas, ), whereas highly anxious individuals tend to seek reassurance when experiencing relational distress (Hazan & Shaver, ). When gender is added to the mix, the finding that high anxiety is more characteristic of women whereas high avoidance is more characteristic of men is consistent with several studies in which women reported more attachment anxiety and men reported more attachment avoidance (e.g., Kirkpatrick & Davis, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problematic Domains of Romantic Relationships as a Function of Attachment Insecurity and Gender

Muetzelfeld

Megale

Friedlander

2020

ANZ J of Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theoretically, securely attached adults view the world as safe and see their romantic partners as emotionally available, supportive, and non‐threatening. Little is known, however, about which relationship domains are most problematic for securely (versus insecurely) attached adults. To fill this gap, we asked 62 adults in committed relationships to complete the Marital Satisfaction Inventory‐Revised (MSI‐R; Snyder, 1997), a measure of the frequency and severity of 10 kinds of couple problems, and the Experiences in Close Relationships‐Revised (ECR‐R; Fraley, Waller, & Brennan, 2000), a measure of attachment insecurity. High Avoidance and Anxiety were associated with numerous relationship problems being rated as frequent and severe. A canonical correlation showed that 26.5% of the variance in the set of relational problem areas was accounted for by attachment insecurity and gender. While greater attachment security was associated with fewer perceived difficulties in affective communication, irrespective of gender, greater Avoidance and Anxiety were associated with more difficulties in this area. Female participants with high Anxiety (and low Avoidance) reported more global relationship and family‐of‐origin distress, but fewer financial disagreements and less difficult problem‐solving communication; conversely, male participants with high Avoidance (and low Anxiety) reported more financial disagreements and difficult problem‐solving communication, but less global relationship and family‐of‐origin distress. These results have implications for practice by suggesting ways in which couples’ attachment dynamics can become manifested in specific kinds of relational difficulties.

show abstract

Couple conflict: insights from an attachment perspective

Cited by 91 publications

References 22 publications

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self–disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within–person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self–disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within–person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

What Do Romanian Couples Talk About on a Daily Basis? A Mixed Method Approach

Problematic Domains of Romantic Relationships as a Function of Attachment Insecurity and Gender

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About