Journals / Akdeniz İnsani Bilimler Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

The Relationship Between Attachment Styles, Interpersonal Schemas for Partner and Marital Adaptation

Bağlanma Örüntüleri ve Evlilik Uyumu Arasındaki İlişkide Eşe Yönelik Kişilerarası Şemaların Aracı Yolu

Pages
187–199
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results, married individuals with insecure attachment patterns had lower marital adjustment than those with secure attachment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study into the role of interpersonal schemas in the relationship between marital adjustment and attachment patterns was investigated through bootstrap analysis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study the sample consisted of 268 married couples, 133 were men and 135 were women.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results, married individuals with insecure attachment patterns had lower marital adjustment than those with secure attachment.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study into the role of interpersonal schemas in the relationship between marital adjustment and attachment patterns was investigated through bootstrap analysis. In this study the sample consisted of 268 married couples, 133 were men and 135 were women. All the individuals who participated in this study completed the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS), the Interpersonal Schema Questionnaire (ISQ) and the Experiences in Close Relationship II (YIYE-II). According to the results, married individuals with insecure attachment patterns had lower marital adjustment than those with secure attachment. Among the insecure attachment patterns, it was found that avoidant couples had a lower marital adjustment than anxious ones. In the relationship between insecure attachment and marital adjustment, the proximity axis (friendship and hostility interpersonal schemes) was found to have a significant mediator role. On the other hand, the control axis (dominance and passivity interpersonal schemes) was found not to have a mediator role. These findings highlighted the importance of interpersonal schemas as an underlying mechanism, through the relationship between attachment patterns and marital adaptation in marriage. The findings from this research are discussed within the contect of the related literature.

Özet

Bu çalışma kapsamında evlilik uyumu ile bağlanma örüntüleri arasındaki ilişkide kişilerarası şemaların aracı rolünün bootstrap analizi ile incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Araştırmanın örneklemi 135kadın ve 133 erkek olmak üzere, 268 evli çiftten oluşmaktadır. Yakın İlişkilerde Yaşantılar Envanteri-II(YİYE-II), Kişilerarası Şemalar Ölçeği (KŞÖ) ve Çiftler Uyumu Ölçeği (ÇUÖ) ölçüm araçları olarakkullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre güvensiz bağlanma örüntüsüne sahip evli bireylerin evlilikuyumları güvenli bağlananlara kıyasla daha düşüktür. Güvensiz bağlanma örüntüleri arasında ise kaçınıcıbağlananların evlilik uyumları kaygılı bağlananlara göre daha düşüktür. Güvensiz bağlanma ve evlilikuyumu arasındaki ilişkide ise yakınlık ekseninin (dostluk ve düşmanlık kişilerarası şemaları) aracı rolübulunurken, kontrol ekseninin (baskınlık ve pasiflik kişilerarası şemalarının) aracı etkisi bulunmamıştır.Çalışma bulguları kişilerarası şemalar, bağlanma örüntüleri ve evlilik uyumu arasındaki ilişkinin mekanizmasının anlaşılması açısından önemli bulgular sunmaktadır. Araştırma bulguları ilgili alan yazın doğrultusunda ele alınmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ULUÇ, S., HEKİMOĞLU, F. M. (2022). The Relationship Between Attachment Styles, Interpersonal Schemas for Partner and Marital Adaptation. Akdeniz İnsani Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 187–199. https://ajindex.com/articles/433749

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (5)

  1. Baldwin M. W. (1992). “Relational Schemas and the Processing of Social Information”. Psychological Bulletin 112/3 (1992) 461-484. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.461 Banse R. (2004). “Adult Attachment and Marital Satisfaction: Evidence for Dyadic Configuration Effects”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 21/2 (2004) 273-282. Baron R. M. & Kenny D. A. (1986). “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51/6 (1986) 1173-1182. Bartholomew K. & Horowitz L. M. (1991). “Attachment Styles in Young Adults: A Test of a FourCategory Model”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61/2 (1991) 226-224.
  2. Bi S., Haak E. A., Gilbert L. R., El-Sheikh M. & Keller P. S. (2018). “Father Attachment, Father Emotion Expression, and Children’s Attachment to Fathers: The Role of Marital Conflict”.Journal of Family Psychology 32/4 (2018) 456-465. DOI: 10.1037/fam0000395 Boden J. S., Fischer J. L. & Niehuis S. (2010). “Predicting Marital Adjustment from Young Adults’ Initial Levels and Changes in Emotional Intimacy Over Time: A 25-Year Longitudinal Study”. Journal of Adult Development 17/3 (2010) 121-134. Bodenmann G. & Randall A. K. (2012). “Common Factors in the Enhancement of Dyadic Coping”. Behavior Therapy 43/1 (2012) 88-98.
  3. Bowlby J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Attachment. New York 1969. Boyacıoğlu G. & Savaşır I. (1995). “Kişilerarası Şemalar Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması”. Türk Psikologlar Dergisi 35 (1995) 40-58. Brennan K. A. Clark C. L. & Shaver P. R. (1998). “Self- Report Measurement of Adult Attachment: An Integrative Overview”. Eds. J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes, Attachment Theory and Close Relationship (1998) 46-76.
  4. New York. Carr D., Freedman V. A., Cornman J. C. & Schwarz N. (2014). “Happy Marriage, Happy Life? Marital Quality and Subjective Well‐being in Later Life”. Journal of Marriage and Family 76 (2014) 930-948. Collins N. L. & Feeney B. C. (2004). “Working Models of Attachment Shape Perceptions of Social Support: Evidence from Experimental and Observational Studies”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87/3 (2004) 363-383.
  5. Donato S., Parise M., Bertoni A., Finkenauer C. & Bodenmann G. (2015). “Dyadic Coping Responses and Partners’ Perceptions for Couple Satisfaction: An Actor-Partner Interdependence Analysis”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 32/5 (2015) 580-600. Dumlupınar-Aslan M