Date post: | 19-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Actor-Partner Effects: Attachment and Psychological Aggression in Romantic
Relationships
Elizabeth A. Goncy & Manfred H. M. van Dulmen
Kent State UniversityDepartment of Psychology
Acknowledgement
This project was partially funded by the Center of the Treatment and Study of Traumatic Stress (Summa Health Systems/Kent State University).
Psychological Aggression
High frequency Definition:
Relational acts Causing emotional or psychological harm
Consequences
Attachment Theory Framework for understanding
interpersonal relationship (Bowlby, 1977) Internal working models Attachment styles
Limitations of Previous Work
Primary focus on physical aggression Categorized attachment scores Examination at individual level
Aims of the Current Study
To investigate the association between attachment behavior and psychological aggression Test using the Actor-Partner
Interdependence Model To determine if effects are different
for males or females
Sample
Transitions Into Adulthood and Romantic Relationship study
18 – 25 year olds in a self-defined romantic relationship of 4 months or longer
This study is limited to Wave 1 questionnaires.
Sample Demographics
115 Heterosexual couples Age (M=19.78, SD=1.65) 89% Caucasian 50% in relationship longer than 12
months
Measures Experiences in Close Relationships Scale -
Revised (Fraley et al., 2000) Anxiety scale
Females M = 1.62 Males M = 1.16
Avoidant scale Females M = 1.65 Males M = 1.22
Correlations Females r = 0.54, p < 0.01 Males r = 0.52, p < 0.01
Measures
Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory (Wolfe et al., 2001) Emotional/verbal abuse subscale
Females M = 1.94 Males M = 1.77 r = 0.513, p < 0.01
Actor Partner Interdependence Model (APIM, Kashy & Kenny, 2000)
Independence assumption violated What can the APIM tell us?
Actor effect Partner effect Couple effect
APIM
Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Attachment
Male Attachment Male Emotional/
Verbal Abuse
Actor
Actor
Partner
Partn
er
Actor Effects – If Actor > 0 Partner Effects – If Partner > 0 Couple Effects – If Actor not significantly different from Partner
Results
Conducted in Mplus 5.1 Followed procedures laid out by
Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006
Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Avoidance
Male AvoidanceMale Emotional/
Verbal Abuseβ = 0.14, SE = 0.10, ns
β = 0.17, SE = 0.10+
β = -0.05, SE = 0.20, ns
β = 0.21, SE = 0.10 *
* p < 0.05 + trendns = non-significant
Actor
Actor
Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Avoidance
Male AvoidanceMale Emotional/
Verbal Abuseβ = 0.14, SE = 0.10, ns
β = 0.17, SE = 0.10+
β = -0.05, SE = 0.20, ns
β = 0.21, SE = 0.10 *
* p < 0.05 + trendns = non-significant
Partner
Partner
Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.04, ns No
Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.04, ns No
Are there differences in partner effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 2.955, p = 0.08 Trend
Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Anxiety
Male AnxietyMale Emotional/
Verbal Abuse β = -0.38, SE = 0.08*
β = -0.36, SE = 0.08*
β = 0.12, SE = 0.09, ns
β = -0.26, SE = 0.08*
* p < 0.05ns = non-significant
Actor
Actor
Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Anxiety
Male AnxietyMale Emotional/
Verbal Abuse β = -0.38, SE = 0.08*
β = -0.36, SE = 0.08*
β = 0.12, SE = 0.09, ns
β = -0.26, SE = 0.08*
* p < 0.05ns = non-significant
Partner
Partner
Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Female Anxiety
Male AnxietyMale Emotional/
Verbal Abuse β = -0.38, SE = 0.08*
β = -0.36, SE = 0.08*
β = 0.12, SE = 0.09, ns
β = -0.26, SE = 0.08*
* p < 0.05ns = non-significant
COUPLE
Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.41, ns No
Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse
Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.41, ns No!
Are there differences in partner effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 8.39, p < 0.05 Yes!
Conclusion
Avoidance: Partner Effect for Females Males avoidance predicts lower female
use of emotional and verbal abuse Somewhat inconclusive
Anxiety: Actor Effect for Males Couple Effect for Females
Future Directions
Integrate findings from observational data
Integrate multi-informant Partner-rated Emotional and Verbal
Abuse
Contact Information Elizabeth Goncy, MA
Kent State University Department of Psychology Kent OH 44242 email: [email protected]://dept.kent.edu/psychology/ADPlab/Index.html