Volume 10 -
MEJDS (2020) 10: 178 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rafee F, Asadi J, Khajvand Khoshli A. Comparing the Effects of Reality Therapy and Imago Relationship Therapy on Marital Control in Women Seeking a Divorce. MEJDS 2020; 10 :178-178
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-2056-en.html
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-2056-en.html
1- Department of Psychology, Gorgan Branch, Islamic Azad University
Abstract: (1445 Views)
Background & Objectives: After marriage, young couples encounter several tasks and should have a mutual understanding in their everyday life. Major reasons for the conflicts in the couples include communication–related problems and incorrect and unsatisfying relations. Marital control can seriously affect healthy marital relationships and impair couples’ communications, and eventually lead to divorce. In the Reality Therapy (RT) approach, the problems and harms of married life arise from the efforts of each party to control the other to satisfy their needs and desires. Imago Relationship Therapy (IRT) is a novel approach to resolving conflicts and enriching the relationship between spouses, which relies on a sense of security and could be linked to marital control. Therefore, this research aimed to compare the effects of RT and IRT on marital control in women seeking a divorce.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest–follow–up and a control group design. The statistical population of this study was all women applying for divorce in Hamedan City, Iran, in 2019. Considering the inclusion criteria, the eligible volunteers were selected by convenience sampling method; subsequently, they were randomly divided into three groups of RT, IRT, and control (n=10/group). The inclusion criteria of the study were the age range of 20–50 years and not receiving therapy services in psychological treatment centers. If a volunteer failed to participate in two intervention sessions, she was excluded from the study. IRT and RT were performed in groups and twice a week, for 10 sessions in 60 minutes and 8 sessions in 90 minutes, respectively. The Marital Control Questionnaire (Amini, 2017) was used in the pretest, posttest, and quarterly follow–up stages. The context of controlling practices in marital relationships includes emotional control, negligence control, verbal violence control, isolation control, and concealment control. Data analysis was performed using repeated–measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) in SPSS at the significance level of p<0.05.
Results: The collected results suggested significant differences between the IRT, RT, and control groups in 3 measurement stages concerning marital control (p=0.019); same differences were detected regarding marital control and its components between the RT and IRT groups, including emotional control (p=0.026), verbal control (p=0.008), and secrecy control (p=0.016). However, no significant difference was observed in inattention control (p=0.198) and isolation control (p=0.186). Bonferroni posthoc test data indicated a significant difference between the RT and control groups in marital control variables (p=0.033) and emotional control (p=0.025). Thus, RT significantly reduced marital control and emotional control in the study subjects. However, in all variables, the scores of the IRT group and controls were not significantly different. Besides, the scores of the RT and IRT groups were significantly different in marital control (p=0.048). To evaluate the difference between marital control scores and its components in three assessment phases, Bonferroni posthoc test was employed. The relevant results revealed a significant difference between pretest and posttest (p<0.001), pretest and follow–up (p<0.001), as well as posttest and follow–up (p<0.001) values concerning marital control; there was a significant difference between pretest and posttest (p=0.005), pretest and follow–up (p<0.001), as well as posttest and follow–up (p<0.001) scores in emotional control. Furthermore, there was a significant difference between pretest and posttest (p<0.001), pretest and follow–up (p<0.001), as well as posttest and follow–up (p=0.002) data in verbal control (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the pretest and posttest statistics of inattention control (p=0.576). There was no significant difference between posttest and follow–up data respecting isolation control (p=0.999). There was also no significant difference between posttest and follow–up values in secrecy control (p=0.072).
Conclusion: According to the present research findings, RT was more effective than IRT in improving marital control. Therefore, RT is suggested to be used as a more effective therapy method in this regard.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest–follow–up and a control group design. The statistical population of this study was all women applying for divorce in Hamedan City, Iran, in 2019. Considering the inclusion criteria, the eligible volunteers were selected by convenience sampling method; subsequently, they were randomly divided into three groups of RT, IRT, and control (n=10/group). The inclusion criteria of the study were the age range of 20–50 years and not receiving therapy services in psychological treatment centers. If a volunteer failed to participate in two intervention sessions, she was excluded from the study. IRT and RT were performed in groups and twice a week, for 10 sessions in 60 minutes and 8 sessions in 90 minutes, respectively. The Marital Control Questionnaire (Amini, 2017) was used in the pretest, posttest, and quarterly follow–up stages. The context of controlling practices in marital relationships includes emotional control, negligence control, verbal violence control, isolation control, and concealment control. Data analysis was performed using repeated–measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) in SPSS at the significance level of p<0.05.
Results: The collected results suggested significant differences between the IRT, RT, and control groups in 3 measurement stages concerning marital control (p=0.019); same differences were detected regarding marital control and its components between the RT and IRT groups, including emotional control (p=0.026), verbal control (p=0.008), and secrecy control (p=0.016). However, no significant difference was observed in inattention control (p=0.198) and isolation control (p=0.186). Bonferroni posthoc test data indicated a significant difference between the RT and control groups in marital control variables (p=0.033) and emotional control (p=0.025). Thus, RT significantly reduced marital control and emotional control in the study subjects. However, in all variables, the scores of the IRT group and controls were not significantly different. Besides, the scores of the RT and IRT groups were significantly different in marital control (p=0.048). To evaluate the difference between marital control scores and its components in three assessment phases, Bonferroni posthoc test was employed. The relevant results revealed a significant difference between pretest and posttest (p<0.001), pretest and follow–up (p<0.001), as well as posttest and follow–up (p<0.001) values concerning marital control; there was a significant difference between pretest and posttest (p=0.005), pretest and follow–up (p<0.001), as well as posttest and follow–up (p<0.001) scores in emotional control. Furthermore, there was a significant difference between pretest and posttest (p<0.001), pretest and follow–up (p<0.001), as well as posttest and follow–up (p=0.002) data in verbal control (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the pretest and posttest statistics of inattention control (p=0.576). There was no significant difference between posttest and follow–up data respecting isolation control (p=0.999). There was also no significant difference between posttest and follow–up values in secrecy control (p=0.072).
Conclusion: According to the present research findings, RT was more effective than IRT in improving marital control. Therefore, RT is suggested to be used as a more effective therapy method in this regard.
Type of Study: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Psychology
References
1. Asghari Ganji A, Navabinejad Sh. The effectiveness of the couple therapy based on internal control psychology in increasing marital satisfaction. Quarterly Journal of Family and Research. 2014; 11(2) 37-50[Persian] [Article]
2. Arabpour E, Hashemiyan K. The effectiveness of couple therapy via reality therapy method on the improvement of intimacy relations of couples. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2012;3(1):1–13. [Persian] [DOI]
3. Kennedy S, Ruggles S. Breaking up is hard to count: the rise of divorce in the United States, 1980-2010. Demography. 2014;51(2):587–98. [DOI]
4. Demographic Statistics Newsletter 2015 [Internet]. Tehran, Iran: Office of Statistics and Demographic Information and Immigration, national organization for civil registration; 2015. [Persian] [Article]
5. Glasser W, Glasser C. Eight lessons for a happier marriage. 1st ed. New York: Harper; 2007.
6. Amini H. Sakht noskheye Irani porseshname kontrol-gari dar ravabet zanashouie va taieen vijegihaye ravan-sanji an [Making an Iranian version of the control questionnaire in marital relations and determining its psychometric characteristics] [Thesis for M.A]. [Mashhad, Iran]: Ferdowsi University; 2017, p:78. [Persian]
7. Omidian M. Rabete-ye raftarha-ye mahar garayane zojeyn va karkard khanevade [The Relationship between Couple's Restraining Behaviors and Family Functioning] [Thesis for M.A]. [Qazvin, Iran]: Imam Khomeini International University; 2014, p:169. [Persian]
8. Fatollahzadeh N. Effectiveness of marital life enrichment based on Choice Theory on quality of marital relationship and couples’ intimacy. Quarterly of Applied Psychology. 2018;11(3):353–72. [Persian] [Article]
9. Khalili S, Barzegar Kahnamouei S, Sahebi A, Farahani H. Explore the impact of choice theory and reality therapy interventions on couples marital satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychological Research. 2016;7(1):1–23. [Persian] [Article]
10. Abbasi Molid H, Fatehizadeh M, Ghomrani A. The effect of Glaser's vocal therapy on increasing the moral commitment of couples. Insight and Islamic Education. 2013;10(25):59–80. [Persian] [Article]
11. Abbasi H, Ahmadi SA, Maryam Fatehi zadeh MMF zadeh, Bahrami F. The effect of glaser’s reality therapy on personal commitment of couples. Family Pathology, Counseling and Enrichment Journal. 2016;2(1):39–53. [Persian] [Article]
12. Soltanloo F. Effectiveness of reality therapy on group self-efficacy, happiness and marital conflicts in married women. Journal of Psychology New Ideas. 2019;3(7):1–21. [Persian] [Article]
13. Halford WK, Snyder DK. Universal processes and common factors in couple therapy and relationship education. Behav Ther. 2012;43(1):1–12. [DOI]
14. Mohannaee S, Poladei Rayshahri A, Golestaneh S, Keykhosrovani M. Effectiveness of couple therapy by Hendrix Imago therapy method on improving communication patterns and reducing emotional divorce. Iranian Journal of Psychiatric Nursing. 2019;7(1):58–65. [Persian] [Article]
15. Sodani M, Shogaeyan M, Khojastamhr R, Shiralinia KH. The effectiveness of collaborative couple therapy on communication patterns and intimacy of couples referring to counseling centers of Behbahan, Iran. Armaghane danesh. 2017;22(4):499–514. [Persian] [Article]
16. Agathagelou AM. Individual psychodynamic development : the Imago relationship approach in organizational context [Ph.D dissertion in Psychology]. University of South Africa; 2013.
17. Sheydanfar N, Navabinejad S, Farzad V. Comparing the effectiveness of Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy (EFCT) and Imago Relation Therapy (IRT) in couple’s marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology. 2018;4(2):75–88. [Persian] [Article]
18. Bradford K, Skogrand L, Higginbotham BJ. Intimate partner violence in a statewide couple and relationship education initiative. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy. 2011;10(2):169–84. [DOI]
19. Hendrix H, Hunt HL. Making marriage simple: ten relationship-saving truths. Rahmani Shams H, Nazari SM. (Persian translator). Tehran: Nasl-e-Aftab Pub;2016.
20. Bokharaee M. Barrasi tassir moshavere gorouhi ba roykard vaghe’ieat darmani bar kahesh ta’arozat zanashouie zanan khane-dar mantaghe 5 Tehran [Effect of reality therapy group counseling approach to reduce marital conflict housewives in 5th district of Tehran] [Thesis for M.A]. [Tehran, Iran]: Alzahra University; 2006, p:149. [Persian]
21. Hasanzadeh R. Applied research methods. Tehran: Ravan Pub;2018. [Persian]
22. Amani A. The efficacy of reality therapy on marital commitment and self esteem of couples. Family Counseling and Psychotherapy. 2015;5(2):1–23. [Persian] [Article]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
