Volume 11 - Articles-1400
MEJDS (2021) 11: 44 |
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:
Eisapour Haftkhani M, Dousti Y, Donyavi R. Mediating Role of Neuroticism in the Relationship Between Romantic Attachment Styles and Mutual Relationships in Couples Referring to Divorce Centers. MEJDS 2021; 11 :44-44
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1742-en.html
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1742-en.html
1- Department of Psychology, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University
2- Department of Psychology, Neka Branch, Islamic Azad University
2- Department of Psychology, Neka Branch, Islamic Azad University
Abstract: (1862 Views)
Background & Objectives: Among various factors that threaten marriage, extramarital relationships have become of increasing interest to researchers. Extramarital relationships of any secret romantic or sexual activity suggest that it occurs while the individual is in a completely private relationship, like marriage. The relationships in the foregoing relationships were found that each of them could be influenced by personality traits. Anxiety and neuroticism were also among the personality traits identified with fear, anxiety, malice, despair, hostility, and loneliness. The present study aimed to investigate the mediating role of neuroticism in the relationship between romantic attachment styles and extramarital relationships among couples who are seeking a divorce. We used modeling respecting the relationships between the study variables.
Methods: This descriptive-correlational research employed a structural equation modeling. The statistical population of this study included all couples referring to divorce counseling centers in districts 1, 2, 3, and 4 in Tehran City, Iran, in 2019. Furthermore, according to the number of observed variables and the allocation of the coefficient of 20 per observed variable (13 variables observed in the model), 270 subjects were selected as the study sample by purposive sampling method. The inclusion criteria of the study included female gender, referring to districts 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Tehran, referring to divorce centers for counseling, being married, declaring consent to cooperate in the study, and not presenting biopsychological problems according to the study participants’ self-report. The exclusion criterion of the study included providing incomplete questionnaires. Data collection tools were the Extramarital Relationships Questionnaire (Glass and Wright, 1992), Behavioral Systems Questionnaire-Revised (Farman & Wehner, 1999), and NEO Five-Factor Inventory-Revised (NEO-FFI) (McCurry and Costa, 1992). Mean and standard deviation indices were used to present the obtained descriptive statistics; for inferential statistics, the research data were analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficient and path analysis in SPSS and AMOS at a significance level of 0.05.
Results: Safe attachment styles (β=-0.264, p<0.001), distressed (β=0.297, p<0.297), and discrete (β=0.191, p<0.001), as well as neuroticism (β=0.187, p<0.001) provided a direct and significant effect on extramarital affairs. Furthermore, secure attachment styles (β=-0.359, p<0.001), disturbed (β=0.331, p<0.001), and discrete (β=0.270, p<0.001) with the mediating role of neuroticism presented an indirect and significant effect on extramarital relationships. The calculated good fit indices revealed that neuroticism mediated the relationship between romantic attachment styles and extramarital relationships in the explored couples seeking divorce counseling. Additionally, the model for measuring the research variables was suitable (x2/df=2.748, CFI=0.957, GFI=0.993, NFI=0.963, RMSEA=0.42).
Conclusion: Based on the current study findings concerning the mediating role of neuropsychology in the relationship between romantic attachment styles and extramarital relationships in couples seeking a divorce, psychologists and consultants should pay attention to personality traits to reduce divorce rates.
Methods: This descriptive-correlational research employed a structural equation modeling. The statistical population of this study included all couples referring to divorce counseling centers in districts 1, 2, 3, and 4 in Tehran City, Iran, in 2019. Furthermore, according to the number of observed variables and the allocation of the coefficient of 20 per observed variable (13 variables observed in the model), 270 subjects were selected as the study sample by purposive sampling method. The inclusion criteria of the study included female gender, referring to districts 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Tehran, referring to divorce centers for counseling, being married, declaring consent to cooperate in the study, and not presenting biopsychological problems according to the study participants’ self-report. The exclusion criterion of the study included providing incomplete questionnaires. Data collection tools were the Extramarital Relationships Questionnaire (Glass and Wright, 1992), Behavioral Systems Questionnaire-Revised (Farman & Wehner, 1999), and NEO Five-Factor Inventory-Revised (NEO-FFI) (McCurry and Costa, 1992). Mean and standard deviation indices were used to present the obtained descriptive statistics; for inferential statistics, the research data were analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficient and path analysis in SPSS and AMOS at a significance level of 0.05.
Results: Safe attachment styles (β=-0.264, p<0.001), distressed (β=0.297, p<0.297), and discrete (β=0.191, p<0.001), as well as neuroticism (β=0.187, p<0.001) provided a direct and significant effect on extramarital affairs. Furthermore, secure attachment styles (β=-0.359, p<0.001), disturbed (β=0.331, p<0.001), and discrete (β=0.270, p<0.001) with the mediating role of neuroticism presented an indirect and significant effect on extramarital relationships. The calculated good fit indices revealed that neuroticism mediated the relationship between romantic attachment styles and extramarital relationships in the explored couples seeking divorce counseling. Additionally, the model for measuring the research variables was suitable (x2/df=2.748, CFI=0.957, GFI=0.993, NFI=0.963, RMSEA=0.42).
Conclusion: Based on the current study findings concerning the mediating role of neuropsychology in the relationship between romantic attachment styles and extramarital relationships in couples seeking a divorce, psychologists and consultants should pay attention to personality traits to reduce divorce rates.
Type of Study: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Psychology
References
1. 1. Pronk TM, Karremans JC, Wigboldus DHJ. How can you resist? Executive control helps romantically involved individuals to stay faithful. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011;100(5):827–37. [DOI]
2. 2. Negash S, Sheppard NVN, Lambert NM, Fincham FD. Trading later rewards for current pleasure: pornography consumption and delay discounting. J Sex Res. 2016;53(6):689–700. [DOI]
3. 3. Marín RA, Christensen A, Atkins DC. Infidelity and behavioral couple therapy: Relationship outcomes over 5 years following therapy. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice. 2014;3(1):1–12. [DOI]
4. 4. He S, Tsang S. Perceived female infidelity and male sexual coercion concerning first sex in Chinese college students’ dating relationships: The mediating role of male partners’ attachment insecurity. Personality and Individual Differences. 2017;111:146–52. [DOI]
5. 5. Jeanfreau MM, Jurich AP, Mong MD. Risk factors associated with women’s marital infidelity. Contemp Fam Ther. 2014;36(3):327–32. [DOI]
6. 6. Hojatkhah M, Mohammadi M, Valadbaygi P. The relationship between attachment styles, personality traits, and forgiveness to the attitude towards extramarital relations in the married couples of the city of Kermanshah. Women’s Studies Sociological and Psychological. 2017;14(4):209–28. [Persian] [DOI]
7. 7. Rezvanizadeh A, Aslani Katouli E. Pishbini ravabet farazanashouie az rouye sabkhaye delbastegi ezzat nafs va mizan khodshiftegi dar beyn daneshjouyan moteahel [Predicting extramarital relationships from attachment styles, self-esteem, and narcissism among married college students]. Journal of Recent Advances in Behavioral Sciences. 2016;1(2):31–42. [Persian] [Article]
8. 8. Fincham FD, May RW. Infidelity in romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2017;13:70–4. [DOI]
9. 9. Barbaro N, Pham MN, Shackelford TK, Zeigler-Hill V. Insecure romantic attachment dimensions and frequency of mate retention behaviors. Personal Relationships. 2016;23(3):605–18. [DOI]
10. 10. Arianfar N, Arianfar N. Structural Equation Modeling of the predicting marital conflict on the basis of initial maladaptive schemas of the cuts and rejection areas and the mediatory variable of the lovemaking styles. Counseling Culture and Psycotherapy. 2017;8(29):107–34. [Persian] [DOI]
11. 11. Parker ML, Campbell K. Infidelity and attachment: the moderating role of race/ethnicity. Contemp Fam Ther. 2017;39(3):172–83. [DOI]
12. 12. Ghasemi B, Sharifi Y, Sharifi K. The role of sexual function and experience emotional breakdown in tendency toward relationships Extra-marital. Rooyesh-e- Ravanshenasi Journal. 2017;6(1):45–68. [Persian] [Article]
13. 13. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2010.
14. 14. Loehlin, JC. Latent variable models: an introduction to factor, path, and structural equation analysis. New York: Psychology Press; 2004.
15. 15. Ghasemi V. Estimation of optimum sample size in structural equation modeling assessing its adequacy for social researchers. Iranian Journal of Sociology. 2012;12(4):138–61. [Persian] [Article]
16. 16. Glass SP, Wright TL. Justifications for extramarital relationships: The association between attitudes, behaviors, and gender. Journal of Sex Research. 1992;29(3):361–87. [DOI]
17. 17. Sharifi M, Haji Heidari M, Khoroush F, Fatehizadeh M. Correlation between love schemas and justifications for extramarital involvement in married women. Journal of Research in Behavioural Sciences. 2013;10(6):526–34. [Persian] [Article]
18. 18. Furman W, Wehner EA. The Behavioral Systems Questionnaire – Revised. University of Denver; 1999.
19. 19. Amanelahi A, Aslani Kh, Tashakor H, Ghavabesh S, Nekoei S. Romantic Attachment/Love Styles and Marital Satisfaction in Women: Investigating the Relationship. 2012;10(3):68-86. [DOI]
20. 20. Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1992.
21. 21. McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. A contemplated revision of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences. 2004;36(3):587–96.
22. 22. Alavi M, Kye Mei T, Mehrinezhad SA. The Dark Triad of personality and infidelity intentions: The moderating role of relationship experience. Personality and Individual Differences. 2018;128:49–54. [DOI]
23. 23. Ghasemi V. Modelsazi moadele sakhtari dar pazhoohesh–haye ejtemaie ba karbord Amos–Graphics [Structural equation modeling in social research using Amos– Graphics]. Tehran: Sociology Publications; 2010. [Persian]
24. 24. Drigotas SM, Safstrom CA, Gentilia T. An investment model prediction of dating infidelity. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 1999;77:509-24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.509
25. 25. Heidaripour SH, Aman Elahi A. Vizhegi-haye shakhsiyati va angize-haye khiyanat ba gerayesh be khiyanat dar barrasiye rabete-ye beyne zanane moteahele shahre Ahvaz. [Personality traits and motives of infidelity with a tendency to infidelity in examining the relationship between married women in Ahvaz]. Paper presented at the Fourth National Conference on Counseling and Mental Health, Quchan; 2016. [Article]
26. 26. Whisman MA, Wagers TP. Assessing relationship betrayals. J Clin Psychol. 2005.61(11);1383-91. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
