تعطیلات نوروزی مجله- ضمن تبریک فرارسیدن بهار و شروع سال جدید به اطلاع میرساند این نشریه از تاریخ ۲۵ اسفندماه ۱۴۰۲ لغایت ۱۳ فروردین ۱۴۰۳ تعطیل می باشد.

Volume 11 - Articles-1400                   MEJDS (2021) 11: 38 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Ghazanfari B, Keshavarzi Arshadi F, Hassani F, Emamipour S. Comparing the Effects of Emotion-Focused Couple Therapy and Choice Theory-Based Couple Therapy on Relationship Quality in Couples With Marital Conflicts. MEJDS 2021; 11 :38-38
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1812-en.html
1- Department of Psychology, Tehran Center Branch, Islamic Azad University
Abstract:   (1548 Views)
Background & Objectives: Family health and dynamics are the fundamental and productive core of society and are rooted in the couples’ health and wellbeing. Common complaints of couples include communication problems and the lack of emotional connection. The frequency of emotions, such as anxiety, distress, and anger leads to couples’ dissatisfaction and increased incidence of conflict. Marital quality consists of positive aspects, like support and satisfaction, and negative aspects, such as conflict and the odds of separation. Thus, a thoughtful focus on marital conflict and relationship quality based on human communication approaches can ultimately convey happiness to society. Therefore, the current study aimed to compare the effects of Emotion–Focused Couple Therapy (EFCT) and Choice Theory (CT)–based couple therapy on marital relationship quality.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest–follow–up and a control group design. Of the couples referring to the Family Transplantation Counseling Center in Mashhad City, Iran, in the fall of 2016, 50 couples who scored ≥115 on the Questionnaire of Marital Conflicts (QMC) were considered. In a purposive manner, 30 volunteer couples were selected and randomly assigned to the experimental (EFCT & CT–based couple therapy) and control groups. The inclusion criteria of the study included reporting marital conflict based on the QMC, couple participation in 8 therapy sessions, a marriage duration of 2 to 10 years, the age range of 25 to 45 years, a minimum diploma education, living together while conducting this research, and providing a written informed consent form for participation in this research. The exclusion criteria of the study were having a chronic physical illness or severe psychiatric disorders; divorce or being on the verge of divorce; sexual dysfunction; extramarital affairs, and receiving simultaneous psychological treatment individually or in groups. The research instrument was the Perceived Relationship Quality Components (PRQC) Inventory (Fletcher et al., 2000). Therapeutic interventions included EFCT (Johnson, 2012) and CT–based couple therapy (Glasser & Glasser, 2010). Interventions were performed in pairs; for each pair, consisting of eight 90–minute weekly sessions, simultaneously. All study groups conducted pretest, posttest, and 2–month follow–up examinations. The control group also received the couple therapy interventions after the end of the study. The obtained data were analyzed using repeated–measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s posthoc test in SPSS at the significance level of 0.05.
Results: There was a significant difference in the mean scores of marital relationship quality between the intervention groups and the controls (p<0.001); however, there was no significant difference between the intervention groups in this respect (p=0.621). The mean scores of marital relationship quality were significantly different between pretest, posttest, and follow–up phases (p<0.001); However, no significant difference was observed between the posttest and follow–up scores of the study participants (p=0.113). In other words, the effects of both presented couple therapy interventions on improving the quality of couples' relationship remained in the long run (after two months). The mean±SD scores of couples’ relationship quality in posttest (116.95±3.74) and follow–up (115.35±4.61) phases were higher than that of the pretest step (101±9.73) in the EFCT group. Furthermore, the mean±SD scores of relationship quality in the posttest (115.45±7.99) and follow–up (113.95±10.49) phases in the CT–based couple therapy group were higher than that in the pretest step (94.90±8.91).
Conclusion: According to the obtained results, EFCT and CT–based couple therapy improved relationship quality in the studied couples with marital conflicts.
Full-Text [PDF 774 kb]   (443 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Psychology

References
1. 1. Lavaf H, Shokri O. The mediating role of couples’ communication patterns in the relationship between marital conflict and internalized and externalized disorders in girls. J Family Psychology. 2015;1(2):3–18. [Persian] [Article]
2. 2. Davis D, Shaver PR, Vernon ML. Physical, emotional, and behavioral reactions to breaking up: the roles of gender, age, emotional involvement, and attachment style. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2003;29(7):871–84. [DOI]
3. 3. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5. 5th ed. Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.
4. 4. Gottman JM, Tabares A. The effects of briefly interrupting marital conflict. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 2018;44(1):61–72. [DOI]
5. 5. Khojasteh Mehr R, Parsi E, Shirali Nia K. The moderating role of positive emotion on the relationship between negative emotion and destructive marital exchanges in women. Journal of Family Psychology. 2015;2(1):49–58. [Persian] [Article]
6. 6. Sanford K. Communication during marital conflict: when couples alter their appraisal, they change their behavior. Journal of Family Psychology. 2006;20(2):256–65. [DOI]
7. 7. Xu M, Thomas PA, Umberson D. Marital quality and cognitive limitations in late life. Journals of Gerontology: Series B. 2016;71(1):165–76. [DOI]
8. 8. Derrick JL, Houston RJ, Quigley BM, Testa M, Kubiak A, Levitt A, et al. (Dis)similarity in impulsivity and marital satisfaction: a comparison of volatility, compatibility, and incompatibility hypotheses. Journal of Research in Personality. 2016;61:35–49. [DOI]
9. 9. Gray JS, Coons JV. Trait and goal similarity and discrepancy in romantic couples. Personality and Individual Differences. 2017;107:1–5. [DOI]
10. 10. Ostenson JA, Zhang M. Reconceptualizing marital conflict: a relational perspective. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. 2014;34(4):229–42. [DOI]
11. 11. Lundblad A-M, Hansson K. Couples therapy: effectiveness of treatment and long-term follow-up. J Family Therapy. 2006;28(2):136–52. [DOI]
12. 12. Johnson S, Zuccarini D. Integrating sex and attachment in emotionally focused couple therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 2010;36(4):431–45. [DOI]
13. 13. McKinnon JM, Greenberg LS. Vulnerable emotional expression in emotion focused couples therapy: relating interactional processes to outcome. J Marital Fam Ther. 2017;43(2):198–212. [DOI]
14. 14. Burgess Moser M, Johnson SM, Dalgleish TL, Lafontaine M-F, Wiebe SA, Tasca GA. Changes in relationship-specific attachment in emotionally focused couple therapy. J Marital Fam Ther. 2016;42(2):231–45. [DOI]
15. 15. Greenman PS, Johnson SM. United we stand: emotionally focused therapy for couples in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder. J Clinical Psychology. 2012;68(5):561–9. [DOI]
16. 16. Doss BD, Thum YM, Sevier M, Atkins DC, Christensen A. Improving relationships: mechanisms of change in couple therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2005;73(4):624–33. [DOI]
17. 17. Karbala’i M, Azari E. Asar bakhshi darman hayajan madar bar samimi’at zanashoo’i va kahesh delzadegi zanashoo’i zojeyn moraje’e konande be marakeze moshavere mantaghe 2 Tehran [The effectiveness of emotion-focused therapy on marital intimacy and reduction of marital burnout in couples referred to counseling centers in district 2 of Tehran]. Journal of Psychology and Educational Sciences. 2017;3(1&2):108–17. [Persian]
18. 18. Welch TS, Lachmar EM, Leija SG, Easley T, Blow AJ, Wittenborn AK. Establishing safety in emotionally focused couple therapy: a single‐case process study. J Marital Fam Ther. 2019;45(4):621–34. [DOI]
19. 19. Wittenborn AK, Liu T, Ridenour TA, Lachmar EM, Mitchell EA, Seedall RB. Randomized controlled trial of emotionally focused couple therapy compared to treatment as usual for depression: outcomes and mechanisms of change. J Marital Fam Ther. 2019;45(3):395–409. [DOI]
20. 20. Glasser W. Choice theory: a new psychology of personal freedom. First edition. New York: Harper Collins; 1998, pp:30–1.
21. 21. Yahyaee GA, Nooranipoor R, Shafiabadi A, Farzad V. The effectiveness of reality therapy on the improvement of couples’ family functioning. Archeives of Hygiene Sciences. 2015;4(3):120–7. [Article]
22. 22. Grills C, Villanueva S, Anderson M, Corsbie-Massay CL, Smith B, Johnson L, et al. Effectiveness of choice theory connections: a cross-sectional and comparative analysis of California female inmates. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2015;59(7):757–71. [DOI]
23. 23. Shadish WR, Baldwin SA. Meta‐analysis of MFT interventions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 2003;29(4):547–70. [DOI]
24. 24. Fletcher GJ, Simpson JA, Thomas G. The measurement of perceived relationship quality components: a confirmatory factor analytic approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2000;26(3):340–54. [DOI]
25. 25. Nilforooshan P, Navidian A. Composition of spouses’ attachment dimensions on marital satisfaction. Journal of Fundamentals of Mental Health. 2014;16(63):200–12. [Persian] [Article]
26. 26. Johnson SM. The practice of emotionally focused couple therapy: creating connection. 2nd ed. New York/Hove: Routledge; 2012, pp:129–92.
27. 27. Glasser W, Glasser C. Getting together and staying together: solving the mystery of marriage. New York: Harper Collins; 2010, pp:48–64.
28. 28. Johnson S. Attachment in action–changing the face of 21st century couple therapy. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2019;25:101–4. [DOI]
29. 29. Christensen A, Doss BD. Integrative behavioral couple therapy. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2017;13:111–4. [DOI]
30. 30. Christensen A. Therapy. In: Christensen A, Jacobson NS, editors. Acceptance and Change in Couple Therapy. New York: Norton; 1998. pp: 225–35.
31. 31. Hajhosseini M, Zandi S, Saninejad S. Efficacy of PAIRS group psycho-education on marital satisfaction of pregnant women. Frooyesh. 2017;6(2):221–38. [Persian] [Article]
32. 32. Holley SR, Haase CM, Chui I, Bloch L. Depression, emotion regulation, and the demand/withdraw pattern during intimate relationship conflict. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2018;35(3):408–30. [DOI]
33. 33. McCoy A, Rauer A, Sabey A. The meta marriage: links between older couples’ relationship narratives and marital satisfaction. Family Process. 2017;56(4):900–14. [DOI]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb