Compiling a Structural Model for Predicting Love Trauma Syndrome in University Students Based on Primary Maladaptive Schemas with the Mediation of Emotion Regulation Cognitive Strategies

Yousefi, Niaz; Zargham Hajebi, Majid; Tabraei, Ramin

Volume 13 - Articles-1402 MEJDS (2023) 13: 150 | Back to browse issues page

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Yousefi N, Zargham Hajebi M, Tabraei R. Compiling a Structural Model for Predicting Love Trauma Syndrome in University Students Based on Primary Maladaptive Schemas with the Mediation of Emotion Regulation Cognitive Strategies. MEJDS 2023; 13 :150-150
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-3190-en.html

Compiling a Structural Model for Predicting Love Trauma Syndrome in University Students Based on Primary Maladaptive Schemas with the Mediation of Emotion Regulation Cognitive Strategies

Niaz Yousefi¹

, Majid Zargham Hajebi ^*²

, Ramin Tabraei²

1- PhD Student in Counseling, Department of Psychology, Ghom Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qom, Iran
2- Department of Psychology, Ghom Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ghom, Iran

Abstract: (714 Views)

Abstract
Background & Objective: Facing emotional failure is associated with high levels of anxiety, depression, grief, physical symptoms, vulnerability, and experiencing negative emotions. The best prevention and coping method is to identify the factors related to it. Based on the review of the theoretical foundations and research literature, the two variables of primary maladaptive schemas and the cognitive regulation of emotion can affect the symptoms of love trauma in students. Considering that the cognitive regulation of emotion is also affected by the primary maladaptive schemas, the current research aims to complete the previous study and investigate more deeply and more complexly, with the aim of testing and explaining a model for predicting love trauma symptoms of students based on primary maladaptive schemas with the mediation of emotion–regulation cognitive strategies.
Methods: This research was a descriptive–analytical correlational study. The statistical population comprised Islamic Azad University of Tehran, Tehran City, Iran, with Love Trauma Syndrome in the academic year of 2022–2023. Among them, 206 people were selected using the available sampling method. To collect the data, the Emotional Regulation Questionnaire (Garnefski and Karaij, 2006), the short form of the Yang Schema Questionnaire (1999), and the Love Trauma Syndrome Questionnaire (Ross, 1999) were used. The inclusion criteria were as follows: obtaining at least 20 (the cutoff point) from the Love Trauma Syndrome Questionnaire, passed at least two months from love trauma, aged 19 to 40 years, without any diseases or mental disorders, not being in new emotional relationship, not under treatment, and no addiction or drug abuse. The exclusion criterion was the non–cooperation of participants.
The structural equation modeling method and SPSS25 and AMOS25 software were used to analyze the research data. The level of significance in this research was considered 0.05.
Results: The results showed that the direct effect of the dimensions of abandonment schema (β=0.11, p=0.001), approval seeking (β=0.15, p=0.001), and emotional inhibition (β=0.17, p=0.001) were significant on the Love Trauma variable. However, the effect of trapped schema (β=–0.48, p=0.060) and restraint (β=0.44, p=0.116) were not significant. Abandonment schemas (β=–0.20, p=0.001), approval seeking (β=–0.40, p=0.001), and emotional inhibition (β=–0.21, p=0.001) had a significant effect on the adaptive strategy of emotion regulation. However, the impact of trapped schemas (β=–0.19, p=0.590) and restraint (β=0.20, p=0.572) was not significant. Also, schemas of abandonment (β=0.28, p=0.001), approval seeking (β=0.18, p=0.001), and emotional inhibition (β=0.24, p=0.001) on compromise strategy were significant. The results of emotion regulation had a significant effect, but the effects of trapped schemas (β=–0.67, p=0.098) and self–control (β=0.55, p=0.175) were not significant. Also, the indirect effect of abandonment (β=0.14, p=0.001), approval seeking (β=0.20, p=0.001), and emotional inhibition (β=0.14, p=0.001) on love trauma were significant. However, the indirect effects of trapped schema (β=–0.063, p=0.503) and restraint (β=0.034, p=0.66) were not significant. The fit indices showed a good fit for the model (IFI=0.99, GFI=0.99, CFI=0.99, RMSEA=0.17).
Conclusion: The present study showed that the schemas of abandonment, confirmation seeking, and emotional inhibition, as well as cognitive regulation of emotion, have a significant effect on students' love failure. Therefore, the role of these variables should be considered in designing interventions and treatment programs or in holding treatment courses for people with love failure experience.

Keywords: Love trauma syndrome, Primary maladaptive schemas, Cognitive strategies of emotion regulation

Full-Text [PDF 683 kb] (309 Downloads)

Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Counseling

References

1. Rosse RB. The love trauma syndrome: free yourself from the pain of a broken heart. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press; 2007, pp:36–7.

2. Jacob GA, Arntz A. Schema therapy for personality disorders—a review. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy. 2013;6(2):171–85. [DOI]

3. Asayesh MH, Qazinejad N, Bahonar F. Explanation of the emotional reactions of girls with love trauma syndrome: a qualitative study. The Women and Families Cultural-Educational. 2021;15(53):125–54. [Persian] [Article]

4. Eken E. The role of early maladaptive schemas on romantic relationships: a review study. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences. 2017;3(3):108–23. [DOI]

5. Karatzias T, Jowett S, Begley A, Deas S. Early maladaptive schemas in adult survivors of interpersonal trauma: foundations for a cognitive theory of psychopathology. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2016;7:30713. [DOI]

6. Taylor PM, Uchida Y. Awe or horror: differentiating two emotional responses to schema incongruence. Cogn Emot. 2019;33(8):1548–61. [DOI]

7. Seligman MEP, Schulman P, Tryon AM. Group prevention of depression and anxiety symptoms. Behav Res Ther. 2007;45(6):1111–26. [DOI]

8. Sdaghat F, Rafiipour A, Samavi A. Moghayese noshkhar fekri dar daneshjouyan ba va bedoun neshanegan zarbe eshgh shar Bandar Abbas [Comprison of rumination in students with and withgout hit love syndrome in Bandar Abbas city]. New Advance in Behavioral Science. 2016;1(3):75–81. [Persian] [Article]

9. Kennedy C, Deane FP, Chan AYC. Intolerance of uncertainty and psychological symptoms among people with a missing loved one: emotion regulation difficulties and psychological inflexibility as mediators. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science. 2021;21:48–56. [DOI]

10. Fagundes CP. Implicit negative evaluations about ex–partner predicts break–up adjustment: the brighter side of dark cognitions. Cogn Emot. 2011;25(1):164–73. [DOI]

11. Tashiro T, Frazier P. "I’ll never be in a relationship like that again”: personal growth following romantic relationship breakups. Personal Relationships. 2003;10(1):113–28. [DOI]

12. Schneier FR. Social anxiety disorder. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):515–6. [DOI]

13. Shabani Khadiv A, Ahmadiyan H. Studying the relationship between of basic psychological needs satisfaction and the emotional regulation disorder with the mediation of early maladaptive schemas at Bu–AliSina university students. Knowledge & Research in Applied Psychology. 2019;20(1):101–11. [Persian] [DOI]

14. Shimek C, Bello R. Coping with break–ups: rebound relationships and gender socialization. Social Sciences. 2014;3(1):24–43. [DOI]

15. Kweon SH, Lee S. A study on empathy, credibility, and political attitude in social media: focused on the relationship between empathetic intention and the motivation of belonging on intended pro–social and political behavior. Advances in Journalism and Communication. 2013;1(3):26–40. [DOI]

16. Habibi A, Adanvar M. Structural equation modeling and factor analysis (practical training of LISREL software). Tehran: Iranian Students Booking Agency; 2017, pp:113. [Persian]

17. Garnefski N, Kraaij V. Cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire – development of a short 18–item version (CERQ–short). Personality and Individual Differences. 2006;41(6):1045–53. [DOI]

18. Besharat MA, Bazzazian S. Psychometri properties of the cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire in a sample of Iranian population. Advances in Nursing & Midwifery. 2015;24(84):61–70. [Persian] [Article]

19. Young JE. Young schema questionnaire–short form [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2023 Sep 10]. Available from: [DOI]

20. Schmidt NB, Joiner TE, Young JE, Telch MJ. The schema questionnaire: investigation of psychometric properties and the hierarchical structure of a measure of maladaptive schemas. Cogn Ther Res. 1995;19(3):295–321. [DOI]

21. Ghahari S, Viesy F, Kavand H, Yeke Fallah M, Zandifar H, Farrokhi N, et al. Psychometric properties of early maladaptive schemas questionnaire short form–75 items (YSQ–SF). Nurse and Physician Within War. 2020;8(27):31–40. [Persian] [Article]

22. Dehghani M, Atef–Vahid MK, Gharaee B. Efficacy of short–term anxiety–regulating psychotherapy on love trauma syndrome. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci. 2011;5(2):18–25.

23. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1–55. [DOI]

24. Araghi L, Shafiabadi A, Delavar A, Mardani Rad M. Developing a structural model of love failure based on personality traits, attachment style, early maladaptive schemas, parenting patterns and perceived social support factors. Clinical Psychology Studies. 2020;10(40):47–75. [Persian] [DOI]

25. McDermott N. Early maladaptive schemas, attachment, negative affect and relationship satisfactionrelationship satisfactio [thesis in M.A.] [Internet]. [Glassboro, US]: Rowan University; 2008. Available from: [Article]

26. Nicol A, Kavanagh PS, Murray K, Mak AS. Emotion regulation as a mediator between early maladaptive schemas and non–suicidal self–injury in youth. Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy. 2022;32(3):161–70. [DOI]

27. Salgó E, Bajzát B, Unoka Z. Schema modes and their associations with emotion regulation, mindfulness, and self–compassion among patients with personality disorders. Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2021;8(1):19. [DOI]

28. Garnefski N, Kraaij V. Relationships between cognitive emotion regulation strategies and depressive symptoms: a comparative study of five specific samples. Personality and Individual Differences. 2006;40(8):1659–69. [DOI]

29. Zade–Mohammadi A, Kordestanchi Aslani H. The mediating role of cognitive emotion regulation in the relationship of early maladaptive schemas with spouse abuse. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. 2021;26(4):502–23. [Persian] [DOI]

30. Malik S, Wells A, Wittkowski A. Emotion regulation as a mediator in the relationship between attachment and depressive symptomatology: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2015;172:428–44. [DOI]