Marital Messages Have Received By University Students From Various Sources

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the marital messages university students receive from various sources according to demographic variables. Convenient sampling method was used in the study. Marital Messages Scale and a Personal Information Form are the data collection tools of the study. In the study, survey model was used. ANOVA and t-test were used in the analysis of the data. At the end of the study, it was found out that female students, university students who have spent most of their lives in towns or smaller residential areas, and university students whose parents have arranged marriages have received more positive marital messages compared to male university students, university students who have spend most of their lives in metropolitans, and university students whose parents married of their own volition, respectively. It was also seen that university students whose parents are alive and together, university students who perceive their parents’ marriage positively, and university students who indicate that their parents’ marriage has no conflict have received more positive marital messages compared to university students whose parents are divorced, who perceive their parents’ marriage as conflict-ridden, and university students who indicate that their parents’ marriage constantly suffer from conflict, respectively.

Keywords

• Marital
• Marital Messages
• Marital Message Sources
• University Students.

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Çeşitli Kaynaklardan Aldıkları Evlilik Mesajları

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin demografik özelliklerine göre çeşitli kaynaklardan aldıkları evlilik mesajlarını incelemektir. Araştırmada elverişli örnekleme yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Evlilik Mesajları Ölçeği ve Kişisel Bilgi Formu çalışmanın veri toplama araçlarıdır. Araştırmada tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde ANOVA ve t-testi uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda kadın öğrencilerin, erkek öğrencilerden; yaşamının çoğunu ilçe ve daha altı yerleşim yerinde geçiren üniversite öğrencilerinin; yaşamının çoğunu büyükşehir statüsündeki illerde geçirenlerden ve anne-babası görücü usulü ile evlenen üniversite öğrencilerinin anne-babası kendi aralarında anlaşarak evlenenlerden evliliğe yönelik daha olumlu mesajlar aldığı bulunmuştur. Anne- babası sağ ve birlikte olan üniversite öğrencilerinin anne- babası boşanmış olanlardan; anne- babasının evliliğini mutlu olarak algılayan üniversite öğrencilerinin anne-babasının evliliğini çatışmalı olarak algılayanlardan; anne-babasının evliliğinde hiçbir zaman çatışma yaşanmadığını belirten üniversite öğrencilerinin anne-babasının evliliğinde sürekli çatışma yaşandığını belirtenlerden ailelerinden daha olumlu evlilik mesajları aldığı saptanmıştır.

Keywords

• Evlilik,
• Evlilik Mesajları,
• Evlilik Mesajı Kaynakları,
• Üniversite Öğrencileri

References

1. Ataman, H. (2009). LGBTT rights are human rights. Ankara: Human Rights Agenda Association Publication.
2. Benson, M. J., Larson, J., Wilson, S., & Demo, D. H. (1993). Family of origin influences on late adolescent romantic relationships. Journal of Marital & The Family, 55, 663-672.
3. Bradbury, N. B., Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. (2002). Evlilik doyumunun doğası ve belirleyicileri üzerine araştırmalar: Son on yılın derlemesi. (Ş. Tutarel-Kışlak, Çev.). Türk Psikoloji Bülteni, 7 (24-25), 120-129.
4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: research perspectives. [Electronic version]. Developmental Psychology. 22(6), 723-742.
5. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç- Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2014). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
7. Cantor, N., Acker, M., & Cook-Flannagan, C. (1992). Conflict and preoccupation in the intimacy life task. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63, 644-655.
8. Clark, K. J., & Kanoy, K. (1998). Parents’ marital status, father–daughter intimacy and young adult females’ dating relationships. Journal of Divorce & Remarital, 29, 167-179.

9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis fort he behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. H. (1984). The effects of remarital on children: A review of the empirical literature. Family Relations, 33(2), 389-406.
11. Cook, J. R., & Kilmer, R. P. (2010). Defining the scope of systems of care: An ecological perspective. Evaluation & Program Planning, 13, 18-20.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research, planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
13. Cutler, H. A., & Radford, A. (1999). Adult children of alcoholics: Adjustment to a college environment. The Family Journal: Counseling, & Therapy for Couples & Families, 7, 148-153.
14. Douglass, F. M., & Douglass, R. (1995). The Marital Problems Questionnaire (MPQ): A short screening instrument for marital therapy. Family Relations, 44(3), 238-244.
15. Dökmen, Y. Z. (2004). Gender social psychological explanations. Ankara: Sistem Publishing.
16. Espelage, D. L., & Swearer-Napolitano, S. M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here? School Psychology Review, 12(3), 365-383.
17. Ganong, L., Coleman, M., & Brown, G. (1981). Effect of family structure on marital attitudes of adolesscents. Adolescence, 16(62), 22-34.
18. Glenn, N. D. (1991). The recent trend in marital success in the united states. Journal of Marital & The Family, 53, 261-270.
19. Greenberg, E. F., & Nay, W. R. (1982). The intergenerational transmission of marital instability reconsidered. Journal of Marital & Family, 44(2), 335-347.
20. Hansen, J.C., & L’abate, L. (1982). The classification of normal families: Functionality and dysfunctionality. Approaches To Family Therapy. Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc.
21. Haurin, R. J. (1992). Patterns of childhood residence and the relationship to young adult outcomes. Journal of Marital & Family. 54(4), 846-860.
22. Hortaçsu, N. (1999) The first year of family- and couple-initiated marriages of a Turkish sample: a longitudinal investigation. International Journal of Psychology, 34, 29-41.
23. Jackl, J. A. (2016). “Love doesn’t just happen…”: Parent-child communication about marital. Communication Quarterly, 64(2), 193-209.
24. Karaman, N. (2013). Family communication patterns as a predictor of premarital relationship evaluation (Master's thesis). Hacettepe Universty, Ankara.
25. Kendir, E. M., & Demirli, C. (2016). Examining the effect of parental attitude on marital satisfaction. Education Sciences (NWSAES), 11(3), 96-113.
26. Kinnaird, K. L., & Gerrard, M. (1986). Premarital sexual behavior and attitudes toward marital and divorce among young women as a function of their mother' marital status. Journal of Marital & the Family, 48, 757-765.
27. Kozuch, P., & Cooney, T. M. (1995). Young adults' marital and family attitudes. Journal of Divorce & Remarital, 23, 45-62.
28. L’Abate, L. (1994). Family evaluation: A psychological approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Larson, J. H., Benson, M. J., Wilson, S. M., & Medora, F. (1998) Family of origin influences on marital attitudes and readiness for marital in late adolescents. Journal of Family Issues, 19(6), 750-768.
30. Long, B. H. (1987). Perceptions of parental discord and parental separations in the United States: Effects on daughters' attitudes toward marital and courtship progress. The Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 573-582.
31. Miller, R. R., & Browning, S. L. (1999). Marital messages the case of black women and their children. Journal of Family Issues, 20(5), 633-647.
32. Moya, M. Expósito, F., & Ruiz, J. (2000). Close relationships, gender, and career salience. Sex Roles, 42, (9-10), 825-846.
33. Ozguven, E. (2002). Communication and life in the family. Ankara: PDREM Publications.
34. Packer- Williams, C. (2009). Understanding the impact of maternal messages given to single, educated African American women about relationships. Black Women, Gender & Families, 3(2), 48-67.
35. Salcuni, S., Di Riso, D., Mazzeschi, C., & Lis, A. (2007). Parents' representations of their children: An exploratory study using the Osgood Semantic Differential Scales. Perceptual, & Motor Skills, 105, 39-46.
36. Segrin, C., Taylor, M. E., & Altman, J. (2005). Social cognitive mediators and relational outcomes associated with parental divorce. Journal of Social, & Personal Relationships, 22, 361-377.
37. Senol, S. (2012). Research and sampling methods. Ankara: Nobel Academic Publishing.
38. Shurts, W. M. (2004). The relationships among marital messages received, marital attitudes, relationship self-efficacy, and wellness among never-married traditional-aged undergraduate students. (Doctoral dissertation). University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina‎, USA.
39. Shurts, W. M., & Myers, J. E. (2012). Relationships among young adults’ marital messages received, marital attitudes, and relationship self-efficacy. ADULTSPAN Journal, 11(2), 97-111.
40. Sahin, E. S. (2019). Various sources of received marital messages and attitudes toward marriage of university, (Doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
41. Sahin, E. S. & Bilge, F. (2020). Development, validity and reliability of the Marital Messages Scale (MMS). Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 53, 137-163.
42. Valerian, A. V. (2001). The relationship between the family of origin processes and attitudes towards marital and the likelihood to divorce among college students (Doctoral dissertation). Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey, USA.
43. Woody, R. H., & Woody, J. D. (1973). Sexual, marital and familial relations. Illinois: Bannerstone House.
44. Yu, T. (2007). The interplay of parental marital conflict and divorce in young adult children’s relationships with parents and romantic partners. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering, 68(5), 3431.