The Secret Powers of Marital Relationship: Agapic Love, Transformative Power of Suffering and Satisfaction with Sacrifice

Abstract

The first aim of this study was to explore which kind of sacrifice behaviours are performed in marital relationship and whether or not they differentiate into gender. The second was to examine the relationship between satisfaction with sacrifice and agapic love, and the mediating effect of transformative power of suffering on this relationship. Data were collected from 318 married individuals. The findings based on the first aim of this study revealed that sacrifice behaviours were grouped under two themes, daily sacrifices (such as errands, communication and interaction) and major sacrifices (such as changing job and home city). The findings based on the second aim of this study showed that there were positive relationships between agapic love, transformative power of suffering, and satisfaction with sacrifice. Also, it was found that agapic love directly and indirectly (through the mediating effect of transformative power of suffering) predicted satisfaction with sacrifice.

Keywords

• Satisfaction with sacrifice,sacrifice behaviors,agape,transformative power of suffering,gender

Evlilik İlişkisinin Gizil Güçleri: Özgecil Aşk, Acının Dönüştürücü Gücü ve Fedakârlık Doyumu

Öz

Bu çalışmanın ilk amacı, evlilik ilişkisinde ne tür fedakârlık davranışları sergilendiğini ve bu davranışların cinsiyete göre farklılık gösterip göstermediğini keşfetmektir. İkinci amacı ise evlilik ilişkisinde sergilenen fedakârlık davranışlarından alınan doyum ile özgecil aşk arasındaki ilişkiyi ve bu ilişkide acının dönüştürücü gücünün aracı etkisini incelemektir. Araştırmada 318 evli katılımcıdan veri toplanmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlar, fedakârlık davranışlarının gündelik fedakârlıklar (örneğin günlük işler, iletişim ve etkileşim) ve büyük fedakârlıklar (örneğin işini ve yerleşim yerini değiştirme gibi) olmak üzere iki tema altında gruplandığını göstermiştir. İkinci amaç doğrultusunda elde edilen sonuçlar özgecil aşk, acının dönüştürücü gücü ve fedakârlık doyumu arasında pozitif yönde anlamlı ilişkiler olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca özgecil aşkın, fedakârlık doyumunu doğrudan ve dolaylı olarak (acının dönüştürücü gücü aracılığıyla) yordadığı saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fedakârlık doyumu,Fedakârlık davranışları,Özgecil aşk,Acının dönüştürücü gücü,Cinsiyet

Kaynakça

1. Aron, A., Aron, E. N. ve Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596-612.
2. Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor ve M. Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(2), 241-253.
3. Aron, A., Mashek, D. J. ve Aron, E. N. (2004). Closeness as including other in the self. D. J. Mashek ve A. Aron (Ed.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (s. 27-42) içinde. Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
4. Aydoğan, D. ve Özbay, Y. (2018). Evlilikte fedakârlık doyumunun ilişkisel özgünlük ve evlilik doyumu bağlamında değerlendirilmesi. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, 7(2), 1276-1290.
5. Bahr, D. B. ve Bahr, K. S. (2001). Families and self-sacrifice: Alternative models and meanings for family theory. Social Forces, 79(4), 1231-1258.
6. Bar-Tal, D. (1976). Prosocial behavior. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.
7. Baron, R. M. ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
8. Batson, D., Bolen, M. H., Cross, J. A. ve Neuringer-Benefiel, H. E. (1986). Where is the altruism in the altruistic personality? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 212-220.

9. Bilgin, R. (2016). Geleneksel ve modern toplumda kadın bedeni ve cinselliği. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 219-243.
10. Büyükşahin, A. ve Hovardaoğlu, S. (2004). Çiftlerin aşka ı̇lişkin tutumlarının Lee’nin çok boyutlu aşk biçimleri kapsamında ı̇ncelenmesi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 19(54), 59-72.
11. Clark M. S. ve Mills, J. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 12-24.
12. Creswell, C. (2017). Eğitim araştırmaları: Nicel ve nitel araştırmanın planlanması, yürütülmesi ve değerlendirilmesi (H. Ekşi, Çev. Ed.). İstanbul: EDAM Yayınları.
13. Day, L. C. ve Impett, E. A. (2017). Giving when it costs: How inter-dependent self-construal shapes willingness to sacrifice and satisfaction with sacrifice in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(5), 722-742.
14. Dinçer, D. (2017). Romantik ilişkilerde ilişki doyumunu ve yaşam doyumunu yordayan etmenler: İki Boyutlu İlişkisel Benlik Değişimi Modeli (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
15. Dinçer, D. (2018). Power of suffering. D. A. Leeming, (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Psychology & Religion içinde. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27771-9_200188-1
16. Dinçer, D., Ekşi, H. ve Aron, A. (2018). Two new scales in the field of couples and marriage counseling: The inclusion of other in the self scale and Turkish self-change in romantic relationships scale. SHS Web of Confereces, 48, 1-7.
17. Dinçer, D., Ekşi, H., Demirci, I. ve Kardaş, S., (2015), Acının Dönüştürücü Gücü Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 39, 409-421.
18. Dion, K. L. ve Dion, K. K. (1996). Cultural perspectives on romantic love. Personal Relationships, 3(1), 5-17.
19. Eagly, A. H. ve Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54(6), 408-423.
20. Edgar, D. ve Glezer, H. (1994). Family and intimacy: Family careers and the reconstruction of private life. International Social Science Journal, 46(1), 117-139.
21. Ekşi, H., Dinçer, D. ve Akalp, C. (2017, Nisan). The relationships of parental rearing behaviors, fear of happiness, and transformative power of suffering. 8th World Conference on Psychology, Counseling, and Guidance, Antalya, Türkiye’de sunulan bildiri. Özet https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2ALYHsCTIQ3ZGo5UHgxSmZvNmM/view adresinden alındı.
22. Erikson, E. H. (1982/2014). İnsanın 8 evresi. İstanbul: OkuyanUs Yayıncılık.
23. Ewart, C. K., Taylor, C. B., Kraemer, H. C. ve Agras, W. S. (1991). High blood pressure and marital discord: Not being nasty matters more than being nice. Health Psychology, 10(3), 155-163.
24. Fehr, B. ve Russell, J. A. (1991). A concept of love viewed from a prototype perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(3), 425-438.
25. Fincham, F. D. ve Beach, S. R. (1999). Marital conflict: Implications for working with couples. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 47-77.
26. Gable, S. L. ve Reis, H. T. (2001). Appetitive and aversive social interaction. J. Harvey ve A. Wenzel (Ed.), Close romantic relationships: Maintenance and enhancement (s. 169–194) içinde. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Gilligan, C. (2017). Kadının farklı sesi: Psikolojik kuram ve kadının gelişimi (Dinçer, M. Elma ve F. Arısan, Çev.). İstanbul: Pinhan Yayıncılık.
28. Günindi-Ersöz, A. (2015). Özel alan/kamusal alan dikotomisi: Kadınlığın “doğası” ve kamusal alandan dışlanmışlığı. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 18(1), 80-102.
29. Hatfield, E. ve Sprecher, S. (1986) Measuring passionate love in intimate relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 9(4), 383-410.
30. Hendrick, C. ve Hendrick, S. S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 392-402.
31. Hendrick, S. S. ve Hendrick, C. (1987). Love and sex attitudes and religious beliefs. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 5(3), 391-398.
32. Hendrick, C. ve Hendrick, S. S. (1990). A relationship-specific version of The Love Attitudes Scale. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 5(4), 239-254.
33. Hendrick, C., Hendrick, S. S. ve Dicke, A. (1998). The Love Attitudes Scale: Short form. Journal of Personal and Social Relationships, 15(2), 147-159.
34. Hill, R. P. (2002). Compassionate love, agape, and altruism: A new framework for understanding and supporting impowerished consumers. Journal of Macromarketing, 22(1), 19-31.
35. Impett, E. A., Gable, S. L. ve Peplau, L. A. (2005). Giving up and giving in: The costs and benefits of daily sacrifice in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 327–344.
36. Impett, E. A. ve Gordon, A. (2008). For the good of others: Toward a positive psychology of sacrifice. S. J. Lopez (Ed.), Positive psychology: Exploring the best in people (s. 79-100) içinde. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.
37. Jack, D. C. (1991). Silencing the self: Women and depression. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38. Jayawickreme, E. ve Blackie, L. E. R. (2016). Exploring the psychological benefits of hardship: A critical reassessment of posttraumatic growth. Springer: Nottingham, UK.
39. Johnson, M. P., Caughlin, J. P. ve Huston, T. L. (1999). The tripartite nature of marital commitment: Personal, moral, and structural reasons to stay married. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(1), 160–177.
40. Joseph, S. ve Linley, P. A. (2008). Psychological assessment of growth following adversity: A review. S. Joseph ve P. A. Linley (Ed.), Trauma, recovery, and growth: Positive psychological perspectives on posttraumatic stress (s. 21-36) içinde. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
41. Joshanloo, M., (2014), Differences in the endorsement of various conceptions of well-being between two Iranian groups, Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 6(2): 138-149.
42. Joshanloo, M. (2015). Conceptions of happiness and identity integration in Iran: A situated perspective. Middle East Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(1), 24-35.
43. Kanemasa, Y., Taniguchi, J., Daibo, I. ve Ishimori, M. (2004). Love styles and romantic love experiences in Japan. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 32(3), 265-282.
44. Kelley, H. H. (1991). Lewin, situations, and interdependence. Journal of Social Issues, 47(2), 211-233.
45. Kelley, H. H. ve Thibault, J. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York, NY: Wiley.
46. Killen, M. ve Turiel, E. (1998). Adolescents’ and young adults’ evaluations of helping and sacrificing for others. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 8(3), 355-375.
47. Kogan, A., Impett, E., Oveis, C., Hui, B., Gordon, A. ve Keltner, D. (2010). When gives feels good: The intrinsic benefits of sacrifice in romantic relationships for the communally motivated. Psychological Science, 21(12), 1918-1924.
48. Lambert, N. M., Fincham, F. D. ve Stanley, S. (2012). Prayer and satisfaction with sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(8), 1058-1070. Lee, J. A. (1975). Romantic heresy. Canadian Review of Sociology, 12(4), 514-528.
49. Lee, J. A. (1977). A typology of styles of loving. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3(2), 173-182.
50. Lee, J. A. (1977/1973). The colors of love (3. Baskı). New York, NY: Bantam Books.
51. Lerner, H. G. (1988). Women in therapy. New York, NY: Perennial Library.
52. Levine, R., Sato, S., Hashimoto, T. ve Verma, J. (1995). Love and marriage in eleven cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26(5), 554-571.
53. Levinger, G. (1980). Toward the analysis of close relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(6), 510–544.
54. Lin, L. ve Huddleston-Casas, C. A. (2005) Agape love in couple relationships, Marriage & Family Review, 37(4), 29-48.
55. Martin, J. D., Blair, G. E., Nevels, R. ve Fitzpatrick, J. H. (1990). A study of the relationship of styles of loving and marital happiness. Psychological Reports, 66(1), 123-128.
56. Montgomery, M. J. ve Sorell, G. T. (1997). Differences in love attitudes across family life stages. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 46(1), 55-61.
57. Neff, K. D. ve Harter, S. (2002). The authenticity of conflict resolutions among adult couples: Does women’s other-oriented behavior reflect their true selves? Sex Roles, 47(9-10), 403-412.
58. Noller, P. (1996). What is this thing called love? Defining the love that supports marriage and family. Personal Relationships, 3(1), 97-11.
59. Page, J. R., Stevens, H. B. ve Galvin, S. L. (1996). Relationships between depression, self-esteem, and self-silencing behavior. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15(4), 381–396.
60. Pam, A., Plutchik, R. ve Conte, H. (1973). Love: A psychometric approach. Proceedings of the 81st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 159-160.
61. Rubin, Z. (1970). Measurement of romantic love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16(2), 265-273.
62. Rusbult, C. E., Verette, J., Whitney, G., Slovik, L. ve Lipkus, I. (1991). Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(1), 53–78.
63. Sakallı-Ugurlu, N ve Türkoğlu, B. (2017). Günümüz Türkiye’sinde cinsiyet kalıpyargıları: Kadın kimdir? Erkek kimdir? D. Kökdemir ve Z. Yeniçeri (Ed.), 1. Sosyal Psikoloji Kongresi (s. 98-107) içinde. Ankara: Başkent Üniversitesi.
64. Scrutton, A. P. (2015). Suffering as potentially transformative: A philosophical and pastoral consideration drawing on Henri Nouwen’s experience of derpression. Pastoral Psychology, 64(1), 99-109.
65. Shaver, C. ve Hazan, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Interpersonal Relations and Group Process, 52(3), 511-524.
66. Sprecher, S. ve Toro-Morn, M. (2002). A study of men and women from different sides of earth to determine if men are from Mars and women are from Venus in their beliefs about love and romantic relationships. Sex Roles, 46(5-6), 131-147.
67. Stanley, S. M. ve Markman, H. J. (1992). Assessing commitment in personal relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 54(3), 595-608.
68. Stanley, S. M., Whitton, S. W., Sadberry, S. L., Clements, M. L. ve Markman, H. J. (2006). Sacrifice as predictor of marital outcomes. Family Process, 45(3), 289-303.
69. Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93(2), 119-135.
70. Tedeschi, R. G. ve Calhoun, L. G. (1995). Trauma and transformation: Growing in the aftermath of suffering. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
71. Tedeschi, R. G. ve Calhoun, L. G. (1996). The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory: Measuring the positive legacy of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9(3), 455–471.
72. Tedeschi, R. G. ve Calhoun, L. G. (2004). Target article: “Posttaumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and emprical evidence”. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1-18.
73. Thompson, B. ve Borello, G. M. (1992). Measuring second-order factors using confirmatory methods: An illustration with the Hendrick-Hendrick love instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(1), 69-77.
74. Topcu, Ç., ve Tezer, E. (2013). Fedakârlık ta Algılanan Zarar Ölçeği ve Fedakârlık Doyum Ölçeği’nin Türkçe’ye adaptasyonu. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 5(40), 176-185.
75. Triandis, H. C. (1993). Collectivism and individualism as cultural syndromes. Cross-Cultural Research, 27(3-4), 155-180.
76. Whitton, S. W., Stanley, S. M. ve Markman, H. J. (2007). If I help my partner, will it hurt me? Perceptions of sacrifice in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26(1), 64-91.
77. Wood, W. ve Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 699-727.
78. Van Lnge, P. A., Agnew, C. R., Harinck, F. ve Steemers, G. E. M. (1997). From game theory to real life: How social value orientation affects willingness to sacrifice in ongoing close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1330-1344.
79. Van Lange, P. A. M., Rusbult, C. E., Drigotas, S. M., Arriaga, X. A., Witcher, B. S. ve Cox, C. L. (1997). Willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1373-1395.
80. Visserman, M. L., Righetti, F., Impett, E. A., Keltner, D. ve Van Lange, P. A. M. (2017). It's the motive that counts: Perceived sacrifice motives and gratitude in romantic relationships. Emotion 18(5), 625-637.
81. Yaman, K. G. ve Eryiğit, D. (2018). Psikolojik danışmanlar ve özel eğitim öğretmenlerinin eş tükenmişliğinin fedakârlık tan algılanan zarar, fedakârlık doyumu ve duygu düzenleme güçlüğü değişkenleri ışığında incelenmesi, Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 60-68.