BAĞLANMA STİLLERİ, ÇATIŞMA YÖNETİMİ ve İLİŞKİ BAĞLILIĞI: YATIRIM MODELİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE BİR İNCELEME

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 65 Sayı: 1, 559 - 580, 25.06.2025

Fatma Can

https://doi.org/10.33171/dtcfjournal.2025.65.1.23

Öz

Bu araştırma, yetişkin bağlanma stilleri ile yatırım modeli bileşenleri (doyum, seçenekler ve yatırım) arasındaki ilişkide çatışma çözme stratejilerinin aracı rolünü incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmaya 237’si (%59.1) kadın ve 164’ü (%40.9) erkek olmak üzere flört ilişkisi olan, sözlü/nişanlı ve evli, toplam 401 kişi katılmıştır. Katılımcılara kolayda örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak ulaşılmış ve çevrimiçi ortamda hazırlanan anketi doldurmaları istenmiştir. Katılımcılardan Demografik Bilgi Formu, Yakın İlişkilerde Yaşantılar Envanteri-II, İlişki İstikrarı Ölçeği ve Romantik Partner Çatışma Ölçeğini doldurmaları istenmiştir. Bulgular, hem kaygılı hem de kaçınmacı bağlanmanın, çatışma gibi stresli durumlara verilen tepkilerin farklılaşmasıyla ilişkili olduğunu ve bu farklı tepkilerin de ilişkideki doyum, yatırım ve alternatiflerin niteliği gibi ilişki sonuçlarını önemli ölçüde şekillendirdiğini göstermektedir. Kaygılı bağlanma stiline sahip bireylerin etkileşimsel tepkisellik, baskınlık gibi çatışmaya aktif katılımla ilişkili çatışma çözme stratejilerini tercih ettikleri ve bu durumun ilişki doyumunu olumsuz etkilerken, seçenekleri daha fazla değerlendirmeyle ilişkili olduğu görülmüştür. Kaçınmacı bağlanma stiline sahip bireylerin ise kaçınma ve boyun eğme gibi pasif stratejiler benimsediği ve bu stratejilerin ilişki yatırımı ve doyumu üzerinde olumlu etkiler yaratabileceği bulunmuştur. Bu sonuçlar, bağlanma stillerinin farklı çatışma çözme stratejileri aracılığıyla, romantik ilişkilerdeki dinamikler üzerindeki belirleyici rolünü ortaya koyarken, bağlanma teorisinin ilişki süreçlerinin anlaşılmasındaki önemini vurgulamaktadır. Bu bulgular, ilişki kalitesini artırmayı hedefleyen müdahale programlarının geliştirilmesine katkı sağlayabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yetişkin bağlanma stilleri , Çatışma çözme startejileri , İlişkiye bağlılık , Yatırım modeli

ATTACHMENT STYLES, CONFLICT MANAGEMENT and RELATIONSHIP COMMITMENT: AN INVESTIGATION WITHIN THE INVESTMENT MODEL FRAMEWORK

Öz

This study aims to examine the mediating role of conflict resolution strategies in the relationship between adult attachment styles and the components of the investment model (satisfaction, alternatives, and investment). A total of 401 participants, consisting of 237 women (59.1%) and 164 men (40.9%) in dating, engaged, and married relationships, participated in the study. Participants were recruited using a convenience sampling method and were asked to complete an online survey. The survey included the Demographic Information Form, the Experiences in Close Relationships Inventory-II, the Investment Model Scale, and the Romantic Partner Conflict Scale.The findings indicate that both anxious and avoidant attachment styles are associated with different responses to stressful situations, such as conflicts, and that these varying responses significantly shape relationship outcomes, including satisfaction, investment, and the evaluation of alternatives. Specifically, individuals with an anxious attachment style tend to prefer conflict resolution strategies that involve active engagement, such as interactive reactivity and dominance, which negatively impact relationship satisfaction while being related to a greater consideration of alternatives. Conversely, individuals with an avoidant attachment style are more likely to adopt passive strategies, such as avoidance and submission, which may positively influence relationship investment and satisfaction.These results highlight the crucial role of attachment styles in shaping the dynamics of romantic relationships through different conflict resolution strategies and underscore the importance of attachment theory in understanding relationship processes. The findings also suggest that these insights could contribute to the development of intervention programs aimed at improving relationship quality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Adult attachment styles , Conflict resolution strategies , Relationship commitment , İnvestment model

Kaynakça

• Akköse, F. (2021). Bağlanma Stilleri ve İlişki Doyumu Arasındaki İlişkide Aleksitimi ve Çatışma Çözme Stillerinin Aracı Rolü (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). İstanbul: Medipol Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Bartholomew, K. ve Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.226
• Bonache, H., Gonzalez-Mendez, R. ve Krahé, B. (2019). Adult attachment styles, destructive conflict resolution, and the experience of intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(2), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516640776
• Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
• Bretherton, I. (1987). New perspectives on attachment relations: Security, communication, and internal working models. J. D. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development içinde (s. 1061-1100). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
• Büyükşahin, A. (2005). Çok boyutlu ilişki ölçeği: Geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 16(2), 97– 105.
• Can, F., Topçu, A. E. ve Topçu, G. (2022). Romantik partner çatışma ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi, 10(25), 438–455. https://doi.org/10.7816/nesne-10-25-05
• Cann, A., Norman, M. A., Welbourne, J. L. ve Calhoun, L. G. (2008). Attachment styles, conflict styles and humour styles: Interrelationships and associations with relationship satisfaction. European Journal of Personality: Published for the European Association of Personality Psychology, 22(2), 131- 146. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.666
• Collins, N. L. ve Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(4), 644-663. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644
• Collins, N. L., Guichard, A. C., Ford, M. B. ve Feeney, B. C. (2004). Working models of attachment: New developments and emerging themes. W. S. Rholes ve J. A. Simpson (Eds.). Adult attachment: Theory, research, and clinical implications içinde (s. 196-239). New York: Guilford Publications.
• Corcoran, K. ve Mallinckrodt, B. (2000). Adult attachment, self-efficacy, perspective taking, and conflict resolution. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78(4), 473-483. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2000.tb01931.x
• Costa, C . B . D . v e M osmann, C . P . (2020). Aspects o f the marital relationship that characterize secure and insecure attachment in men and women. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 37, e190045.
• Creasey, G. (2002). Associations between working models of attachment and conflict management behavior in romantic couples. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49(3), 365-375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.49.3.365
• Davila, J., Karney, B. R. ve Bradbury, T. N. (1999). Attachment change processes in the early years of marriage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 783-802.
• Domingue, R. ve Mollen, D. (2009). Attachment and conflict communication in adult romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(5), 678-696.
• Ein-Dor, T., Mikulincer, M. ve Shaver, P. R. (2011). Attachment insecurities and the processing of threat-related information: Studying the schemas involved in insecure people's coping strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(1), 78- 93. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022503
• Etcheverry, P. E., Le, B., Wu, T. F. ve Wei, M. (2013). Attachment and the investment model: Predictors of relationship commitment, maintenance, and persistence. Personal Relationships, 20(3), 546-567. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01423.x
• Feeney, J . A . v e N oller, P . ( 1990). Attachment s tyle a s a p redictor o f a dult r omantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(2), 281- 291. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.2.281
• Fletcher, G. J., Simpson, J. A. ve Thomas, G. (2000). The measurement of perceived relationship quality components: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 340-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200265007
• Finkel, E. J., Simpson, J. A. ve Eastwick, P. W. (2017). The psychology of close relationships: Fourteen core principles. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 383-411.
• Fraley, R. C. ve Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 132-154. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.132
• Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G. ve Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 350-365. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.350
• Hazan, C. ve Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511
• Joel, S., MacDonald, G. ve Shimotomai, A. (2011). Conflicting pressures on romantic relationship commitment for anxiously attached individuals. Journal of Personality, 79(1), 51-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00680.x
• Kobak, R. R. ve Hazan, C. (1991). Attachment in marriage: Effects of security and accuracy of working models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 861-869. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.861
• Kobak, R., Cole, H., Ferenz-Gillies, R., Fleming, W. ve Gamble, W. (1993). Attachment and emotion regulation during mother-teen problem solving: A control theory analysis. Child Development, 64(1), 231-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 8624.1993.tb02907.x
• Li, T . v e C han, D . K . S . ( 2012). H ow a nxious a nd a voidant a ttachment a ffect r omantic relationships quality differently: A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(4), 406-419. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1842
• Mikulincer, M. ve Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press.
• Paley, B., Cox, M. J., Burchinal, M. R. ve Payne, C. C. (1999). Attachment and marital functioning: Comparison of spouses with continuous-secure, earned-secure, dismissing, and preoccupied attachment stances. Journal of Family Psychology, 13(4), 580-597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.13.4.580
• Pistole, M. C., Clark, E. M. ve Tubbs, A. L. (1995). Love relationships: Attachment style and the investment model. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 17(2), 199-209.
• Reis, H. T. ve Shaver, P. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. S. Duck (Ed.). Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research, and interventions içinde (s. 367- 389). Routledge.
• Ricco, R. B. ve Sierra, A. (2017). Argument beliefs mediate relations between attachment style and conflict tactics. Journal of Counseling & Development, 95(2), 156- 167. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12128
• Rusbult, C. E. (2013). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 101-117. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.45.1.101
• Rusbult, C. E. ve Buunk, B. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10(2),175-204. https://doi.org/10.1177/026540759301000202
• Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M. ve Agnew, C. R. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5(4), 357-387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475- 6811.1998.tb00177.x
• Sarı, T. (2008). Üniversite öğrencilerinde romantik ilişkilerle ilgili akılcı olmayan inançları, bağlanma stilleri ve ilişki doyumu arasındaki ilişkiler. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi), Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Selçuk, E., Günaydın, G., Sümer, N. ve Uysal, A. (2005). Yetişkin Bağlanma Boyutlan İçin Yeni Bir Ölçüm: Yakın İlişkilerde Yaşantılar Envanteri-II'nin Türk Örnekleminde Psikometrik Açıdan Değerlendirilmesi. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 8(16), 1-11.
• Shaver, P. R. ve Brennan, K. A. (1992). Attachment styles and the" Big Five" personality traits: Their connections with each other and with romantic relationship outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(5), 536-545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292185003
• Shi, L. (2003). The association between adult attachment styles and conflict resolution in romantic relationships. American Journal of Family Therapy, 31(3), 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180301120
• Sığırcı, A. (2010). Evli bireylerde bağlanma biçimleri ve evliliğe dair inançların evlilik doyumu ile ilişkisinin incelenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Malatya: İnönü Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Sierau, S. ve Herzberg, P. Y. (2012). Conflict resolution as a dyadic mediator: Considering the partner perspective on conflict resolution. European Journal of Personality, 26(3), 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.828
• Simpson, J. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 971-980. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.59.5.971
• Simpson, J. A. ve Rholes, W. S. (1994). Stress and secure base relationships in adulthood. K. Bartholomew ve D. Perlman (Eds.). Attachment processes in adulthood içinde (s. 181-204). Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
• Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S. ve Nelligan, J. S. (1992). Support seeking and support giving within couples in an anxiety-provoking situation: The role of attachment styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 434-446.
• Zacchilli, T. L., Hendrick, C. ve Hendrick, S. S. (2009). The romantic partner conflict scale: A new scale to measure relationship conflict. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(8), 1073-096. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509347936