PERCEIVED PARTNER CHANGE, CLOSENESS, AND LIFE SATISFACTION AMONG WOMEN IN ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

Yıl 2021, , 569 - 590, 31.12.2021

Duygu Dinçer

https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.990863

Öz

This study examined the relationship between perceived partner change, inclusion of other in the self (closeness), and life satisfaction among women who were involved in a romantic relationship. In this study, inclusion of other in the self was investigated as a mediator concerning the link between perceived partner change and life satisfaction. Data was obtained from 203 women participants who were involved in a romantic relationship. Participants ranged in age from 19 to 22 and they were in a dating relationship or engaged relationship. The relationship length of participants varied from one year to five years. In data collection, a demographic survey and several other scales, including the Perceived Partner Change in Relationships Scale, Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale, and the Satisfaction with Life Scale were used. In the stage of data analysis, Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis was used to assess the initial relationships of the variables while mediational analysis was used to investigate the mediating role of inclusion of other in the self in the relationship between partner change and life satisfaction through structural equation model. The results of correlation analysis showed that life satisfaction was associated with perceived partner change and inclusion of other in the self. In addition, the results of mediational analysis supported the proposed model and revealed that the inclusion of other in the self mediated the relationship between perceived partner change and life satisfaction. These findings indicate that relational closeness serves as a cognitive and emotional regulator between perceived partner change and life satisfaction. All findings obtained from study were discussed in the light of current close relationships literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

PERCEIVED PARTNER CHANGE, CLOSENESS, INCLUSION OF OTHER IN THE SELF, LIFE SATISFACTION, WOMEN

ROMANTİK İLİŞKİSİ OLAN KADINLARDA ALGILANAN PARTNER DEĞİŞİMİ, YAKINLIK VE YAŞAM DOYUMU

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı romantik ilişkisi olan kadınlarda algılanan partner değişimi, ben tasavvuruna ötekini katma (yakınlık) ve yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişkileri incelemektir. Çalışmada algılanan partner değişimi ve yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişkide ben tasavvuruna ötekini katmanın aracı bir rolü olup olmadığı test edilmiştir. Araştırma verileri, yaşları 19-22 arasında değişmekte olan ve romantik ilişki içinde bulunan 203 kadın katılımcıdan elde edilmiştir. Katılımcıların ilişki durumları flört ya da nişanlıdır; ilişki süreleri bir ile beş yıl arasında değişmektedir. Verilerin toplanmasında demografik bilgi formu, Romantik İlişkilerde Algılanan Partner Değişimi Ölçeği, Ben Tasavvuruna Ötekini Katma Ölçeği ve Yaşam Doyumu Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde değişkenler arası ilişkileri değerlendirmek amacıyla Pearson çarpım moment korelasyon katsayısına başvurulmuştur. Ben tasavvuruna ötekini katmanın, algılanan partner değişimi ve yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişkideki aracılık rolünü incelemek üzere yapısal eşitlik modeli kullanılmıştır. Korelasyon analizi sonuçları yaşam doyumunun algılanan benlik değişimi ve ben tasavvuruna ötekini katma ile ilişkili olduğunu göstermiştir. Aracılık testi sonuçları öngörülen modeli doğrulamıştır ve ben tasavvuruna ötekini katmanının algılanan partner değişimi ile yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişkide aracılık rolü olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Bu bulgular ben tasavvuruna ötekini katmanın algılanan partner değişimi ve yaşam doyumu arasında bilişsel ve duyuşsal bir düzenleyici işlevi görebileceğine işaret etmektedir. Çalışma kapsamında elde edilen bulgular, yakın ilişkiler alanyazını ışığında tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

ALGILANAN PARTNER DEĞİŞİMİ, YAKINLIK, BEN TASAVVURUNA ÖTEKİNİ KATMA, YAŞAM DOYUMU, KADIN

Kaynakça

• Adamcyzk, Katarzyna; Segrin, Chris (2015). “Direct and Indirect Effects of Young Adults’ Relationship Status on Life Satisfaction through Loneliness and Perceived Social Support”. Psychologica Belgica, 55(4), 196-211.
• Agnew, Christopher R.; Etcheverry, P.E. (2006). “Cognitive Interdependence: Considering Self-in-Relationship”, Vohs, Kathleen D.; Finkel, Eli J. (Eds.). Self and Relationships: Connecting Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Processes, New York: Guilford Press, 274-296.
• Akın, Ahmet; Süler, Melek; Eker, Halime; Anlı, Gazanfer (2015). “Romantik İlişkilerde Algılanan Değişim Ölçeğinin Türkçeye Uyarlanması, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması”. Uluslararası Hakemli Psikiyatri ve Psikoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 113-122.
• Amodio, David M.; Showers, Carolin J. (2005). “‘Similarity Breeds Liking’ Revisited: The Moderating Role of Commitment”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(6), 817-836.
• Aron, Arthur; Aron, Elaine N.; Smollan, Danny (1992). “Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the Structure of Interpersonal Closeness”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596-612.
• Aron, Arthur; Aron, Elaine N.; Tudor, Michael; Nelson, Greg (1991). “Close Relationships as Including Other in the Self”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(2), 241-253.
• Aron, Arthur, McLaughlin-Volpe, Tracy; Mashek, Debra; Lewandowski, Gary; Wright, Stephen C.; Aron, Elaine N. (2004). “Including Others in the Self.” European Review of Social Psychology, 15(1), 101-132.
• Aron, Arthur; Nardone, Natalie (2012). “Self and Close Relationships”. Leary, Mark R.; Tangney, June Price (Eds.). Handbook of Self and Identity, New York: The Guilford Press, 520–541.
• Ayten, Ali (2013), “Din ve Sağlık: Bireysel Dindarlık, Sağlık Davranışları ve Hayat Memnuniyeti İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma”. Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi, 13(3), 2014, 7-31.
• Barrett, Anne E. (2000). “Marital Trajectories and Mental Health”. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 41(4), 451-464.
• Batan, S. Nazlı; Ayten, Ali (2015). “Dini Başa Çıkma, Psikolojik Dayanıklılık ve Yaşam Doyumu İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma”. Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi, 15(3), 67-90.
• Chen, Serena; Boucher, Helen C.; Tapias, Molly Parker (2006). “The Relational Self Revealed: Integrative Conceptualization and Implications for Interpersonal Life”. Psychological Bulletin, 132(2), 151-179.
• Cresswell, John (2017). Eğitim Araştırmaları: Nicel ve Nitel Araştırmanın Planlanması, Yürütülmesi ve Değerlendirilmesi, Ekşi, Halil (Çev. ve Ed.). İstanbul: Edam Yayınları.
• Diener, Ed; Emmons, Robert A.; Larsen, Randy J.; Griffin, Sharon (1985). “The Satisfaction with Life Scale”. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.
• Diener, Ed; Gohm, Carol, L.; Suh, Eunkook; Oishi, Shigehiro (2000). “Similarity of the Relations between Marital Status and Subjective Well-being across Cultures”. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 31(4), 419-436.
• Diener, Ed; Seligman, Martin (2002). “Very Happy People”. Psychological Science, 13(1), 81-84.
• Dinçer, Duygu (2017). “Romantik İlişkilerde İlişki Doyumunu ve Yaşam Doyumunu Yordayan Etmenler: İki Boyutlu İlişkisel Benlik Değişimi”, (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
• Dinçer, Duygu; Ekşi, Halil; Aron, Arthur (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 Conferences, 48, 1-7.
• Frost, David M.; Forrester, Cat (2013). “Closeness Discrepancies in romantic Relationships: Implications for Relational Well-being, Stability, and Mental Health”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(4), 456-469.
• Gabriel, Shira; Gardner, Wendi L. (1999). “Are There “His” and “Hers” Types of Interdependence? The Implications of Gender Differences in Collective Versus Relational Interdependence for Affect, Behavior, and Cognition”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 642-655.
• Gilligan, Carol (2003). In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Gomez-Lopez, Mercedes; Viejo, Carmen; Ortega-Ruiz, Rosario (2019). “Psychological Well-being during Adolescence: Stability and Association with Romantic Relationships”. Frontiers Psychology, 16(13), 1-31.
• Hatfield, Elaine; Rapson, Richard L. (1994). “Love and Intimacy”. http://www.elainehatfield.com/uploads/3/ 4/5/ 2/34523593/55._hatfield__rapson_1994.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 04.04.2021).
• Hayes, Andres F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Hendrick, Gay; Hendrick, Kathylyn (1993). Centering and the Art of Intimacy Handbook: A New Psychology of Close Relationships. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
• Hira, Shreena N.; Overall, Nickhola C. (2011). “Improving Intimate Relationships: Targeting the Partner versus Changing the Self”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28(5), 610-633.
• Hughes, Erin K.; Slotter, Erica B.; Lewandowski, Gary W. Jr. (2020). “Expanding Who I am: Validating the Self-Expansion Preference Scale”. Journal of Personality Assessment, 102(6), 792-803.
• Kamp Dush, Claire M.; Amato, Paul R. (2005). “Consequences of Relationship Status and Quality for Subjective Well-being”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(5), 607-627.
• Kim, Hae-Young (2013). “Statistical Notes for Clinical Researchers: Assessing Normal Distribution (2) Using Skewness and Kurtosis”. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52-54.
• Kouneski, Edward F.; Olson, David H. (2004). “A Practical Look at Intimacy: ENRICH Couple Typology”, Mashek, Debra J.; Aron, Arthur P. (Eds.). Handbook of Closeness and Intimacy, New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 117–133.
• Köker, Süreyya (1991). “Normal ve Sorunlu Ergenlerin Yaşam Doyumu Düzeyinin Karşılaştırılması”, (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek lisans tezi), Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Mashek, Debra; Le, Benjamin; Israel, Ken; Aron, Arthur (2011). “Wanting Less Closeness in Romantic Relationships”. Basic and Applied Psychology, 33(4), 333-345.
• Mastekaasa, Arne (1994). “Psychological Well-being and Marital Dissolution: Selection Effects?”. Journal of Family Issues, 15(2), 208-228.
• Mattingly, Brent A.; Lewandowski, Gary W. Jr.; McIntyre, Kevin P. (2014). “‘You Make Me A Better/Worse Person’: A Two‐Dimensional Model of Relationship Self-change”. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 176-190.
• McIntyre, Kevin P.; Mattingly, Brent A.; Gorban, Sarah A.; Cope, Morgan A. (2020). “Implications of Relationship-Induced Self-concept Change across partners: An Actor-Partner Interdependence Model Approach”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37(5), 1554-1562.
• McIntyre, Kevin P.; Mattingly, Brent A.; Lewandowski, G. W. Jr. (2015). “When “We” Changes “Me”: The Two-Dimensional Model of Relational Self-change and Relationship Outcomes”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32(7), 857-878.
• Murray, Sandra L.; Holmes, John G.; Bellavia, Gina; Griffin, Dale W.; Dolderman, Dan (2002). “Kindred Spirits? The Benefits of Egocentrism in Close Relationships”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 563-581.
• Myers, David G.; Diener, Ed (1995). “Who is Happy?”. Psychological Science, 6(1), 10-19.
• Pavot, William; Diener, Ed (1993). “Review of the Satisfaction with Life Scale”. Psychological Assessment, 5(2), 164-172.
• Pavot, William G.; Diener, Ed; Colvin, C. Randall; Sandvik, Ed (1991). “Further Validation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: Evidence for the Cross-Method Convergence of Well-being Measures”. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(1), 149-161.
• Preacher, Kristopher J.; Hayes, Andrew F. (2004). “SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in Simple Mediation Models”. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36(4), 717-731.
• Reis, Harry T.; Clark, Margaret S.; Holmes, John G. (2004). “Perceived Partner Responsiveness as an Organizing Construct in the Study of Intimacy and Closeness”. Mashek, D. J.; Aron, A. P. (Eds.). Handbook of Closeness and Intimacy, New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 201-225.
• Roberts, Brent W.; Robins, Richard W. (2000). “Broad Dispositions, Broad Aspirations: The Intersection of Personality Traits and Major Life Goals”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1284-1296.
• Schmidt, Christa Ming Talbot (2020). “Purpose, Self-Other Overlap, and Subjective Well-being: A Cluster Analysis of Distinct Features of Purpose”, (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Cornell University, New York.
• Sedikides, Constantine; Oliver, Mary Beth; Campbell, W. Keith (1994). “Perceived Benefits and Costs of Romantic Relationships for Women and Men: Implications for Exchange Theory”. Personal Relationships, 1(1), 5-21.
• Shin, Doh Chull; Johnson, Dan M. (1978). “Avowed Happiness as an Overall Assessment of the Quality of Life”. Social Indicators Research, 5, 475-492.
• Slotter, Erica B.; Gardner, Wendi L. (2009). “Where Do You End, and I Begin? Evidence for Anticipatory, Motivated Self–Other Integration between Relationship Partners”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(6), 1137-1151.
• Slotter, Erica B.; Lucas, Gale M. (2013). “Validating a Measure of Self and Partner Change in Romantic Relationships: The Perceived Change in Relationships Scale”. Self and Identity, 12(2), 177-185.
• Tomlinson, Jennifer M.; Aron, Arthur (2013). “The Path to Closeness: A Mediational Model for Overcoming the Risks of Increasing Closeness”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(6), 805-812.
• Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (2020). “Yaşam Doyumu Araştırması”, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p= Yasam %20-Memnuniyeti-Arastirmasi-2020-37209 (Erişim Tarihi: 10.05.2021)
• Windstead, Barbara A.; Derlega, Valerian J.; Rose, Suzanna (1997). Gender and Close Relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.