Relationship of Conflict Resolution Styles in Marriage with Marital Adjustment and Satisfaction

Yıl 2022, , 322 - 330, 30.09.2022

Özge Ünal , Serap Akgün

https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1016806

Cited By: 3

Öz

This review focuses on the relationship between spouses’ conflict resolution styles and marital happiness, firstly the conceptualizations of marital satisfaction and marital adjustment were defined and their differences were discussed. Prior studies show that marital adjustment and satisfaction are two concepts related to marital happiness but need to be separated from each other. Then, the relationships between spouses’ approaches to their marital conflicts and their marital happiness were considered in this review. Conflict is a natural part of all marriages but the couples’ approaches to marital conflicts may lead to constructive or destructive outcomes for their relationships. One of the most important goals of many intervention programs developed for distressed couples is to provide spouses with the ability to resolve their conflicts constructively. Findings showed that constructive conflict resolution (considering conflict as a social problem that could be solved with cooperation, striving to satisfy the needs of both parties, and finding out solutions together) leads to an increase in marital satisfaction and marital adjustment. Destructive behaviors with hostile intentions focused on self-interest (physical and verbal aggression and oppression) seem to be negatively related to marital adjustment and satisfaction. Besides these negative coping behaviors, it will be beneficial for spouses to gain awareness of behaviors such as submission, protective buffering, and underestimating the coping capabilities of the partner with an overprotective attitude, which are not based on hostile intentions in dealing with problems but can have devastating consequences in the long term.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Conflict, Marital adjustment, Satisfaction, Marriage

Evlilikte Çatışma Çözme Stillerinin Evlilik Uyumu ve Doyumu ile İlişkisi

Öz

Eşlerin çatışma çözme stillerinin evlilikte mutlulukla ilişkisinin incelendiği bu derlemede öncelikle evliliği değerlendirmede en sık kullanılan evlilik doyumu ve evlilik uyumu kavramları tanımlanmış ve aralarındaki farklar tartışılmıştır. Alanyazındaki çalışmalar uyum ve doyumun evlilikte mutlulukla ilgili ancak birbirinden ayrıştırılması gereken iki kavram olduğunu göstermektedir. Ardından eşlerin evliliklerinde yaşadıkları çatışmalara yaklaşımlarının ve çatışma çözme stillerinin evlilik uyumu ve evlilik doyumu ile ilişkisi ele alınmıştır. Çatışma tüm evliliklerde yaşanan doğal bir olgudur ancak eşlerin yaşadıkları çatışmalara ilişkin yaklaşımları evlilik ilişkisi için yapıcı ya da yıkıcı sonuçlara yol açabilmektedir. Eşlere çatışmalarını yapıcı bir biçimde çözme becerisi kazandırmak, danışman desteğine ihtiyaç duyan çiftlere yönelik olarak geliştirilen birçok müdahale programının en önemli hedefleri arasındadır. Araştırma bulguları, çatışmayı işbirliği yaparak çözülebilecek bir sorun olarak ele almak, ortak faydaya odaklanmak, birlikte çözüm yolları üretmek gibi aşamaları içeren yapıcı çatışma çözme yaklaşımının evlilik uyumu ve evlilik doyumunu artırdığını göstermektedir. Öte yandan fiziksel ve sözel saldırı ile baskı kurmayı içeren düşmanca niyete dayalı ve bireysel faydaya odaklı olumsuz çatışma çözme davranışlarının evlilik uyumu ve doyumu ile olumsuz yönde ilişkili olduğu görülmektedir. Bu olumsuz baş etme davranışlarına ek olarak, sorunlarla baş etmede düşmanca niyete dayalı olmayan ancak uzun vadede ilişki için yıkıcı sonuçlar doğurabilecek olan boyun eğme, tampon görevi üstlenme, aşırı korumacı bir tutumla eşin baş etme becerilerini hafife alma gibi davranışlar konusunda eşlerin farkındalık kazanmalarının faydalı olacağı düşülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çatışma, Çift uyumu, Doyum, Evlilik

Kaynakça

• Accordino MP, Guerney BG Jr (2003). Relationship Enhancement couples and family outcome research of the last 20 years. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 11, 162–166.
• Allendorf K (2012). Marital quality from a rural Indian context in comparative perspective. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 43(4), 527-544.
• Anderson SA, Sabatelli RM (2007) Family interaction: A multigenerational developmental perspective. Boston: Pearson. Baumeister RF, Vohs KD (2007). Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
• Bodenmann G, Bradbury TN, Pihet S (2009). Relative contributions of treatment related changes in communication skills and dyadic coping skills to the longitudinal course of marriage in the framework of marital distress prevention. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 50, 1–21.
• Burgess EW, Locke HJ, Thomes MM (1963). The Family from institution to companionship. American Book Company. New York.
• Burr WR (1970). Satisfaction with various aspects of marriage over the life cycle: A random middle class sample. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 32, 29-37.
• Busby DM, Christensen C, Crane DR, Larson JH (1995). A Revision of the dyadic adjustment scale for use with distressed and non distressed couples: Construct hierarchy and multidimensional scales. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21(3), 289-308.
• Crawford DK, Bodine RJ (1996). Conflict Resolution Education: A Guide to Implementing Programs in Schools, Youth-Serving Organizations, and Community and Juvenile Justice Settings. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and U.S. Department of Education, Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program.
• Curun F (2006). Yüklemeler, iletişim çatışmaları, cinsiyet ve cinsiyet rolü yönelimi ile evlilik doyumu arasındaki ilişki. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Deutsch M (2006). Cooperation and competition. M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman & E. E Marcus (Ed.), In the handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (21-40). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Erbek E, Beştepe E, Akar H, Eradamlar N, Alpkan R (2005). Evlilik Uyumu. Düşünen Adam: Psikiyatri ve Nörolojik Bilimler Dergisi, 18 (1), 39- 47.
• Erel O, Burman B (1995). Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent-child relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 108–132.
• Falconier MK, Jackson J B, Hilpert P, Bodenmann G (2015). Dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 42, 28-46.
• Fincham F D, Bradbury TN (1993). Marital satisfaction, depression, and attributions: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of personality and social psychology, 64(3), 442-452.
• Finkel E J, Cheung E O, Emery LF, Carswell K L, Larson G M (2015). The suffocation model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 238–244.
• Gilligan C (1982/1993). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Glenn ND, Weaver CN (1981). The contribution of marital happiness to global happiness. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 161-168.
• Gottman JM, Driver J, Tabares A (2015). Repair during marital conflict in newlyweds: How couples move from attack–defend to collaboration. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 26(2), 85-108.
• Gottman JM, Katz LF (1989). Effects of marital discord on young children's peer interaction and health. Developmental Psychology, 25(3), 373-381. Gottman JM, Krokoff LJ (1989). Marital ınteraction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57(1) ,47-52.
• Gottman J, Silver N (2013). Evliliği sürdürmenin yedi ilkesi. (Çev. E. Deniz). İstanbul: Varlık Yayınları. (Özgün çalışma, 1999).
• Greeff AP, Bruyne T (2000). Conflict management style and marital satisfaction. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 321-334.
• Grych JH, Fincham FD (1990). Marital conflict and children's adjustment: A cognitive-contextual framework. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 267-290.
• Jakubowski SF, Milne EP, Brunner H, Miller RB (2004). A review of empirically supported marital enrichment programs. Family relations, 53(5), 528-536.
• Johnson DR, Amoloza TO, Booth A (1992). Stability and developmental change in marital quality: A Three-Wave panel analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 54(3), 582-594.
• Johnson DR, White LK, Edeards JN, Booth A (1986). Dimensions of marital quality: Toward methodological and conceptual refinement. Journal of Family Issues, 7(1), 31-49.
• Kaur T, Sokhey G (2010). Conflict resolution and marital satisfaction. Indian Journal of Community Psychology, 6(1), 90-104.
• Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL (2006). Dyadic Data Analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.
• Knudson RM, Sommers AA, Golding SL (1980). Interpersonal perception and mode of resolution in marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(5), 751-763.
• Kouros CD, Papp LM, Goeke-Morey MC, Cummings EM (2014). Spillover between marital quality and parent–child relationship quality: Parental depressive symptoms as moderators. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(3), 315.
• Kurdek LA (1994). Conflict resolution styles in gay, lesbian, heterosexual nonparent, and heterosexual parent couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 56(3), 705-722.
• Lively EL (1969). Toward concept clarification: The Case of marital interaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 31(1), 108-114.
• Li T, Fung HH (2011). The dynamic goal theory of marital satisfaction. Review of General Psychology, 15, 246–254.
• Locke HJ, Wallace KM (1959). Short marital-adjustment and prediction tests: Their reliability and validity. Marriage and Family Living, 21(3), 251-255.
• Minuchin S (1974). Families and Family Therapy. Massachusets: Harvard University.
• Özen A (2006). Value similarities of wives and husbands and conflict resolution styles of spouses as predictors of marital adjustment. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Planalp EM, Van Hulle CA, Goldsmith HH (2019). Parenting in context: Marital adjustment, parent affect, and child temperament in complex families. Journal of Family Psychology, 33(5), 532.
• Prigerson HG, Maciejewski PK, Rosenheck RA (1999). The effects of marital dissolution and marital quality on health and health service use among women. Medical Care, 37(9), 858-873.
• Polat D (2006). Evli bireylerin evlilik uyumları, aldatma eğilimleri ve çatışma eğilimleriarasındaki ilişkilerin bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Rahim MA (1983). A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict. Academy of Management Journal. 26(2), 368-376.
• Robles TF, Trombello JM, Slatcher RB, McGinn MM (2014). Marital quality and health: A Meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), 140-187.
• Rusbult CE (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A Test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172 - 186.
• Rusbult CE, Martz JM, Agnew CR (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357-391.
• Smith CG (1966). A Comparative analysis of some conditions and consequences of intra-organizational conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(49), 504-524.
• Spanier GB (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15-28.
• Stanley SM, Blumberg SL, Markman HJ (1999). Helping couples fight for their marriages: The PREP approach. R. Berger ve M. T. Hannah (Eds.), Preventive approaches in couples therapy içinde(ss. 279–303). Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.
• Soylu Y, Kağnıcı DY (2015). evlilik uyumunun empatik eğilim, iletişim ve çatışma çözme stillerine göre yordanması. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal 5(43) 44-54.
• Şendil G, Korkut Y (2008) Evli çiftlerdeki çift uyumu ve evlilik çatışmasının demografik özellikler açısından incelenmesi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Psikoloji Çalışmaları Dergisi, 28, 15-34.
• Thibaut JW, Kelley HH (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups, New York: Wiley.
• Thomas VG (1990). Determinants of global life happiness and marital happiness in dual-career black couples. Family Relations, 174-178.
• Uğurlu O(2003). Evli çiftlerde cinsiyet ayrımına ilişkin tutumlar, çatışma yönetim biçimleri ve evlilik uyumu arasındaki ilişki. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Ünal Ö, Akgün S (2020) Conflict resolution styles as predictors of marital adjustment and marital satisfaction: An actor–partner interdependence model. Journal of Family Studies, DOI: 10.1080/13229400.2020.1766542.
• Wheeler LA, Updegraff KA, Thayer SM (2010). Conflict resolution in Mexican‐origin couples: Culture, gender, and marital quality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(4), 991-1005.
• White LK, Booth A (1985). The transition to parenthood and marital quality. Journal of Family Issues, 6(4), 435-449.
• Yılmaz A (2001). Eşler arasındaki uyum: Kuramsal yaklaşımlar ve görgül çalışmalar. Aile ve Toplum Eğitim – Kültür ve Araştırma Dergisi, 1(4), 49-59.
• Young M, Riggs S, Kaminski P (2017). Role of marital adjustment in associations between romantic attachment and coparenting. Family Relations, 66(2), 331-345.
• Zara A, Yucel FG (2017). The effect of projective identification, conflict resolution styles, and gender roles on marital satisfaction. Klinik Psikiyatri Dergisi, 20(2), 76-83.