Dyadic perfectionism, communication patterns and relationship quality in couples
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and couples' negative communication patterns, particularly demandwithdraw and mutual avoidance-withholding patterns of communication, are among various factors that are associated with poor relationship quality. Individuals high in maladaptive dyadic perfectionism are inclined to believe that their romantic partner's performance always falls short of their high ideal expectations. Informed by Robins and Boldero's (2003) relational discrepancy theory, this study was designed to assess three primary questions: (a) How does maladaptive dyadic perfectionism relate to perceived relationship quality for both partners?; (b) How does maladaptive dyadic perfectionism relate to negative communication patterns between romantic partners?; and (c) Do negative communication patterns between partners mediate the association between maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and perceived relationship quality? Both partners in 113 heterosexual, monogamous, long-term romantic relationships were recruited from community resources and from the Psychology Department Participant Pool at the University of Windsor. All participants completed measures to assess dyadic perfectionism, communication patterns, relationship quality and other relationship variables. Structural Equation Modeling was used to assess hypotheses. Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) analyses indicated that actor but not partner effects were supported for men and women; maladaptive dyadic perfectionism in one partner was associated with their own perceptions of relationship quality, but not with their partner's perceptions of relationship quality. APIM analyses indicated that actor and partner effects between maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and communication were significant, with the exception of the partner effect between women's maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and men's reports of negative communication patterns. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Model analysis indicated that actoractor mediated effects were significant for men and women; reports of negative communication patterns by one partner partially explained the association between their own maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and their personal perceptions of relationship quality. The hybrid APIM and Common Fate Mediation Model analysis indicated that a couple's negative communication patterns mediated the association between maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and perceived relationship quality for both partners when communication was assessed as a latent common fate variable. Thus, couples' negative communication patterns partially explain the association between maladaptive dyadic perfectionism and perceived relationship quality and contribute to our understanding of how maladaptive dyadic perfectionism relates to relationship dynamics
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».