Adult Attachment and Male Aggression in Couple Relationships: The Demand-Withdraw Communication Pattern and Relationship Satisfaction as Mediators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines men's domestic aggression as a function of attachment insecurities, considering the mediating roles of the demand-withdraw communication pattern and relationship satisfaction. The sample included 55 Canadian men undergoing counseling for relationship difficulties including aggression. The men completed questionnaires assessing physical and psychological aggression, the two dimensions of attachment insecurity (anxiety over abandonment and avoidance of intimacy), the demand-withdraw communication pattern, relationship satisfaction, and social desirability (a control measure). As predicted, there was an association between attachment anxiety and aggression (both physical and psychological), which was mediated by the man demands/woman withdraws (MD/WW) pattern (as reported by the men). There was no evidence of mediation by the woman demands/man withdraws pattern, as reported by the men. Relationship satisfaction mediated the association between attachment anxiety and psychological (but not physical) aggression, but did not mediate the link between avoidance and aggression (physical or psychological). Limitations and clinical implications are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".