Investigating the Effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) on Emotional Empathy, Adaptability, Alexithymia, and Marital Functioning in Incompatible Young Couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Incompatibility in young couples and its resolution failure are among the main causes of emotional separation and divorce, which have several personal and social consequences. The present study aimed to examine the impact of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) on emotional empathy, adaptability, alexithymia, and couple functioning in incompatible young couples. Methods This randomized controlled clinical trial utilized a two-group research design with a pretest-posttest and a 6-month follow-up. The research sample consisted of incompatible young couples from Yazd County, Iran, who had been referred to this city’s counseling and divorce centers in 2023. Based on the inclusion criteria and using simple random sampling, 52 couples (104 individuals) were selected and randomly assigned to the experimental group (ACT) and the control group. Participants were assessed before and after the intervention using the following tools: Mehrabian and Epstein’s empathy questionnaire, Olson’s adaptability and cohesion questionnaire, Toronto alexithymia scale, and the ENRICH couples’ satisfaction questionnaire. The experimental group received a specified ACT protocol consisting of 8 sessions lasting 60 to 90 minutes each week. The project executor monitored the control group weekly, but no specific therapeutic protocol was implemented for them. After the follow-up phase, the treatment protocol was also applied to them. Finally, the data were analyzed using SPSS software, version 29. Results The analysis of covariance indicated significant differences in the pretest and posttest stages in the mean scores of the experimental and control groups in the variables of emotional empathy, adaptability, alexithymia, and couple functioning (P>0.01). Conclusion We found that the ACT intervention led to increased emotional empathy, decreased alexithymia, and a modulation of adaptability and couple functioning in incompatible young couples. Therefore, ACT can be utilized for incompatible couples seeking assistance at counseling and divorce centers.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".