The Study on Event-specific Effect and Contexual Effect of Interactive Behavior of Newlywed Couples

Abstract

Abstract: To examine the different level of event-specific effect and contextual effect of interactive behavior of newlywed couple, 106 newlywed couples were videod when they discuss two problem solving and two social support topics in lab. IFIRS has been used to code couples' behaviors, discussion satisfaction and marital quality has been assessed to representative of event-spcific effect index and contextual effect index accordingly. The result demonstrated that 1)Wives were more negative than their husbands regardless of context, wives have more positive envolvement than husbands in her own problem solving and husbands social support interactions, wives have more positive emotions only in husbands social support context; 2)For event specific effects, wives' negativity have negative impacts on both wives and husbands' interaction satisfaction in husbands' problem solving and wives' social support contexts; husbands' negativity and positive emotions can predict his own interaction satisfaction in expected way when discussion of his own social support and problem solving topic accordingly; husbands' positive involvement can positively predict husbands and wives interaction satisfaction in husbands' problem solving and wives' problem solving context accordingly; 3)For contextual effects, husbands' positive involvement have both actor and actress effects in husbands' problem solving as well as wives' social support interaction, and only have actor effects in both wives' problem solving and husbands' social support contexts; wives positive emotions have positive influence on her own marital quality when discussion of husbands' problem solving topic; husbands' positive emotions as well as negativity can influence wives marital quality in expected way when talk about wives problem solving topic.

Key words: couple interactive behavior, event-specific effect, contextual effect, observational study

摘要： 采用观察法对106对新婚夫妻在问题解决和社会支持任务中的行为进行录像，并采用在中国被试中经过修订的IFIRS进行编码；以即时互动满意度和夫妻报告的婚姻质量分别作为即时效应和状态效应的预测指标，检验夫妻互动行为两种效应的不同。结果发现：（1）妻子在4个互动中的消极行为均显著高于丈夫；妻子在自己的问题解决和丈夫社会支持话题中的积极卷入显著高于丈夫，妻子的积极情绪在丈夫社会支持互动中显著高于丈夫。（2）就即时效应而言，妻子的消极行为在丈夫问题解决和自己的社会支持情境中均具有主客体效应；丈夫的消极行为和积极情绪分别在自己的社会支持和问题解决情境中具有主体效应；丈夫的积极卷入在丈夫和妻子问题解决情境中分别具有主体效应和客体效应。（3）就状态效应而言，丈夫的积极卷入在丈夫问题解决和妻子社会支持情境中均具有主客体效应，在妻子问题解决和丈夫社会支持中均具有主体效应；妻子的积极情绪在丈夫问题解决情境中具有主体效应，丈夫的积极情绪和消极行为在妻子问题解决情境中均具有客体效应。

关键词: 夫妻互动, 即时效应, 状态效应, 观察研究

CLC Number:

B849

Ju Xiaoyan, Li Xiaomin, Xie Qinghong, Cao Hongjian, Fang Xiaoyi. The Study on Event-specific Effect and Contexual Effect of Interactive Behavior of Newlywed Couples[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2015, 13(2): 162-170.

琚晓燕, 李晓敏, 谢庆红, 曹洪健, 方晓义. 新婚夫妻互动行为对婚姻质量的即时效应和状态效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2015, 13(2): 162-170.

References

[1] 琚晓燕.(2013). 城市新婚夫妻互动行为与婚姻质量的关系及其影响机制. 北京师范大学博士学位论文.
[2] 琚晓燕, 谢庆红, 曹洪健, 方晓义, 刘宣文.(2013). 夫妻互动行为差异及其对婚姻质量的影响——基于一项观察研究. 中国临床心理学杂志, 21(5), 790-794.
[3] 吴明隆.(2009). 结构方程模型: AMOS 的操作与应用. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社.
[4] Ball, F. L. J., Cowan, P., & Cowan, C. P.(1995). Who's got the power? Gender differences in partners' perceptions of influence during marital problem-solving discussions. Family Process, 34, 303-321.
[5] Christensen, A., Eldridge, K., Catta Preta, A. B., Lim, V. R., & Santagata, R.(2006). Cross Cultural Consistency of the Demand/Withdraw Interaction Pattern in Couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(4), 1029-1044.
[6] Cook, W. L., & Kenny, D. A.(2005). The actor-partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(2), 101-109.
[7] Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H.(2010). Of memes and marriage: Toward a positive relationship science. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(1), 4-24.
[8] Fredrickson, B. L.(1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2, 300-319.
[9] Fredrickson, B. L.(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218-226.
[10] Gottman, J. M.(1979). Marital interaction: Expemental investigations. New York: Academic Press.
[11] Gottman, J. M.(1994). What predicts divorce? The relationship between marital process and marital outcomes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[12] Gottman, J. M., & Krokoff, L. J.(1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 57(1), 47.
[13] Gottman, J. M., & Notarius, C. I.(2000). Decade review: Observing marital interaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 927-947.
[14] Heavey, C. L., Christensen, A., & Malamuth, N. M.(1995). The longitudinal impact of demand and withdrawal during marital conflict. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 797-801.
[15] Heavey, C. L., Layne, C., & Christensen, A.(1993). Gender and conflict structure in marital interaction: A replication and extension. Journal of Clinical and Counseling Psychology, 61, 16-27.
[16] Heyman, R. E., Hunt-Martorano, A. N., Malik, J., & Smith Slep, A. M.(2009). Desired Change in Couples: Gender Differences and Effects on Communication. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(4), 474-484.
[17] Jacobson, N. S.(1985). The role of observation measures in marital therapy outcome research. Behavioral Assessment, 7, 287-308.
[18] Julien, D., Markman, H. J., & Lindahl, K. M.(1989). A comparison of a global and a microanalytic coding system: Implications for future trends in studying interactions. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 81-100.
[19] Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N.(1995). The Longitudinal Course of Marital quality and stability: A review of theory method and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3-34.
[20] Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L.(2006). Dyadic data analysis. The Guilford Press.
[21] Kurdek, L. A.(1998). The nature and predictors of the trajectory of change in marital quality over the first 4 years of marriage for first-married husbands and wives. Journal of Family Psychology, 12(4), 494-510.
[22] Kurdek, L. A.(1999). The nature and predictors of the trajectory of change in marital quality for husbands and wives over the first 10 years of marriage. Developmental Psychology, 35(5), 1283-1296.
[23] Markman, H. J., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., Ragan, E. P., & Whitton, S. W.(2010). The premarital communication roots of marital distress and divorce: The first five years of marriage. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(3), 289.
[24] McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P.(1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 30-46.
[25] Noller, P., Feeney, J. A., Bonnell, D., & Callan, V. J.(1994). A longitudinal study of conflict in early marriage. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 233-252.
[26] Norton, R.(1983). Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 141-151.
[27] Pasch, L. A., & Bradbury, T. N.(1998). Social support, conflict and the development of marital dysfunction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(2), 219-230.
[28] Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L.(2003). Toward a positive psychology of relationships. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt(Eds.), Flourishing: Positive Psychology and the Life Well-lived(pp. 129-159). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
[29] Sanford, K.(2012). The communication of emotion during conflict in married couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 26(3), 297-307.
[30] Williamson, H. C., Bradbury, T. N., Trail, T. E., & Karney, B. R. (2011). Factor analysis of the Iowa Family Interaction Rating Scales. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(6), 993-999.