CIERPIAKOWSKA PSYCHOPATOLOGIA CHOMIKUJ PDF

Informacja o cookies. Wyszukiwarka zaawansowana. Nauki humanistyczne. Archeologia Filologie obce Filologia polska Historia Kulturoznawstwo. Nauki ekonomiczne. Nauki przyrodnicze.

Author:Vijas Arashirn
Country:Guatemala
Language:English (Spanish)
Genre:Education
Published (Last):24 October 2004
Pages:341
PDF File Size:20.24 Mb
ePub File Size:19.52 Mb
ISBN:603-6-13018-817-5
Downloads:8079
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader:Samugore



We'd like to understand how you use our websites in order to improve them. Register your interest. The results showed that ReSta, as opposed to RAS, predicted life satisfaction, emotional and psychological well-being, but it did not predict depressive symptoms, which were predicted by RAS. ReSta also significantly contributed to the higher accuracy of cross-validation of individuals to single and partnered groups when compared with RAS.

The Satisfaction with Relationship Status Scale as an analog scale measuring satisfaction with relationship status provides meaningful information in the prediction of life satisfaction, and emotional and psychological well-being when compared with RAS, which in turn is the only significant predictor of depressive symptoms.

A considerable number of prior studies have demonstrated not only the existence of a link between marital and relationship status and well-being, but also a link between marital and relationship satisfaction and well-being e. Lyubomirsky et al. At the same time, the issue concerning the quality of marital and nonmarital relationships of individuals — with whom single individuals are compared in regard to happiness life satisfaction or any other outcomes — seems to be ignored in a number of prior studies DePaulo and Morris One of the reasons explaining why relationship quality might have not been widely included in the analyses is the fact that relationship satisfaction can be reported only by partnered individuals.

Therefore, single individuals obviously cannot be compared with partnered individuals in regard to relationship satisfaction Levis et al. One of the attempts to overcome the lack of possibility of comparing single and partnered individuals in regard to relationship satisfaction is a recent study by Lehmann et al. Lehmann et al. It is a generic tool measuring satisfaction with relationship status i. The ReSta was intended to be a first analog scale which could allow to perform comparisons between single and partnered adults in the domain of satisfaction with their current relationship status.

Moreover, two recent studies by the present author replicated the results obtained by Lehmann et al. In addition, the current state of knowledge in the domain of psychosocial determinants of well-being has, however, also welcomed a recent study by Levis et al.

The procedure proposed by Levis et al. The new procedure elaborated by Levis et al. The Relationship Assessment Scale is an example of a brief tool designed for measuring global relationship satisfaction among individuals who are in different kinds of intimate relationships such as marital, cohabitating or dating relationships. As a result, RAS cannot provide data from single individuals who are not currently in a relationship and cannot report their experiences in regard to the issue of their satisfaction with a given relationship.

Considering on the one hand satisfaction with relationship status and a new scale measuring this construct i. ReSta , and on the other hand the possibility of incorporating marital or relationship satisfaction in analyses including both single and partnered individuals as measured, for example, with the use of the Relationship Assessment Scale RAS , we need to answer the question of which of these constructs may add more to the prediction of various outcomes, in particular such outcomes as well-being.

On the theoretical level, the distinction between status satisfaction and relationship satisfaction as constructs seems to be clear since status satisfaction refers to the degree to which an individual is satisfied with his or her relationship status Lehmann et al. At the same time, even at an intuitive level, these constructs seem to be somehow related.

Is status satisfaction a broader concept that reflects in its relationship satisfaction reported by partnered individuals? These questions encouraged the present author to focus on incremental validity of the Satisfaction with Relationship Status Scale ReSta by Lehmann et al. The current study builds on prior research by Lehmann et al. The current investigation using a cross-sectional and longitudinal design over a lag of two months was intended to determine the incremental validity of ReSta as compared with one of the most commonly used measures of relationship satisfaction, namely the Relationship Assessment Scale RAS; Hendrick The current study focuses only on the following selected dimensions of incremental validity see Haynes and Lench : 1 Incremental discriminant validity , that is, the degree to which ReSta would not exhibit high degree of shared variance with measures of dissimilar constructs here with relationship satisfaction ; 2 Incremental criterion validity , that is, the degree to which ReSta accounts for a higher proportion of variance in a criterion measure i.

In addition, the current study followed the procedure by Levis et al. Rydz and Ramsz related to their well-being e. Martikainen It is an important extension of the studies by Lehmann et al. Moreover, the current study also offers an excellent opportunity to verify the results obtained by Levis et al. The characteristics of the sample used in the study by Levis et al.

Four hundred questionnaires were originally distributed. Of these, 56 participants were removed because of incomplete data, yielding a final sample of participants. Participants were not offered any compensation for their participation in wave 1 and wave 2. The sample was In this sample, individuals One hundred and twenty nine participants The average time of being in a relationship duration of partnered status was Among single individuals, the average time of remaining single duration of single status was At a 2-month follow-up T2 , the sample consisted of participants drawn from the sample used in wave 1.

Of eligible participants in wave 1, individuals declared their willingness to participate in wave 2 after a 2-month interval. Of these participants, 24 resigned from participation in the follow-up assessment.

Therefore, the response rate for wave 2 was The final sample in wave 2 consisted of 47 single respondents With regard to gender, women constituted To be precise, there was a significant decrease in the percentage of male respondents who participated in wave 2 in comparison to wave 1, and there was a significant increase of female respondents in wave 2 in comparison to wave 1.

In regard to education attainment, there was a significant decrease in the percentage of respondents with high education in wave 2 in comparison to wave 1.

The ReSta consists of five items rated on a on a four-point scale: 0 not at all , 1 a little , 2 to quite some extent , 3 to a great extent. To assess general relationship satisfaction the Relationship Assessment Scale Hendrick Polish adaptation - Monfort et al.

This questionnaire consisted of 7 items rated by respondents on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 not well to 5 very well. This questionnaire includes 14 items assessing emotional, psychological, and social well-being.

Participants rated questions about how they have been feeling during the past month using a scale ranging from 0 never to 5 every day. It consists of 20 statements measuring the frequency of depressive symptoms which includes depressive affect 7 test items , absence of well-being 4 items , somatic symptoms 7 items , and interpersonal affect 2 items. Participants indicate the frequency of depressive symptoms in the past week using a four-point scale from 0 rarely, or not at all to 3 most of the time or all the time.

In order to determine incremental discriminant validity, a zero-order correlation matrix including two predictors i. As Table 1 demonstrates, in wave 1 there was a strong positive correlation between status satisfaction and relationship satisfaction, which suggested that these measures might be redundant and that each of them would not significantly contribute to the increased variance in criterion variables.

At the same time, in wave 2 no link between status satisfaction and relationship satisfaction was observed, which suggested that these measures could be independent. Table 1 also provides data on the independent strength of associations between status satisfaction and relationship satisfaction and each of criterion variables, that is, well-being outcomes.

Looking at the data shown in Table 1 with regard to the strength of significant correlations, it may be indicated that status satisfaction in wave 1 was more strongly correlated with life satisfaction and emotional well-being than relationship satisfaction, which in turn was more strongly correlated with psychological well-being and depressive symptoms. In turn, in wave 2, significant correlations were observed only between status satisfaction and life satisfaction, emotional and psychological well-being, and none of the correlations between relationship satisfaction and well-being outcomes emerged to be significant.

The next step in the analytic strategy was aimed to determine whether adding a new measure i. ReSta to an existing measure of relationship satisfaction i. RAS would significantly contribute to the prediction of well-being outcomes, or whether a combination of these measures would strengthen this prediction see Haynes and Lench Guided by these questions, a hierarchical regression analysis was performed separately for each of the criterion variables, that is for four well-being outcomes measured at T1 and T2.

In the first step of the analysis, a comparison measure, RAS, was introduced, whereas in the second step ReSta was introduced. At the same time, the analysis was preceded by the transformation of relationship satisfaction into z-score as proposed by Levis et al.

To be precise, since relationship satisfaction was examined only among partnered participants, standardized z-scores from RAS were recorded for partnered individuals, whereas for single participants, a score of 0 was recorded.

This way the interaction variable was constructed and introduced into the hierarchical regression analysis. Therefore, the regression coefficient of the interaction term reflected the changes in life satisfaction, emotional and psychological well-being, and depression scores associated with a 1 standard deviation change in total RAS scores. This transformation of relationship satisfaction into z-score allowed for the inclusion of this variable in the analysis performed both on single and partnered individuals.

Furthermore, this step of the analysis also included the determination of the difference in R 2 2 i. With respect to life satisfaction at T1 in the second step of the analysis, both z-score relationship satisfaction and status satisfaction significantly predicted life satisfaction; however, the standardized coefficient was higher for status satisfaction, indicating its stronger association with life satisfaction.

At the same time, the percentage of variance in life satisfaction explained by both measures was With respect to emotional well-being at T1, in the second step of the analysis the only significant predictor of emotional well-being was status satisfaction, and the percentage of variance in life satisfaction explained by status satisfaction was With respect to psychological well-being at T1, in the final step of the analysis both z-score relationship satisfaction and status satisfaction significantly predicted psychological well-being; however, the standardized coefficient was higher for status satisfaction, indicating its stronger association with psychological well-being.

The percentage of variance in psychological well-being explained by both measures was Finally, in the domain of depressive symptoms at T1, in the second step of the analysis the only significant predictor of depressive symptoms was z-score relationship satisfaction, with higher relationship satisfaction related to lower depressive symptoms.

The data in Table 2 also provide results concerning the incremental predictive validity assessed by the use of longitudinal data, that is, the prediction of well-being outcomes at T2 from relationship satisfaction at T1 Step 1 and status satisfaction at T1 Step 2.

As Table 2 shows, with respect to life satisfaction at T2, similarly as in wave 1, both z-score relationship satisfaction and status satisfaction significantly predicted life satisfaction; however, the standardized coefficient was higher for status satisfaction, indicating its stronger association with life satisfaction. With respect to emotional well-being at T2, in the second step of the analysis both z-score relationship satisfaction and status satisfaction significantly predicted emotional well-being; however, the standardized coefficient was higher for status satisfaction, indicating its stronger association with emotional well-being.

The percentage of variance in emotional well-being explained by both measures was In regard to psychological well-being at T2, in the second step of the analysis both z-score relationship satisfaction and status satisfaction significantly predicted psychological well-being; however, the standardized coefficient was higher for z-score relationship satisfaction.

Finally, in the domain of depressive symptoms at T2, in the second step of the analysis the only significant predictor of depressive symptoms was z-score relationship satisfaction, with higher relationship satisfaction related to lower depressive symptoms.

In the final step of the analysis, incremental discriminative validity was investigated by the employment of a discriminant function analysis in order to compare the degree to which ReSta accurately identifies persons placed into single and partnered groups at T1 and T2 with the degree to which RAS accurately identifies persons placed into single and partnered groups at T1 and T2.

Using data from wave 1, the discriminant function analysis demonstrated that when ReSta was used, In turn, when ReSta was used in wave 2, The current two-wave study drew upon two recent studies which contributed to new knowledge in the field on psychosocial determinants of well-being.

At the same time, a study by Levis et al. These two studies touch upon the issue of incremental validity of the scale ReSta designed by Lehmann et al. Guided by this question, the current study intended to investigate the selected dimensions of incremental validity of ReSta in comparison to RAS when assessing general relationship satisfaction. First, in the domain of incremental discriminant validity of ReSta, a zero-order correlation matrix including status satisfaction and relationship satisfaction as two predictors and four well-being outcomes as criterion variables measured at wave 1 and wave 2 was examined.

Using cross-sectional data, it was determined that status satisfaction and relationship satisfaction are highly positively correlated; however, when using longitudinal data, the link did not emerge to be significant, pointing to the independence of these constructs.

The same correlation matrix demonstrated stronger correlations between life satisfaction and emotional well-being than between relationship satisfaction and these outcomes in wave 1, and stronger correlations between relationship satisfaction with psychological well-being and depressive symptoms than between status satisfaction and these outcomes.

At the same time, in wave 2 only status satisfaction was related to life satisfaction, emotional and psychological well-being, whereas relationship satisfaction was not related to any of the well-being outcomes. Second, incremental criterion validity was investigated when using cross-sectional data, as well as predictive validity was assessed using longitudinal data.

AN ATLAS OF METAZOAN PARASITES IN ANIMAL TISSUES PDF

Szustrowa T. - Swobodne techniki diagnostyczne.pdf

We'd like to understand how you use our websites in order to improve them. Register your interest. The results showed that ReSta, as opposed to RAS, predicted life satisfaction, emotional and psychological well-being, but it did not predict depressive symptoms, which were predicted by RAS. ReSta also significantly contributed to the higher accuracy of cross-validation of individuals to single and partnered groups when compared with RAS. The Satisfaction with Relationship Status Scale as an analog scale measuring satisfaction with relationship status provides meaningful information in the prediction of life satisfaction, and emotional and psychological well-being when compared with RAS, which in turn is the only significant predictor of depressive symptoms. A considerable number of prior studies have demonstrated not only the existence of a link between marital and relationship status and well-being, but also a link between marital and relationship satisfaction and well-being e.

HINDWARE CATALOGUE 2015 PDF

Promocje w Księgarni Internetowej PWN

To browse Academia. Skip to main content. By using our site, you agree to our collection of information through the use of cookies. To learn more, view our Privacy Policy. Log In Sign Up. Emilia Soroko. Lidia Cierpialkowska.

Related Articles