Search

In this paper, we investigate the association between evaluating a romantic partner as deviating from relationship ideals (i.e., ideal-partner discrepancy) and a widely studied form of self-regulatory behavior in romantic relationships—accommodation (i.e., inhibiting one's own destructive relationship behaviors and enacting constructive behaviors). We also consider the moderating role of relationship commitment. Two studies tested these associations using self-reports (Study 1, N = 450 individuals) and by observing accommodation behaviors in couples (Study 2, N = 116 dyads). Across both studies, a negative-ideal partner discrepancy (i.e., a partner is deemed as falling below ideals) was associated with more accommodation when relationship commitment was high than for when it was low. The findings provide novel insights into understanding accommodation behavior in romantic relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Exposure to gender‐related minority stressors, the negative experiences and beliefs that stem from anti‐trans stigma increases transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people's vulnerability to experiencing poor mental health outcomes. This study examined if the relationships between experiences of minority stress and mental health outcomes were mediated by early maladaptive schemas: mental representations shaping the way people view themselves, others and the world. Drawing from a schema therapy perspective, the study additionally examined if caregivers' failure to meet TGD people's core emotional needs was associated with mental health outcomes and if schemas similarly mediated these relationships. A total of 619 TGD adults completed an online survey about early maladaptive schemas, core emotional needs, gender‐related minority stress and psychological distress and wellbeing. Causal mediation analyses indicated that caregivers who did not meet TGD people's core emotional needs and greater experiences of minority stress were associated with increased distress and lower wellbeing. These relationships were mediated by schema severity, particularly the disconnection and rejection and impaired autonomy domains. These findings provide empirical support for the schema therapy model's assumption that unmet core emotional needs are associated with schema formation. For TGD people, maladaptive beliefs about the self, others and world can form in response to manifestations of anti‐trans stigma within the individual, their interpersonal relationships, community and broader society. Caregivers' failure to meet needs, plus experiences of minority stress throughout the individual's system, leads to greater distress and lower wellbeing; however, clinical interventions targeting schemas may improve outcomes for this at‐risk group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Emotion regulation is an integral part of the schema therapy model. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to synthesize the evidence on the associations between early maladaptive schemas (EMSs), difficulties with emotion regulation and alexithymia. Method: PsycINFO, PubMed and CINAHL Complete databases were searched on 28 May 2022 and 3 February 2023 in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses. Included studies were in English, in peer‐reviewed journals and reported on the association between one or more of the 18 EMSs or five schema domains and emotion regulation difficulties or alexithymia. Methodological quality was assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross‐Sectional Studies. Meta‐analyses were conducted to examine difficulties with emotion regulation and alexithymia as correlates of each EMS and domain. Results: A total of 19 studies published between 2008 and 2022 were included (Pooled N = 5957). Difficulties with emotion regulation were positively correlated with all 18 EMSs (range: entitlement r(7) =.28, 95% CI [.13,.42] to negativity pessimism r(5) =.53, 95% CI [.23,.74]) and schema domains (range: impaired limits r(5) =.34, 95% CI [.08,.56] to disconnection rejection r(5) =.44, 95% CI [.33,.73]). Alexithymia was positively correlated with the other‐directedness domain (r(2) =.40, 95% CI [.09,.64]) and 16 of the 18 EMSs (range: unrelenting standards r(5) =.21, 95% CI [.12,.28] to emotional inhibition r(5) =.50, 95% CI [.34,.63]). Conclusions: The findings suggested that almost all 18 EMSs are implicated in emotion regulation difficulties and alexithymia, particularly those relating to unmet needs for attachment and autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this meta‐analysis was to determine whether relationship self‐regulation (changing aspects of the self for the sake of the relationship) or partner regulation (changing the partner for the sake of the self/relationship) was more strongly associated with romantic relationship quality. Twenty studies (5 on relationship self‐regulation, 15 on partner regulation; N = 15,563) were included. A moderate positive association was found between relationship self‐regulation and relationship quality (r =.42). A weak positive association was found between positive partner regulation and relationship quality (r =.14). A negative association was found between negative partner regulation strategies and relationship quality (r = −.22). Partner regulation strategies were unlikely to be successful in prompting change in targeted partners. A weak positive association was found between positive strategies and regulation success (r =.10), and a weak negative association was found between negative strategies and regulation success (r = −.09). Thus, relationship self‐regulation is more strongly associated with relationship quality than partner regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two key processes in romantic relationships—power and dominance—can contribute to relationship disruption, but the association between these variables is complex. Elucidating the association between power and dominance during the COVID‐19 pandemic is particularly important given the economic, social, and health‐related stressors that pose a risk to relationship health. We examined associations between power, stress, and dominance by recruiting 1813 participants to complete an initial online survey at the beginning of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Participants were contacted 10 and 22 months later to complete follow‐up surveys. Results revealed two main effects: individuals who had greater relationship power and experienced more COVID‐19‐related stressors than other people engaged in more dominance behaviors. A significant curvilinear effect revealed that at low levels of power, power was not associated with dominance behaviors. However, once power surpassed low levels, individuals with more power engaged in more dominance behaviors. Finally, people engaged in more dominance behaviors when they experienced more power and stress compared to their own average (i.e., within‐person effects) during the pandemic. Implications for theories of power, dominance, and relationship disruption and distress are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although negative anticipatory emotions are typically seen as risk factors for poorer psychological outcomes over COVID‐19, emotion theorists suggest that this risk may be attenuated if balanced by the experience of positive emotion. Thus, the current study examined whether interactions between positive and negative anticipatory emotions were concurrently associated with psychological distress and greater personal wellbeing/posttraumatic growth (PTG) at three distinct periods (i.e., pre‐lockdown, during lockdown, post‐lockdown), and whether associations varied by these three COVID‐19 time periods. The study utilizes two large longitudinal Australian samples, surveyed in 2020 prior to, during, and after a strict 4‐month lockdown that occurred in Australia. Overall, positive emotions attenuated the adverse psychological outcomes arising from higher levels of negative emotion (i.e., higher psychological distress and lower personal wellbeing). Observed effects varied according to COVID‐19 threat exposure. Specifically, the interaction was significantly associated with psychological distress prior to the lockdown for Sample 2, and during the lockdown for both samples. The interaction was significantly associated with wellbeing (Sample 2) prior to, and during, the lockdown but only marginally associated post‐lockdown. The interaction, however, was not significantly associated with PTG (Sample 1). The results suggest that it is valuable for future research to consider greater emotional complexity (i.e., mixed emotions) over COVID‐19, and other stressors more generally, to encompass a more nuanced understanding of resilience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of the Study: The aged care industry experiences high rates of staff turnover. Staff turnover has significant implications for the quality of care provided to care recipients and the financial costs to care agencies. In this study, we applied a model of intention to quit to identify the contextual and personal factors that shape aged care staff's intention to quit. Design and Methods: A sample of 208 aged care staff, including nurses, personal care assistants, allied health professionals, and managers completed a self-report questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed intention to quit, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, self-esteem, stressors, stress, and supervisor support. Results: The findings largely supported the model. Specifically, job commitment, job satisfaction, and work stressors directly influenced intentions to quit, although work stressors and supervisor support demonstrated numerous indirect associations on quitting intentions. Implications: The findings suggest that aged care service providers can modify aged care workers' intentions to quit by reducing job stressors and increasing supervisor support.

Research into self‐regulation and partner regulation strategies has largely involved parallel lines of research, thus, it is difficult to determine the relative contribution of both forms of regulation when it comes to relationship outcomes. Therefore, the question remains as to which form of regulation is more strongly associated with relationship quality; is it more important to focus on adaptive self‐regulation or adaptive strategies to regulate one's partner? The current research addresses this important gap by comparing the relative associations of adaptive self‐regulation and adaptive partner regulation strategies on romantic relationship quality. A community sample of mixed gender couples (N = 114) who were predominantly satisfied with their current relationships – but nonetheless still experienced relationship conflict – were administered self‐report assessments of various self‐regulation and partner regulation strategies as well as a measure of relationship quality. Couples also participated in a videotaped discussion of an unresolved relationship issue that was scored by trained coders for verbal and nonverbal indicators of self‐regulation and partner regulation strategies. Actor–partner interdependence modeling revealed that for both men and women, adaptive self‐regulation strategies were positively associated with their own evaluations of relationship quality as well as their partner's relationship quality. In contrast, engaging in adaptive partner regulation strategies was not significantly associated with men's or women's own, or their partner's relationship quality. Findings highlight the importance of focusing on self‐regulation in relationships, as it is these strategies, over partner regulation strategies, that have more positive implications for the relationship quality experienced by typically satisfied couples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the popularity of schema therapy, there exist several important gaps in research on the schema therapy model and its effectiveness. The number of gaps makes it difficult to determine the research areas of the highest strategic priority to advance schema therapy. The objective of this study was to establish consensus among schema therapy clinicians and researchers on the priority areas for future schema therapy research. A panel of experts in schema therapy (43 clinicians and 13 researchers) participated in a Delphi consensus study. The research areas rated were developed by interviewing the founder of schema therapy, Jeffrey Young, conducting a focus group with the executive board of the International Society for Schema Therapy and screening recent reviews on schema therapy for recommendations for future research. The panel rated 81 research areas in terms of priority across three rounds. Nineteen research areas were rated by 75% of the panel as 'Very high priority' or 'High priority'. These priorities reflected four broad themes: (1) schema therapy constructs and measures, (2) the theoretical assumptions underlying schema therapy, (3) schema therapy and theory in relation to different contexts and outcomes and (4) schema therapy effectiveness and mechanisms of change. The findings are important for establishing a clear research agenda for the future of schema therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]