Actor-Partner Effects: Attachment and Psychological Aggression in Romantic

Relationships

Elizabeth A. Goncy & Manfred H. M. van Dulmen

Kent State UniversityDepartment of Psychology

Acknowledgement

This project was partially funded by the Center of the Treatment and Study of Traumatic Stress (Summa Health Systems/Kent State University).

Psychological Aggression

High frequency Definition:

Relational acts Causing emotional or psychological harm

Consequences

Attachment Theory Framework for understanding

interpersonal relationship (Bowlby, 1977) Internal working models Attachment styles

Limitations of Previous Work

Primary focus on physical aggression Categorized attachment scores Examination at individual level

Aims of the Current Study

To investigate the association between attachment behavior and psychological aggression Test using the Actor-Partner

Interdependence Model To determine if effects are different

for males or females

Sample

Transitions Into Adulthood and Romantic Relationship study

18 – 25 year olds in a self-defined romantic relationship of 4 months or longer

This study is limited to Wave 1 questionnaires.

Sample Demographics

115 Heterosexual couples Age (M=19.78, SD=1.65) 89% Caucasian 50% in relationship longer than 12

months

Measures Experiences in Close Relationships Scale -

Revised (Fraley et al., 2000) Anxiety scale

Females M = 1.62 Males M = 1.16

Avoidant scale Females M = 1.65 Males M = 1.22

Correlations Females r = 0.54, p < 0.01 Males r = 0.52, p < 0.01

Measures

Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory (Wolfe et al., 2001) Emotional/verbal abuse subscale

Females M = 1.94 Males M = 1.77 r = 0.513, p < 0.01

Actor Partner Interdependence Model (APIM, Kashy & Kenny, 2000)

Independence assumption violated What can the APIM tell us?

Actor effect Partner effect Couple effect

APIM

Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Attachment

Male Attachment Male Emotional/

Verbal Abuse

Actor

Actor

Partner

Partn

er

Actor Effects – If Actor > 0 Partner Effects – If Partner > 0 Couple Effects – If Actor not significantly different from Partner

Results

Conducted in Mplus 5.1 Followed procedures laid out by

Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006

Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Avoidance

Male AvoidanceMale Emotional/

Verbal Abuseβ = 0.14, SE = 0.10, ns

β = 0.17, SE = 0.10+

β = -0.05, SE = 0.20, ns

β = 0.21, SE = 0.10 *

* p < 0.05 + trendns = non-significant

Actor

Actor

Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Avoidance

Male AvoidanceMale Emotional/

Verbal Abuseβ = 0.14, SE = 0.10, ns

β = 0.17, SE = 0.10+

β = -0.05, SE = 0.20, ns

β = 0.21, SE = 0.10 *

* p < 0.05 + trendns = non-significant

Partner

Partner

Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.04, ns No

Avoidance Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.04, ns No

Are there differences in partner effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 2.955, p = 0.08 Trend

Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Anxiety

Male AnxietyMale Emotional/

Verbal Abuse β = -0.38, SE = 0.08*

β = -0.36, SE = 0.08*

β = 0.12, SE = 0.09, ns

β = -0.26, SE = 0.08*

* p < 0.05ns = non-significant

Actor

Actor

Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Anxiety

Male AnxietyMale Emotional/

Verbal Abuse β = -0.38, SE = 0.08*

β = -0.36, SE = 0.08*

β = 0.12, SE = 0.09, ns

β = -0.26, SE = 0.08*

* p < 0.05ns = non-significant

Partner

Partner

Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Female Anxiety

Male AnxietyMale Emotional/

Verbal Abuse β = -0.38, SE = 0.08*

β = -0.36, SE = 0.08*

β = 0.12, SE = 0.09, ns

β = -0.26, SE = 0.08*

* p < 0.05ns = non-significant

COUPLE

Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.41, ns No

Anxiety Emotional/Verbal Abuse

Are there differences in actor effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 0.41, ns No!

Are there differences in partner effects for males and females? Χ2(1) = 8.39, p < 0.05 Yes!

Conclusion

Avoidance: Partner Effect for Females Males avoidance predicts lower female

use of emotional and verbal abuse Somewhat inconclusive

Anxiety: Actor Effect for Males Couple Effect for Females

Future Directions

Integrate findings from observational data

Integrate multi-informant Partner-rated Emotional and Verbal

Abuse

Contact Information Elizabeth Goncy, MA

Kent State University Department of Psychology Kent OH 44242 email: egoncy@kent.eduhttp://dept.kent.edu/psychology/ADPlab/Index.html