doctoral defenseluanacunhaferreira2013

Faculdade de Psicologia da Universidade de Lisboa Faculdade de Psicologia e Ciências da Educação

da Universidade de Coimbra

Intimacy and sexual desire in couple relationships:

The paradox of couple differentiation

Luana Cunha das Neves Teixeira Ferreira

Supervisors: Isabel Narciso, PhD & Rosa Novo, PhD

Interuniversity Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology: Family Psychology and Intervention

December 19th, 2013

Couple sexuality: neglected research

theme

Desire & Intimacy:essential to couple

satisfaction

Individual; college–age

samples

Focus on sexual frequency and other

narrow variables

Lack of studies investigating associations

Definition and assessment problems regarding construct.

Clinical models of couple therapy: Increase emotional intimacy and desire will follow

Intimacy increases ? (Acker & Davies, 1992, Baumeister &

Bratslavsky, 1999)

Sexual desire decreases

(Basson, 2002; Regan & Bersheid, 1999)

Theoretical Framework

Ferreira, L. C., Narciso, I., & Novo, R. F. (2012). Intimacy, sexual desire and differentiation in couplehood: A theoretical and methodological review. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 38(3), 263–80.

?

Can ‘too much intimacy’ dampen desire?

No studies addressing these

models

Differentiation of self (DoS): The ability to maintain a sense of autonomy while in a deep

intimate relationship

How can differentiation of self contribute to the understanding of the association

between intimacy and desire?

Why do healthy couples with high emotional intimacy also report low desire?

Ferreira, L. C., Narciso, I., & Novo, R. F. (2012). Intimacy, sexual desire and differentiation in couplehood: A theoretical and methodological review. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 38(3), 263–80.

Theoretical Framework

Initial question

How are the processes of

intimacy and differentiation of self

defined and articulated,

and in which ways do they associate with

sexual desire and couple satisfaction?

GenderCohabitation

duration ChildrenAge

Post-positivism

Eco-systemic theory

Social construccionism

Systemic complexity

Social experienceLanguage Language

Sensitizing concepts

Lived reality

Patterns

Chaos

Context Networks

Circularity

Multiverse reality

Communication

Information

HeuristicsDevelopment

Interaction

Conceptual Framework

Couples Individuals in a couples relationship

Joint couple interview:Intimacy; Sexual desire Differentiation of

self; Trajectories; Inter-relationships

Intimacy

N=428

Self report Questionnaire:Intimacy (MSIS); Differentiation of self (DSI-R);

Sexual desire (HISD); Couples satisfaction (EASAVIC)

Desire & Differentiation

Couple Discrepancies

Predictive models

Qualitative studies Quantitative studies

N=33

Validation studies

N=492

Methodological Framework

Qualitative studies

Qualitative analysis: Constructivist grounded theory

Study 1

Ferreira, L. C., Narciso, I., & Novo, R. F. (2013). Authenticity, work and change: A qualitative study on couple intimacy Families, Relationships and Societies, 2 (3), 339-354. 

How is intimacy defined by couples who are reflecting together on their experience of intimacy?

Which influences do they perceive as impacting their couple intimacy ?

COUPLE INTIMACY

Methods

• Constructivist grounded theory• Semi-structured, joint interviews• N=33 couples

Study 1 + Study 2

COUPLE INTIMACYSelected results

What is couple intimacy ?

Authenticity

TrustSharing

autonomy

understanding

priva

cy

COUPLE INTIMACY

Work

Limits

Change

Selected resultsWhat factors are perceived as

impacting intimacy?

Work schedule (-)

Feeling rewarded (+)

Boundaries with subsystems (-)

(children, family of origin)

Routine (-)

New experiences (+)

Study 2

Ferreira, L. C., Fraenkel. P., Narciso, I., & Novo, R. F. Is committed desire intentional? A qualitative exploration of sexual desire and differentiation of self in couples (submitted) 

How do couples perceive the articulation and development of sexual desire and differentiation of

self through the couple relationship?

Which factors do couples perceive as influencing desire and differentiation processes and trajectories?

SEXUAL DESIRE AND DIFFERENTIATION

Desire factors

• Enhancing:• Change• Autonomy• Ease

• Disturbing:• Stress• Conflict• Children

Desire strategies

• Innovation• Effort• Sharing• Autonomy

Differentiation strategies

• Fostering personal interests

• Investing in a positive connection

• Enhancing personal integrity

Selected results

SEXUAL DESIRE AND DIFFERENTIATIONSelected results

Quantitative studies

Quantitative measures

Variable Self-report measureCronbach

Alpha α

Intimacy Miller Social Intimacy Scale - MSIS

Miller & Lefcourt (1982), PV: Ferreira, Narciso & Novo (2010)

.92

Sexual desire Hurlbert Index of sexual Desire - HISD

Hurlbert & Apt (1992); PV: Ferreira, Narciso & Novo (2010)

.95

Differentiation of self (DoS)

Differentiation of Self Inventory Revised - DSI-R

Skowron & Friedlander (1998); PV: Relvas et al.(2013)

.95

Couple satisfaction

Scale for the Evaluation of Satisfaction in areas of Couple Life - EASAVIC

Narciso & Costa (1996)

.97

Study 3

Ferreira, L. C., Narciso, I., Novo, R. F., & Pereira, C. Partner’s similarity in differentiation of self contributes to higher couple sexual desire: A quantitative dyadic study. (submitted) 

How are differences and similarities between the

partners related to gender and to individual levels

of sexual desire, differentiation of self and couple

satisfaction?

DYADIC ASSOCIATIONS OF INTIMACY, DESIRE, DIFFERENTIATION AND COUPLE SATISFACTION

Methods• Quantitative analysis: • t-tests, correlations• multi-level hierarchical linear analysis • 2 levels: couple and individual

• Self-report questionnaires (MSIS; DSI-R; HISD)• N=33 couples

S 1

S 2S 1

Individual level

Couple level

Individual score (e.g., sexual desire)

Couple discrepancy score(i.e., Desire discrepancy score)

Couple average score(i.e., Couple average desire)

(S 1 + S 2) ÷ 2 │ S 1 - S 2│

DYADIC ASSOCIATIONS OF DESIRE, DIFFERENTIATION AND COUPLE SATISFACTION

Partners within a couple will show less discrepancy of DoS than unrelated individuals

Women will have the same chances of being the lower desire partners as men

Couple discrepancy regarding DoS will be inversely associated with individual desire

Average couple desire and DoS will be positively associated with average couple satisfaction.

Women reported lower desire than men

Similarity hypothesis not supported

Confirmed hypothesis

Satisfaction Desire + DoS

Hyp

othe

sis

Confirmed hypothesis

DoS similarity DesireDoS similarity predicted desire

DYADIC ASSOCIATIONS OF DESIRE, DIFFERENTIATION (DOS)AND COUPLE SATISFACTIONSelected results

DYADIC ASSOCIATIONS OF DESIRE, DIFFERENTIATION AND COUPLE SATISFACTIONSelected results: Multi-level analysis

The couple discrepancy of DoS negatively predicted individual sexual desire, even after controlling for sex and other variables.

Study 4

Ferreira, L. C., & Novo, R. F., Narciso, I., & Pereira, C. Predictors of sexual desire and couple satisfaction: Intimacy and differentiation of self in couple relationships. (submitted) 

How can sexual desire and intimacy explain the

potential contributes of differentiation of self for

couple satisfaction?

How do these relationships associate with gender?

PREDICTING SEXUAL DESIRE AND COUPLE SATISFACTION

Methods

• Qualitative analysis: • Structural equation modeling with latent variables• Multi-group analysis

• Self report questionnaires (MSIS; DSI-R; HISD; EASAVIC)

• N= 428 individuals in a committed relationship

Proposed model

PREDICTING SEXUAL DESIRE AND COUPLE SATISFACTIONSelected results

Alternative model

PREDICTING SEXUAL DESIRE AND COUPLE SATISFACTIONSelected results

Better representation of the psychological process involving the relationship between DoS and couple satisfaction.

PREDICTING SEXUAL DESIRE AND COUPLE SATISFACTIONSelected results

n men = 174

PREDICTING SEXUAL DESIRE AND COUPLE SATISFACTIONMulti-group analysis

n women = 264

Main contributes

• Empirically-based dimensional definition of intimacy • Strong perception of impact of the multiple subsystems• Diversity of sexual desire trajectories• Couples perception of differentiation of self processes and

trajectory• Structural role of DoS in desire, intimacy and couple satisfaction• Central role of sexual desire as a predictor of intimacy and

satisfaction

Research

Main contributes

Clinical

• Couples agentic posture (strategies vs spontaneity)• Integration of sharing and autonomy• Role of authenticity• Relevance on a dyadic perspective regarding desire issues in

couplehood. • Awareness of fusion might trigger the couple’s promotion of DoS

• Assessment: Work stress related factors in intimacy and desire• Prevention: Turning points in desire, intimacy and DoS

trajectories

Selected limitations

Cross-sectional study

Convenience samples• Low diversity sample: White, well-educated, heterosexual• Mostly satisfied couples• No assessment of psychopathology or therapeutic intervention

Quantitative studies• Multicollinearity; Interdependence• Lack of sub-scale analysis• DSI-R issues with the assessment of both high and low DoS• MSIS targeted love and affection dimensions of intimacy

Qualitative studies: Joint interview

Future studies

Longitudinal analysis of trajectories:

Diary records

Clinical samples:

Couples referred for therapy

Quantitative studies:

Actor partner interdependence models

Therapeutic processes of DoS, desire and intimacy:

Observational strategies

Balance between autonomy & togetherness• Risk regulating systems: self-protection vs connectedness goals • Interpersonal neurobiology

Faculdade de Psicologia da Universidade de Lisboa Faculdade de Psicologia e Ciências da Educação

da Universidade de Coimbra

Intimacy and sexual desire in couple relationships:

The paradox of couple differentiation

Luana Cunha das Neves Teixeira Ferreira

Supervisors: Isabel Narciso, PhD & Rosa Novo, PhD

Interuniversity Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology: Family Psychology and Intervention

December 19th, 2013