Keywords
perceived partner responsiveness and insensitivity scale
close relationships
validity
reliability
How to Cite
Abstract
Perceived partner responsiveness measures have been generally developed without demonstrating construct validity, based on a one-dimensional conceptualization in line with the practical needs of researchers. Based on these limitations, Crasta et al. (2021) have introduced the Perceived Responsiveness and Insensitivity Scale (PRIS) to the literature as an optimized measure with demonstrated validity-reliability. The current study aimed to examine the validity-reliability of the PRIS Turkish form (PRIS-TR) in a sample including individuals with romantic relationships. Participants filled out the research scale set via an online platform. 465 participants with romantic relationships with at least 6 months were randomly divided into two sample groups (n1=336 and n2=129). The mean age of the first sample was 30.07 and of the second sample was 29.54. 75.9% of the first and 81.40% of the second samples included women. Construct validity and internal consistency reliability findings in the first sample confirmed the two-factor structure of PRIS-TR, namely Responsiveness and Insensitivity, and showed that both factors had high reliability. The criterion validity findings revealed that there were significant relationships among Responsiveness, Insensitivity, individual characteristics, and relationship dynamics, in the expected directions in the second sample. Incremental validity findings showed the significant contribution of Insensitivity to relationship dynamics after controlling for Responsiveness in the second sample. Thus, the current research supports that PRIS-TR is a valid-reliable measure.
References
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: infant care and the growth of love. Johns Hopkins Press.
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E. ve Wall, S. N. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Psychology Press.
Alonso-Ferres, M., Righetti, F., Valor-Segura, I. ve Expósito, F. (2021). How power affects emotional communication during relationship conflicts: The role of perceived partner responsiveness. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(7), 1203-1215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550621996496
Araz, A., Güngör, D. ve Aşçı, E. (2019). Turkish adaptation of the positive–negative relationship quality (PN- RQ) scale: A reliability and validity study. Behavioral Sciences, 9(9), 100. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201904.0110.v1
Bar-Kalifa, E. ve Rafaeli, E. (2013). Disappointment’s sting is greater than help’s balm: Quasi-signal detection of daily support matching. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(6), 956- 967. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034905
Beck, L. A., Pietromonaco, P. R., DeVito, C. C., Powers, S. I. ve Boyle, A. M. (2014). Congruence between spouses’ perceptions and observers’ ratings of responsiveness: The role of attachment avoidance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(2), 164-174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213507779
Birnbaum, G. E., Reis, H. T., Mizrahi, M., Kanat-Maymon, Y., Sass, O. ve Granovski-Milner, C. (2016). Intimately connected: The importance of partner responsiveness for experiencing sexual desire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 530-546. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000069
Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. Basic Books.
Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2. Baskı). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Büyükşahin, A., Hasta, D. ve Hovardaoğlu, S. (2005). İlişki İstikrarı Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 8(16), 25-37.
Carstensen, L. L., Gross, J. J. ve Fung, H. H. (1998). The social context of emotional experience. K. W. Schaie ve M. P. Lawton (Eds.), Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics, Vol. 17. Focus on emotion and adult development içinde (ss. 325–352). Springer Publishing Company.
Cortes, K. ve Wood, J. V. (2018). Is it really “all in their heads”? How self‐esteem predicts partner responsiveness. Journal of Personality, 86(6), 990-1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12370
Crasta, D., Rogge, R. D., Maniaci, M. R. ve Reis, H. T. (2021). Toward an optimized measure of perceived partner responsiveness: Development and validation of the perceived responsiveness and insensitivity scale. Psychological Assessment, 33(4), 338-355. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000986
Cutrona, C. E. (1996). Social support in couples: Marriage as a resource in times of stress. Sage Publications.
Çuhadaroğlu, F. (1986). Adolesanlarda benlik saygısı. [Yayınlanmamış Uzmanlık Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
Debrot, A., Cook, W. L., Perrez, M. ve Horn, A. B. (2012). Deeds matter: Daily enacted responsiveness and intimacy in couples' daily lives. Journal of Family Psychology, 26(4), 617-627. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028666
Doherty, N. A. ve Feeney, J. A. (2004). The composition of attachment networks throughout the adult years. Personal Relationships, 11(4), 469-488.
Eker, D. (2001). Çok boyutlu algılanan sosyal destek ölçeğinin gözden geçirilmiş formunun faktör yapısı, geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Turk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 12, 17-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00093.x
Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M. ve Brumbaugh, C. C. (2011). The Experiences in Close Relationships-Relationship Structures Questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23, 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022898
Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G. ve Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 350-365. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.350
Feeney, J. ve Fitzgerald, J. (2019). Attachment, conflict and relationship quality: laboratory-based and clinical insights. Current Opinion in Psychology, 25, 127-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.04.002
Finkel, E. J., Simpson, J. A. ve Eastwick, P. W. (2017). The psychology of close relationships: Fourteen core principles. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 383-411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044038
Forest, A. L. ve Wood, J. V. (2011). When partner caring leads to sharing: Partner responsiveness increases expressivity, but only for individuals with low self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 843-848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.005
Gadassi, R., Bar-Nahum, L. E., Newhouse, S., Anderson, R., Heiman, J. R., Rafaeli, E. ve Janssen, E. (2016). Perceived partner responsiveness mediates the association between sexual and marital satisfaction: A daily diary study in newlywed couples. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(1), 109-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0448-2
Gordon, A. M. ve Chen, S. (2016). Do you get where I’m coming from?: Perceived understanding buffers against the negative impact of conflict on relationship satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(2), 239-260. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000039
Gunaydin, G., Selcuk, E., Urganci, B. ve Yalcintas, S. (2021). Today you care, tomorrow you don’t: Differential roles of responsiveness variability and average responsiveness in romantic attachment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 839-849. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620944111
Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1- 55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Jolink, T. A., Chang, Y. P. ve Algoe, S. B. (2022). Perceived partner responsiveness forecasts behavioral intimacy as measured by affectionate touch. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(2), 203- 221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167221993349
Kırımer-Aydınlı, F. ve Sümer, N. (2020). Bireysel ve ilişkisel bağlamda algılanan partner duyarlığı: Derleme çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 23(46), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.31828/tpy1301996120201201m000024
Lachance-Grzela, M., Ross-Plourde, M., Vautour, M., Larocque, M. ve Duguay, A. (2020). Mindfulness, perceived partner responsiveness, and relational conflict among emerging adult couples. Canadian Journal of Counselling & Psychotherapy, 54(3), 451-463.
Özen, A., Salman-Engin, S. ve Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2016). Romantik ilişkilerde çatışma çözüm stilleri ölçeği: Geçerlik güvenirlik çalışması. Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi, 4(7), 1-19. https://doi.org/ 10.7816/nesne-04- 07-01
Reis, H. T. (2003). A self-report measure of perceived partner responsiveness. (Yayınlanmamış çalışma), University of Rochester.
Reis, H. T. (2007). Steps toward the ripening of relationship science. Personal Relationships, 14(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00139.x
Reis, H. T. (2012). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing theme for the study of relationships and well-being. L. Campbell ve T. Loving (Eds.), Interdisciplinary research on close relationships: The case for integration içinde (s. 27-52). American Psychological Association.
Reis, H. T. ve Clark, M. S. (2013). Responsiveness. J. A. Simpson ve L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships içinde (s. 400-423). Oxford University Press.
Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S. ve Holmes, J. G. (2004). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing construct in the study of intimacy and closeness. D. Mashek ve A. Aron (Eds.), The handbook of closeness and intimacy içinde (s. 201-225). Erlbaum.
Reis, H. T. ve Patrick, B. C. (1996). Attachment and intimacy: Component processes. E. T. Higgins ve A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles içinde (s. 523-563). The Guilford Press.
Reis, H. T. ve Shaver, P. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. S. W. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships içinde (s. 367-389). Wiley.
Reis, H. T., Itzchakov, G., Lee, K. Y. ve Ruan, Y. (2022). Sociability matters: Downstream consequences of perceived partner responsiveness in social life. J. P. Forgas, W. Crano ve K. Fiedler (Eds.), The psychology of sociability: The psychology of sociability: understanding human attachment içinde. Routledge.
Rogge, R. D., Fincham, F. D., Crasta, D. ve Maniaci, M. R. (2017). Positive and negative evaluation of relationships: Development and validation of the Positive–Negative Relationship Quality (PN-RQ) scale. Psychological Assessment, 29(8), 1028-1043. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000392
Rosenberg M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.
Ruan, Y., Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S., Hirsch, J. L. ve Bink, B. D. (2020). Can I tell you how I feel? Perceived partner responsiveness encourages emotional expression. Emotion, 20(3), 329- 342. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000650
Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M. ve Agnew, C. R. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357- 391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x
Sandberg, J. G., Novak, J. R., Davis, S. Y. ve Busby, D. M. (2016). The brief accessibility, responsiveness, and engagement scale: A tool for measuring attachment behaviors in clinical couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42, 106-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12151
Segal, N. ve Fraley, R. C. (2016). Broadening the investment model: An intensive longitudinal study on attachment and perceived partner responsiveness in commitment dynamics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33(5), 581-599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515584493
Selçuk, E., Günaydın, G., Sümer, N. ve Uysal., A. (2005) Yetişkin bağlanma boyutları için yeni bir ölçüm: Yakın İlişkilerde Yaşantılar Envanteri-II’nin Türk örnekleminde psikometrik açıdan değerlendirilmesi. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 8(16), 1-11.
Selcuk, E., Gunaydin, G., Ong, A. D. ve Almeida, D. M. (2016). Does partner responsiveness predict hedonic and eudaimonic well‐being? A 10‐year longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(2), 311-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12272
Selcuk, E., Karagobek, A. B. ve Gunaydin, G. (2018). Responsiveness as a key predictor of happiness: Mechanisms and unanswered questions. M. Demir ve N. Sümer (Eds.), Close relationships and happiness across cultures içinde (s. 1-18). Springer.
Selcuk, E., Stanton, S. C., Slatcher, R. B. ve Ong, A. D. (2017). Perceived partner responsiveness predicts better sleep quality through lower anxiety. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(1), 83-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616662128
Selvi, K. ve Bozo, Ö. (2019). Kaslı olma dürtüsü ölçeği’nin Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Nesne, 7(14), 68-82. https://doi.org/10.7816/nesne-07-14-05
Slatcher, R. B., Selcuk, E. ve Ong, A. D. (2015). Perceived partner responsiveness predicts diurnal cortisol profiles 10 years later. Psychological Science, 26(7), 972-982. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615575022
Smith, S. M. ve Reis, H. T. (2012). Perceived responses to capitalization attempts are influenced by self‐ esteem and relationship threat. Personal Relationships, 19(2), 367-385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2011.01367.x
Sroufe, L. A., Egeland, B., Carlson, E. A. ve Collins, W. (2005). The development of the person: The Minnesota study of risk and adaptation from birth to adulthood. The Guilford Press.
Stanton, S. C., Selcuk, E., Farrell, A. K., Slatcher, R. B. ve Ong, A. D. (2019). Perceived partner responsiveness, daily negative affect reactivity, and all-cause mortality: A 20-year longitudinal study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 81(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000618
Taşfiliz, D., Çetiner, E. S. ve Selçuk, E. (2020). Yakın ilişkilerde algılanan duyarlılığın yaş farklılıkları ve psikolojik esenlik ile ilişkisi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 35(86), 19-42. https://doi.org/10.31828/tpd1300443320190630m000020
Tasfiliz, D., Selcuk, E., Gunaydin, G., Slatcher, R. B., Corriero, E. F. ve Ong, A. D. (2018). Patterns of perceived partner responsiveness and well-being in Japan and the United States. Journal of Family Psychology, 32(3), 355-365. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000378
Theiss, J. A. ve Nagy, M. E. (2013). A relational turbulence model of partner responsiveness and relationship talk across cultures. Western Journal of Communication, 77(2), 186-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2012.720746
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G. ve Farley, G. K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 30-41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
Zeifman, D. ve Hazan, C. (2008). Pair bonds as attachments: Reevaluating the evidence. J. Cassidy ve P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications içinde (s. 436- 455). The Guilford Press.
Zeytinoğlu‐Saydam, S., Erdem, G. ve Söylemez, Y. (2021). Psychometric properties of the brief accessibility, responsiveness, and engagement scale in a community sample of Turkish adults. Family Relations, 70(2), 557-574. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12446
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi