Alien Registration- Drigotas, Martin (Lewiston, Androscoggin County)

https://digitalmaine.com/alien_docs/29228/thumbnail.jp

Relational consequences of compulsive Internet use: A longitudinal study among newlyweds

This article examines how compulsive Internet use and marital well-being are related to each other. We suggest that they are negatively related and explore whether compulsive Internet use predicts marital well-being or vice versa. The relation between compulsive Internet use and marital well-being is tested in a two-wave prospective study among 190 newlywed couples. The results suggest that (a) compulsive Internet use predicts marital well-being, and not vice versa, (b) that this is a within- rather than a cross-partner effect, and (c) that the frequency of Internet use may be positively related to marital well-being. The results are discussed in terms of the mechanisms that underlie the link between compulsive Internet use and relationship quality

Attachment, infidelity, and loneliness in college students involved in a romantic relationship: the role of relationship satisfaction, morbidity and prayer for partner

This study examined the mediating effects of relationship satisfaction, prayer for a partner, and morbidity in the relationship between attachment and loneliness, infidelity and loneliness, and psychological morbidity and loneliness, in college students involved in a romantic relationship. Participants were students in an introductory course on family development. This study examined only students (n = 345) who were involved in a romantic relationship. The average age of participants was 19.46 (SD = 1.92) and 25 % were males. Short-form UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8), (Hays and DiMatteo in J Pers Assess 51:69–81, doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5101_6, 1987); Relationship Satisfaction Scale (Funk and Rogge in J Fam Psychol 21:572–583, doi:10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.572, 2007); Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (De Haes et al. in Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients with the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL): a manual, Northern Centre for Healthcare Research, Groningen, 1996); Prayer for Partner Scale, (Fincham et al. in J Pers Soc Psychol 99:649–659, doi:10.1037/a0019628, 2010); Infidelity Scale, (Drigotas et al. in J Pers Soc Psychol 77:509–524, doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.509, 1999); and the Experiences in Close Relationship Scale-short form (Wei et al. in J Couns Psychol 52(4):602–614, doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.602, 2005). Results showed that relationship satisfaction mediated the relationship between avoidance attachment and loneliness and between infidelity and loneliness. Physical morbidity mediated the relationship between anxious attachment and psychological morbidity. Psychological morbidity mediated the relationship between anxious attachment and physical morbidity. The present results expand the literature on attachment by presenting evidence that anxious and avoidant partners experience loneliness differently. Implications for couple’s therapy are addressed. Future research should replicate these results with older samples and married couples.Acknowledgments This research was supported by Grant Number 90FE0022 from the United States Department of Health and Human Services awarded to the last author

The “I” in us, or the eye on us? Regulatory focus, commitment and derogation of an attractive alternative person

When individuals are highly committed to their romantic relationship, they are more likely to engage in pro-relationship maintenance mechanisms. The present research expanded on the notion that commitment redirects self-oriented goals to consider broader relational goals and examined whether commitment interacts with a promotion and prevention focus to activate derogation of attractive alternatives. Three studies used cross-sectional and experimental approaches. Study 1 showed that romantically involved individuals predominantly focused on promotion, but not prevention, reported less initial attraction to an attractive target than single individuals, especially when highly committed to their relationship. Study 2 showed that romantically involved individuals induced in a promotion focus, compared to those in prevention focus, reported less initial attraction, but only when more committed to their relationship. Regardless of regulatory focus manipulation, more committed individuals were also less likely to perceive quality among alternative scenarios and to be attentive to alternative others in general. Finally, Study 3 showed that romantically involved individuals induced in promotion focus and primed with high commitment reported less initial attraction, than those primed with low commitment, or than those induced in prevention focus. Once again, for these latter no differences occurred according to commitment prime. Together, the findings suggest that highly committed promotion focused individuals consider broader relationship goals and activate relationship maintenance behaviors such as derogation of attractive alternatives to promote their relationship