Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 23, Issue 140 (10-2024)
Journal of Psychological Science 2024, 23(140): 87-105 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mirkazem N S, Esmaeili M, dehdast K. (2024). Couple identity patterns of Tehrani women: A qualitative study. Journal of Psychological Science. 23(140), 87-105. doi:10.61186/jps.23.140.87
URL: http://psychologicalscience.ir/article-1-2047-en.html
URL: http://psychologicalscience.ir/article-1-2047-en.html
M.A. in Family Counseling, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran , nmiirkazem98@gmail.com
Abstract: (766 Views)
Background: Proper formation of the couple's identity is an essential condition for stability of a desirable marriage. Couple identity is culture-dependent and can take many forms and have different consequences based on various factors such as the way the couples cooperate. Despite importance of this topic, research seldom has been conducted to identify couple identity patterns in Iranian culture.
Aims: This study aimed to identify the couple identity patterns among women in Tehran.
Methods: The current research was conducted with a qualitative approach using Glaser’s grounded theory method in Tehran (2022-2023). The sample included 16 married women in Tehran, who were selected through purposive sampling (theoretical type). The data were collected through in-depth and semi-structured interviews, and then the data were and analyzed using Glaser’s method in three steps: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.
Results: In the present study, four patterns of women's couple identity were identified: cooperative, self-seeking-consoling, self-sacrificing and undeveloped identity. Each of these patterns are different from each other based on the characteristics of the following five axes: manifestation of the couple's personal identity, communication space, supportive-emotional space, power sharing space, and consequences.
Conclusion: The results of the study demonstrate that due to the balanced contribution of the relationship parties in the collaborative couple identity pattern, this pattern can be considered the ideal relationship pattern as compared to the other patterns. It is recommended that the findings of this study be made available to experts in the field in order that they can guide couples towards the desired marital identity and improve the quality of marital relationships through education and therapy.
Aims: This study aimed to identify the couple identity patterns among women in Tehran.
Methods: The current research was conducted with a qualitative approach using Glaser’s grounded theory method in Tehran (2022-2023). The sample included 16 married women in Tehran, who were selected through purposive sampling (theoretical type). The data were collected through in-depth and semi-structured interviews, and then the data were and analyzed using Glaser’s method in three steps: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.
Results: In the present study, four patterns of women's couple identity were identified: cooperative, self-seeking-consoling, self-sacrificing and undeveloped identity. Each of these patterns are different from each other based on the characteristics of the following five axes: manifestation of the couple's personal identity, communication space, supportive-emotional space, power sharing space, and consequences.
Conclusion: The results of the study demonstrate that due to the balanced contribution of the relationship parties in the collaborative couple identity pattern, this pattern can be considered the ideal relationship pattern as compared to the other patterns. It is recommended that the findings of this study be made available to experts in the field in order that they can guide couples towards the desired marital identity and improve the quality of marital relationships through education and therapy.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2023/06/7 | Accepted: 2024/02/29 | Published: 2024/08/27
Received: 2023/06/7 | Accepted: 2024/02/29 | Published: 2024/08/27
References
1. عبداللهی، اصغر؛ احدی، حسن؛ تاجری، بیوک؛ و حاجی علی زاده، کبری. (۱۴۰۰). تدوین الگوی مفهومی عوامل شکل دهنده طلاق در پنج سال اول زندگی: یک مطالعه داده بنیاد. مجله علوم روانشناختی، 20(97)، 1-12.
2. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17357462.1400.20.97.10.7
3. محمدیاری، انسیه؛ رضایی‌شریف، علی؛ کیانی، احمدرضا؛ و صدری دمرچی، اسماعیل. (۱۴۰۱). واکاوی باورهای ارتباطی ناکارآمد زنان دارای تعارض زناشویی بر اساس تجربه زیسته. مجله علوم روانشناختی، ۲۱ (۱۱۹)، ۲۱۹۸-۲۱۸۳.
4. http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/JPS.21.119.2183
5. منوچهرآبادی، زهرا؛ دادگران، محمد؛ و دلاور، علی. (۱۴۰۱). پیش‌بینی طلاق براساس طرحواره‌های ناسازگار اولیه، مهارت ارتباط و الگوی ارتباط در زوجین عادی و متقاضی طلاق. مجله علوم روانشناختی، ۲۱ (۱۱۷)، ۱۷۶۱-۱۷۷۷.
6. http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/JPS.21.117.1761
7. Abdollahi A, ahadi H, Tajeri B, HajiAlizadeh K. (2021). Developing a conceptual model of the factors forming divorce in the first five years of life: a grounded theory study. Journal of Psychological Science. 20(97), 1-12. [persian]
8. Afifi, T. D., Merrill, A. F., & Davis, S. (2016). The theory of resilience and relational load. Pers Relatsh, 23(4), 663-683. [DOI:10.1111/pere.12159]
9. Agnew, C. R., & Etcheverry, P. E. (2006). Cognitive interdependence considering self-inrelationship. In K. D. Vohs & E. J. Finkel (eds.), Self and relationships: Connecting intrapersonal and interpersonal processes (pp. 274-293). Guilford Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=rxDnT3nzSbIC
10. Ahmad, S., Fergus, K., Shatokhina, K., & Gardner, S. (2017). The closer 'We'are, the stronger 'I'am: the impact of couple identity on cancer coping self-efficacy. J Behav Med, 40(3), 403-413. [DOI:10.1007/s10865-016-9803-1] [PMID]
11. Alea, N., Singer, J. A., & Labunko, B. (2015). "We-ness" in relationship-defining memories and marital satisfaction. In K. Skerrett & K. Frgus (eds.), Couple Resilience (pp. 163-177). Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-94-017-9909-6_9]
12. Badr, H., & Acitelli, L. K. (2017). Re-thinking dyadic coping in the context of chronic illness. Curr Opin Psychol, 13(2), 44-48. [DOI:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.001] [PMID]
13. Cai, H., Sedikides, C., & Jiang, L. (2013). Familial self as a potent source of affirmation: Evidence from China. Soc Psychol Personal Sci, 4(5), 529-537. [DOI:10.1177/1948550612469039]
14. Combs, G., & Freedman, J. (2016). Narrative therapy's relational understanding of identity. Fam process, 55(2), 211-224. [DOI:10.1111/famp.12216] [PMID]
15. Côté, J. (2006). Identity studies: How close are we to developing a social science of identity?-An appraisal of the field. Identity, 6(1), 3-25. [DOI:10.1207/s1532706xid0601_2]
16. Coulmas, F. (2019). Identity: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. [DOI:10.1093/actrade/9780198828549.001.0001]
17. Crowley, J. L., & Miller, L. E. (2020). "Who's gonna love a junkie? But he does": Exploring couples' identity negotiations and dyadic coping in the context of opioid use disorder. J Soc Pers Relat, 37(5), 1634-1652. [DOI:10.1177/0265407520903385]
18. Daley, R. T., O'Connor, M. K., Shirk, S. D., & Beard, R. L. (2017). 'In this together'or 'Going it alone': Spousal dyad approaches to Alzheimer's. J Aging Stud, 40(1), 57-63. [DOI:10.1016/j.jaging.2017.01.003] [PMID]
19. Emery, L. F., Gardner, W. L., Carswell, K. L., & Finkel, E. J. (2021). Who are "we"? Couple identity clarity and romantic relationship commitment. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 47(1), 146-160. [DOI:10.1177/0146167220921717] [PMID]
20. Gildersleeve, S., Singer, J. A., Skerrett, K., & Wein, S. (2017). Coding "We-ness" in couple's relationship stories: A method for assessing mutuality in couple therapy. Psychother Res, 27(3), 313-325. [DOI:10.1080/10503307.2016.1262566] [PMID]
21. Goldenberg, H., & Goldenberg, I. (2012). Family therapy: An overview. Cengage Learning.
22. Griffiths, O., & Ahmed, A. (2021). Introducing Identity. J Philos Logic, 50(15), 1449-1469. [DOI:10.1007/s10992-021-09605-9]
23. Hecht, M. L., & Phillips, K. E. (2021). Communication theory of identity: Understanding the multilayered nature of identity. In D. O. Braithwait & P. Schrodt (eds.), Engaging Theories in Interpersonal Communication (pp. 221-232). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781003195511]
24. Helgeson, V. S., Jakubiak, B., Van Vleet, M., & Zajdel, M. (2018). Communal coping and adjustment to chronic illness: Theory update and evidence. Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 22(2), 170-195. [DOI:10.1177/1088868317735767] [PMID] []
25. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17357462.1400.20.97.10.7
26. Impett, E. A., Kogan, A., English, T., John, O., Oveis, C., Gordon, A. M., & Keltner, D. (2012). Suppression sours sacrifice: Emotional and relational costs of suppressing emotions in romantic relationships. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 38(6), 707-720. [DOI:10.1177/0146167212437249] [PMID]
27. Jung, E. J., & Lee, S. (2015). The combined effects of relationship conflict and the relational self on creativity. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process, 130(9), 44-57. [DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.006]
28. Kennedy-Lightsey, C. D., Martin, M. M., LaBelle, S., & Weber, K. (2015). Attachment, identity gaps, and communication and relational outcomes in marital couples' public performances. J Fam Commun, 15(3), 232-248. [DOI:10.1080/15267431.2015.1043430]
29. Kreuzbauer, R., Chiu, C. Y., Lin, S., & Bae, S. H. (2014). When does life satisfaction accompany relational identity signaling: A cross-cultural analysis, J Cross Cult Psychol, 45(4), 646-659. [DOI:10.1177/0022022113518369]
30. Kwang, T. N. (2010). Exploring the mutual influence of self and relationship: A theory of couple identity negotiation Master Thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
31. Kwang, T. N. (2012). Finding the "I" in the "we": Three modes of identity merger in close relationship Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin. http://hdl.handle.net/2152/ETD-UT-2012-05-5302
32. Li, X., Cao, H., Zhou, N., Ju, X., Lan, J., Zhu, Q., & Fang, X. (2018). Daily communication, conflict resolution, and marital quality in Chinese marriage: A three-wave, cross-lagged analysis. J Fam Psychol, 32(6), 733. [DOI:10.1037/fam0000430] [PMID]
33. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications. [DOI:10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8]
34. Manouchehrabadi, Z., Dadgaran, M., & Delavar, A. (2022). Predicting divorce in non -divorced and divorce applicant couples based on early maladaptive schemas, communication skills and communication patterns. Journal of Psychological Science, 21(117), 1761 -1777. [Persian] http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/JPS.21.117.1761 [DOI:10.52547/JPS.21.117.1761]
35. Mattingly, B. A., Lewandowski Jr, G. W., & McIntyre, K. P. (2014). "You make me a better/worse person": A two‐dimensional model of relationship self‐change. Pers Relatsh, 21(1), 176-190. [DOI:10.1111/pere.12025]
36. Mohammadyari, E., Rezaei Sharif, A., Kiani, A., & Sadri Demirchi, E. (2023). Analysis of dysfunctional communication beliefs of women with marital conflict based on lived experience. Journal of Psychological Science, 21(119), 2183 -2198. [Persian] http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/JPS.21.119.2183 [DOI:10.52547/JPS.21.119.2183]
37. Owen, J., Fincham, F. D., & Polser, G. (2017). Couple identity, sacrifice, and availability of alternative partners: Dedication in friends with benefits relationships. Arch Sex Behav, 46(17), 1785-1791. [DOI:10.1007/s10508-016-0716-4] [PMID]
38. Pagani, A. F., Parise, M., Donato, S., Gable, S. L., & Schoebi, D. (2020). If you shared my happiness, you are part of me: Capitalization and the experience of couple identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(2), 258-269. [DOI:10.1177/0146167219854449] [PMID]
39. Pals, J. L. (1999). Identity consolidation in early adulthood: relations with ego‐resiliency, the context of marriage, and personality change. Journal of Personality, 67(2), 295-329. [DOI:10.1111/1467-6494.00057] [PMID]
40. Rast III, D. E., van Knippenberg, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2020). Intergroup relational identity: Development and validation of a scale and construct. Group Process Intergroup Relat, 23(7), 943-966. [DOI:10.1177/1368430219883350]
41. Reid, D. W., & Ahmad, S. (2015). Identification with the relationship as essential to marital resilience: Theory, application, and evidence. In K. Skerrett & K. Fergus (eds.), Couple Resilience (pp. 139-161). Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-94-017-9909-6_8]
42. Reid, D. W., Dalton, E. J., Laderoute, K., Doell, F. K., & Nguyen, T. (2006). Therapeutically induced changes in couple identity: The role of we-ness and interpersonal processing in relationship satisfaction. Genet Soc Gen Psychol Monogr, 132(3), 241-284. [DOI:10.3200/MONO.132.3.241-288] [PMID]
43. Richey, A. M. (2022). Shared Identity in Marriage Doctoral dissertation, Regent University, Coastal, Virginia. https://www.proquest.com/openview/efeaca72f814c674b11e44fc363822e6/1.pdf?pq
44. Rodriguez, L. M., Neighbors, C., & Knee, C. R. (2014). Problematic alcohol use and marital distress: An interdependence theory perspective. Addict Res Theory, 22(4), 294-312. [DOI:10.3109/16066359.2013.841890]
45. Sheras, P. L., & Koch-Sheras, P. R. (2006). Couple power therapy: Building commitment, cooperation, communication, and community in relationships. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4317074 [DOI:10.1037/11264-000]
46. Singer, J. A., Labunko, B., Alea, N., & Baddeley, J. L. (2015). Mutuality and the marital engagement-type of :union: scale [me (to us)]: Empirical support for a clinical instrument in couples therapy. In K. Skerrett & K. Fergus (eds.), Couple Resilience. Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-94-017-9909-6_7]
47. Skerrett, K. (2016). We‐ness and the cultivation of wisdom in couple therapy. Fam Process, 55(1), 48-61. [DOI:10.1111/famp.12162] [PMID]
48. Soulsby, L. K., & Bennett, K. M. (2017). When two become one: Exploring identity in marriage and cohabitation. J Fam Issues, 38(3), 358-380.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X15598547 [DOI:10.1007/019253X15598547]
49. Swann Jr, W. B., Gómez, A., Seyle, D. C., Morales, J., & Huici, C. (2009). Identity fusion: The interplay of personal and social identities in extreme group behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol, 96(5), 995. [DOI:10.1037/a0013668] [PMID]
50. Topcu-Uzer, C., Randall, A. K., Vedes, A. M., Reid, D., & Bodenmann, G. (2020). We-ness Questionnaire: Development and Validation. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 3(20), 1-23. [DOI:10.1080/15332691.2020.1805082]
51. Walsh, C. M., & Neff, L. A. (2018). We're better when we blend: The benefits of couple identity fusion. Self and Identity, 17(5), 587-603. [DOI:10.1080/15298868.2018.1430062]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License. |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)