Write your message

Search published articles


Showing 3 results for kakabarayi

Nazita Akhlaghi Nosheri, Keyvan Kakabarayi, Hasan Amiri, Karim Afsharinia,
Volume 18, Issue 77 (8-2019)
Abstract

Background: Family and couples may have difficulties in various functions and variables, including the basic psychological needs. Research has shown the effectiveness of structural family therapy on various variables, but the basic psychological needs of athlete couples have been neglected. Aims: This study was conducted aiming to determine the effectiveness of structural family therapy on satisfying the basic psychological needs of athlete couples. Method: This research was a quasi-experimental study with pretest-posttest design with experimental group and control group. The statistical population of this study consisted of all athlete couples of the city of Tehran in 2018. From this community, 40 couples were selected by convenience sampling and were randomly assigned to two experimental (20 couples) and control groups. Participants completed the Psychological Needs Satisfaction Scale (Gnieh, 2003). Then, the Minuchin Structural Therapy Family Intervention (2013) was administered to the experimental group but no intervention was performed for the control group. The data were analyzed by analysis of covariance. Results: The results of multivariate analysis of covariance and post hoc tests showed that structural family therapy had significant effects on satisfying the basic psychological needs of athletic couples and its components of self-efficacy, competence and relationship (p<0/001). Conclusions: Structural family therapy can be used to satisfy the basic psychological needs of athlete couples and thus improve the quality of life of couples. 

Fatemeh Hooshyar, Karim Afshariniya, Mokhtar Arefi, Keivan Kakabarayi, Hasan Amiri,
Volume 18, Issue 78 (9-2019)
Abstract

Background: Alexithymia is one of the factors that causes Maladjustment and conflict between couples. The effectivenss of couples therapy and acceptance therapy on various variables in couples' lives has been confirmed, but the key question is which therapy is more effective for maladjusted couples? Aims: To compare the effectiveness of couples therapy and acceptance therapy on the  Alexithymia of  Maladjusted couples. Method: This study employed a quasi-experimental design with pre-test and post-test with control group. The statistical population of the study included all  Maladjusted couples who referred to Shiraz Family Court in 2018. Ninety persons were Election from this population using the availability sampling and were randomly placed into three groups (each including 30 persons): Experimental group 1 and 2 and the control group. The instruments used to collect data were Acceptance therapy Protocol (Khanjani Vashki et al., 2016),and Behavioral Couple Therapy (Razavi Nematollahi et al., 2013), and Alexithymia Questionnaire (Torento, 1994). The pretest was performanced  to the  Questionnaire in all three goups. Then, the participants in the two experimental groups were exposed to the treatment including the couple therapy and Accepatance-based therapy but the members of the control group did not receive any intervention. The collected data were analyzed using the analysis of covariance.  Results: The results showed that couples therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy had a significant effect on the couples' alexithymia (P<0/001). There was a significant difference between the two therapies in terms of their effects on  alexithymia (P<0/001). Couple therapy was found to have a more  effect on reducing difficulty in emotion recognition, while acceptance therapy had a more effect on reducing difficulty in describing emotions (p<0/05). Only couple therapy was shown to have a significant effect on reducing objective thinking (p<0/05). Therefore, couple therapy had a more effect on decreasing  alexithymia. Conclusion: Couple therapy can be used to reduce alexithymia. 


Fatemeh Hooshyar, Karim Afshariniya, Mokhtar Arefi, Keivan Kakabarayi, Hasan Amiri,
Volume 18, Issue 82 (12-2019)
Abstract

Background: Ultimate Seeking is the factors that cause disorganized compromise and the difference between couples. The efficacy of couples therapy and acceptance based therapy on different variables in the lives of couples has been confirmed, but the main issue is that what therapy for couples is go undetected compromise? Aims: Comparing the effectiveness of couple therapy and acceptance-based therapy on the final of couples ' go undetected compromise. Method: The research was semi-experimental with pretest and posttest design with control group. The statistical population of the study included all couples compromise go undetected in Shiraz who referred to the family Court of Shiraz in 2018. Of this population, 90 people were selected as available and randomly divided into three groups (30 participants), 1, 2, and control. The tool includes acceptance-based treatment protocols (Khanjani, and the colleagues, 2016), Couples therapy (Razavi nemat Elahi et al., 2013), and the ultimate and Terry shorts questionnaire Karan, 1995). For three groups, the pre-test was performed, then intervention of couples therapy and acceptance-based therapy for two groups of experimental study, but for the control group, no intervention was applied. The results were analyzed by covariance analysis. Results: The results showed that there was a significant effect between behavioral therapy and acceptance-based therapy on the final of couples (p= 0/001). There was a significant difference between the two treatments in terms of final effect (P= 0/001). Therefore, acceptance-based therapy has a greater effect on the final reduction of negative seeking and final increase of positive seeking. (P<=0/05). Conclusions: it can be used for final reduction of negative seeking and final increase of positive seeking from acceptance-based treatment. 


Page 1 from 1     

© 2025 CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 | Journal of Psychological Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)