Recommandé
Contenu connexe
En vedette
En vedette (12)
Similaire à Relationship Rx Case Study (1)
Similaire à Relationship Rx Case Study (1) (20)
Relationship Rx Case Study (1)
- 1. Relationship Rx Case Study K.Nathalia Pena University of Tennessee
- 2. Concern of Interest #20 We tend to think in terms of “I, me and mine” rather than “we, us and ours” ● Used to being independent ● Long distance rx ● Not sharing burdens ○ Him → Her
- 3. Materials ● Baseline packets ● One month packets (FAS_1) ● RX evaluations ● Assessment & Feedback DVD’s
- 4. Demographics ● Ages 45-54 ● White ● Education ○ Her - Associate's Degree ○ Him- Bachelor's Degree ● Income - (Him) 60-69,000 (Her) 50-59,000 ● Marital History ○ Both were previously married- 2x
- 5. Relationship History ● Met online ● 2.5 years romantically involved, lived together 1 year ● Dated for a year before they moved in together ● Now living apart - Long distance relationship ● Visit each other every 2 months ● Engaged
- 6. Top Strengths Him ( @Baseline) # 15 We laugh or smile together. #8 We are happy with our sex life. #24 Our relationship is a high priority for us. Her ( @Baseline) #10 My partner accepts who i am #33 we listen well #31 We are very committed
- 7. Top Concerns Her #20 We think in terms of “I”, “me” #16 We rarely speak of meaningful things #27 Significant recent changes (living together → long distance rx) Him #13 We (I) rarely share each other’s burden. #14 We aren't comfortable leaning on each other for emotional support #20 We tend to think in terms of I, me, mine rather than we, us and ours.
- 8. Relationship Rx Recommended Treatments Option # 1 - Love Maps Option #2 - Book Club Option # 3- Communication Technique Discussion ● “ Business meeting vs. us”
- 9. Scales - ISQ
- 10. Literature Review 1. Staying Close When Apart (Arditti & Kauffman, 2004) ● Long distance relationships (commuter “marriages”) have become more prevalent due to job mobility, education and occupation. ● Intimacy in long distance relationships and the meaning of the experience (temporary/necessary), satisfaction, commitment and strengths. Friendship before relationship was key in confidence within the relationship ● Creative relational maintenance techniques 2. Dimensions of Adult Attachment, Affect Regulation, and Romantic Relationship Functioning (Brennan & Shaver, 1995) ● Early childhood development and attachment influence romantic love (emotional attachment) 3. Balancing the need to be “me”with the need to be “we”: (Slotter et al., 2014) ● Balancing one’s needs and needs within dyad. ● Difficult with long distance
- 11. Discussion ● Autonomy, Interdependence ● Used to being independent ● Long distance rx ● Not sharing burdens ○ Him → Her Implications Limitations ● Most romantic relationship research is based on geographically close rx Future Research ● Early childhood development/attachment theory/personality & romantic relationships with mid-age adults ● Relationship Priority and Commitment in long distance rx ○ Strengths vs. weaknesses
- 12. References Arditti, J. A., & Kauffman, M. (2004). Staying Close When Apart: Intimacy and Meaning in Long-Distance Dating Relationships. Journal Of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 3(1), 27-52. doi:10.1300/J398v03n01_03 Brennan, K.A. and Shaver, P.R. Dimensions of Adult Attachment, Affect Regulation, and Romantic Relationship Functioning Pers Soc Psychol Bull March 1995 21: 267-283, doi:10.1177/0146167295213008 Slotter, E., Duffy, C., & Gardner, W. (2014). Balancing the need to be “me”with the need to b“we”: Applying Optimal Distinctiveness Theory to the understanding of multiple motives within romantic relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 71-81. doi:10 January 2014
Notes de l'éditeur
- 6012B HIM 6012A HER
- She is a nurse- found out about the study via a info session at her job.Dated for a year than moved in together. Decision to move in together- he had a house about 30 miles away from where he was currently living. She mentioned moving in together-they waited some time. Due to benefits and cost moved in together and to experience how the relationship could move forward. Lived together for a year before she moved to Tennessee. He travels to Tennessee often. April 2011 met in (Frisco) Colorado June 2013- seperated. Q 2 months see each other- attempting to make a visit once a month. She moved back to TN due to work and family. He takes time off from work to go to TN and she does also. First impression of her - he was shy had to open conversation- Drew her in- He lives life in a steady pace- She likes to move things along faster- benefited made them “click” Caused them to get to know each other better. His first impression more about beauty- “Aura” about her … “i haven't dated much” - intriguing beautiful - attraction She is able to express herself better than him. He supports her They both have laid out the foundation of their relationship - rx must be the priority
- Read books together Him- areas of strength. Like an umbrella, #24 over and 8,15 under Her- #33/31 she was able to continue her own self-reflection and self-exploration and he served as a great support for her-understanding; even when she decided to move back to TN #10 → validation from her partner for who she is -
- Him (#2,#11,#28) concerns FAS_1 He mentioned he felt guilty for not showing her that it really hurt him (affected him) that she moved away. *doesn't like to share burdens? Her- Top concern- 27 significant changes umbrella to other concerns Not being together on a daily basis- daily exposure to one another - detriment because they have to wait certain times to talk to each other- time zones- weekends are not physically together to talk about certain things - communication barriers due to time zones. They tend to wait until they are physically present to discuss important issues but takes away time from spending quality time cherish their time together. Struggling to schedule “their time together” Time change- Have been able to work a call schedule/ reading books together- watch hockey games at the same time and text eachother about it to create the ties. Have found fun ways around it. Him- used to living alone- so not as bigger as a stressor. But afterwards - more in the forefront due to toll on relationship- didnt hit him before or when she left until lately Top concern- he has a hard time talking about his burdens- sharing them- he feels the burdens he does have are miniscule or will disappear- he hasnt learned to share his feelings. Has been working on that by reading. He knows that she will like for him to show that emotional part from him- because he knows it is an important part in the relationship - he feels he needs to learn to do. Hasnt had that experience from growing up- his dad never did something not done in the family or in past relationships. Thye talk more about i #20 due to distance and ambiguity about long distance relationship. Want to change that. They are apart - self-exploration, self and independence from a long time to go to we, us ours it is a process especially because of distance. Burdens- emotional support uncomfortable, ambiguous on how to express , he knows he is not good at sharing his feelings- more internal he lets things go? He knows it's something that will take time. Burdens are seen as small or unimportant to share- not a big deal- but down the road he knows things may come up that he needs to share and so he wants to learn how to - - sharing small burdens because he knows that she will like to know Her perspective on him sharing burdens - believes it has shifted - she recognizes that that is how he is because at the beginning she felt uncomfortable with her being the only vulnerable one. Nd only one sharing her problems. She has come around- doesn't feel like a threat anymore - was questioning what he was holding back. Not purposeful. Has improved, she's lower her guard and he has to occasionally. She would really like the improvement because she feels she receives more than gives about discussing personal burdens she feels like she drains him sometimes. She also did not developmentally learn to express her emotions but due to her work career she learned that expression was important. Society - females more expressive than males
- Commitment scale was not reliable/valid Commitment Scale Her-100/ 96 ; Him-80/98
- Surra (1985) explains that interdependence can be defined as “increasing degrees of overlap between partners at different stages of involvement . . .” (p. 359). Elements included in this overlap include knowledge partners have about each other as well as the kinds of activities the partners engage in and the likelihood they will share them. Interdependence is seen as a significant part of the “bondedness” existing between couples (Marston et al., 1998), as well as empirically connected to relationship satisfaction and stability (Floyd & Wasner, 1994; Surra, 1985). Commitment involves the tendency to maintain and persist in a relationship as well as feelings of psychological attachment and need (Rusbult, 1983; Van Lange et al., 1997). : (a) How do long-distance couples stay close?; (b) What shared meanings do study participants have with their romantic partner?; and (c) Why do individuals stay in long-distance relationships? The in-depth data yielded common themes from the participants of this study that began to answer questions about intimacy in long-distance dating relationships. . In sum, our findings suggest that viable long-distance relationships might depend on individual personality and developmental qualities (such as the ability to tolerate ambiguity), a shared meaning system that emphasizes the necessity of the separation and the importance of staying committed, and interdependence via relational maintenance and friendship
- Feedback 1 month She grants him more space instead of pushing him to express himself.