Validating Marital Commitment Inventory in Iranian state university students

Khorasaniyan, Mojghan; Seadatee Shamir, Aboutaleb

Validating Marital Commitment Inventory in Iranian state university students

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ M.A of Educational psychology, Islamic Azad university, Bojnourd Branch, Bojnourd, Iran

² PhD of Educational psychology, Farhanghiyan university, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

This research was performed in order to validate the Marital Commitment Inventory among the students of Iran’s state universities which were selected by. The inventory was constructed via Delphi technique based on Johnson’s theoretical framework. It had 37 items and 2 additional items for detecting lies. In this way 500 persons were selected from the statistical population by employing multi cluster sampling. After that exploratory factor analysis was applied for assessing factor structure and construct validity of the inventory. Results: The outcomes realized that 12 out of 37 items were excluded because of meaningless factor loadings and there only stood 25 items. In order to inspect the residual items the confirmatory factor analysis was performed and approved the 25-item inventory with 6 subscales, including: social, personal, gratifying, moral, cultural, and logical- intuitive commitment. Except of the gratifying subscale which holds only 2 items, other subscales include at least 3 items. Using Cronbach’s alpha co-efficient the reliability of the residual items was confirmed. Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and Wilks Lambda were applied to compare the differences between bachelor and married students, and also female and male students. It represented that the average scores of the cultural subscale in married students are meaningfully higher than those of the bachelors. Besides it realized that the average scores of male students are meaningfully higher in moral and logical- intuitive subscale. Also female students have meaningfully higher scores in cultural subscale.

Keywords

References

Abdi Mohammad, khoshkonesh abolghasemi, taghipor ebrahim, mohammadi rohollah ,(1391). Investigate interest style and marital satisfaction of married involved individual in internet infidelity. Psychological studies .8(3):135 – 158

Adams, J. M., & Jones, W. H. (1997). The conceptualization of marital commitment: An integrative analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1177-1196.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S.(1978). Patterns of attachment: Assessed in the

Allen, E., Atkins, D., Baucom, D., Snyder, D., Coup Gordan, K., & Glass, S. (2005). Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and contextual factors in engaging in and responding to extramarital involvement. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 12 (2),101-130

Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollen, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596-612.

Arriaga, X. B, Agnew, C. R. 2001. Being committed: Affective, cognitive, and correlative components of relationship commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27: 1190-1203

AS Owen, J. J., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Fincham, F. D. (2010). “Hooking up” among college students:

Askari parviz , pasha gholareza , azakish maryam .(1390). Comparing marital obligation and sexual satisfaction and life satisfaction of working women and housewives. thoughts and behavior .6(12): 60-53.

Atkins, D. C., Jacobson, N. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2001). Understanding Infidelity: Correlates in a National Random Sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 735-749. Buss, D. M. (2000). The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love and sex.

Atkins, D.C., Baucom, D.H., Jacobson, N. S. (2001). Understanding infidelity:

Bagarozzi, D. A., & Attilano, R. B. (1982). SIDCARB: A clinical tool for assessment of social exchange in- equities and relationship barriers. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 8, 325-334.

Baldwin, M. W. 1992. Rational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin.112:461-484

Baucom. K; Coop Gordon.D.H, & Snyder D.k. (2005), Treating Couples Recovering From Infidelity: An Integrative Approach, Published online in Wiley InterScience, Journal of marital&family therapy, 30(2): 213-231.

Becker, H.S. (1960), ''Notes on the Concept of Commitment," American Journal of Sociology, 66, 32-42.

Blau, P. M. Exchange and power in social life. New York, Wiley, 1967.

Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New York: Basic Books.

Bronstein, P.M.1981. Clinical treatment of marital dysfunction: a multiple-baseline analyze

Bumpass, L.L., Sweet, J.A., and Cherlin, A. (1991). The role of cohabitation in declining rates of marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family 53(4): 913–927.

Buss, D. M., Shackelford,T. K. 1997. Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality vol 31(193-221)

Call, V. R. A., Heaton,T. B.1997. Religious influence on marital stability. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.vol 36(3): 382-392

Cann, A., & Baucom, T. R. (2004). Former partners and new rivals as threats to a elationship: Infidelity type, gender, and commitment asfactors related to distress and forgiveness. Personal Relationships, 1305–318. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00084.x

Cann, A., Mangum, J. L., & Wells, M. (2001). Distress in response to relationship infidelity: The role of gender and attitudes about relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 185-

Correlates in a national random sample. Journal of Family Psychology. Vol 15(4), Dec 2001, 735-749.

Cramer, E. M. (1972). Significance tests and tests ofmodels in multiple regression. American Statistician,26,2630

Cramer, R.E., Abraham, W.T., Johnson, L., & Manning-Ryan, B. (2001). Gender differences in subjective distress to emotional and sexual infidelity: Evolutionary or logical inference explanation? Current Psychology, 20, 327-336.

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 177.

David M Buss.(1999). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and brain sciences.12 (1): 1-14

Dean, D. G., & Spinier, G. B. (1974). Commitment: An overlooked variable in marital adjustment. Sociological Focus, 7, 113-118

Demographic and psychosocial correlates. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 653-663. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9414-1

Drigo