Relationships Between Personality Structures, Psychopathological Characteristics and Problem Areas

Year 2019, Volume: 8 Issue: 4, 3211 - 3229, 31.12.2019

Zeynep Set

https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.616091

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Marriage
and relationship satisfaction is one of the factors that affect a person’s
stress level, emotional state and welfare. For this reason, when couples have
problems, they may apply to couple therapy for different reasons and get help.
Personality structures are an important variable that enables predicting
relational problems. They are generally known to be an important factor in
establishing and maintaining close relationships. Also, psychopathological
features are related to the functioning of the relations. Therefore, in this
study, the relationships between the character structure and psychopathological
characteristics of the couples and the problem areas they receive help were
investigated. Data were collected from 81 couples who applied to the clinic for
psychological help. The problem areas applied by the participants were
determined by 14 problem areas in the interview form. Psychopathological
characteristics and personality structures were evaluated using Minnesota
Multidimensional Personality Inventory (MMPI). According to the results, the
most common problems for both men and women are anger problem and mother-in-law
problem. The psychopathological characteristics and personality structures of
the participants were found to be related to the problems they were receiving
help for.            

Keywords

Personality Structure, Psychopathology, MMPI, Couples Therapy, Marriage Satisfaction

Çiftlerde, Kişilik Yapıları ve Psikopatolojik Özellikler ile Yardım Aldıkları Problem Alanları Arasındaki İlişkiler

Abstract

Evlilik ve ilişki
doyumu, kişinin stresli olma halini, duygu durumunu ve refah seviyesini
etkileyen unsurlardan biridir. Bu sebeple, birçok çift sorun yaşadıklarında
farklı sebeplerle çift terapisine başvurmakta ve yardım alabilmektedir.
İlişkisel problemleri öngörmeyi sağlayan bir unsur kişilik yapılarıdır. Kişilik
özellikleri ile ilgili farklılıkların genellikle yakın bir ilişki kurma ve
sürdürmede önemli bir faktör olduğu bilinmektedir. Ayrıca, psikopatolojik
özellikler de ilişkilerin işleyişi ile bağlantılıdır. Bu çalışmada, çiftlerin
karakter yapıları ve psikopatolojik özellikleri ile yardım aldıkları problemler
arasındaki ilişkiler araştırılmıştır. Veriler, psikolojik yardım almak üzere
kliniğe başvuru yapan 81 çiftten toplanmıştır. Katılımcıların başvurdukları
problem alanları, görüşme formunda yer alan 14 problem alanı ile
belirlenmiştir. Psikopatolojik özellikleri ve kişilik yapıları ise Minnesota
Çok Yönlü Kişilik Envanteri (MMPI) kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuçlar,
hem erkekler hem kadınlar için en sık rastlanan problemlerin öfke problemi ve
kayın valide problemi olduğunu göstermektedir. Katılımcıların psikopatolojik
özelliklerinin ve kişilik yapılarının ise yardım aldıkları problemlerle
ilişkili olduğu bulunmuştur.

Keywords

Kişilik Yapıları, Psikopatoloji, MMPI, Çift Terapisi, Evlilik doyumu

References

• Amani, R., Majzoobi, M. R., & Hadian Hamedani, K. (2019). Comparing the Big-Five Personality Traits of Iranian Women in the Midst of Divorce and Women in the Normal State of Marriage, as Predictors of Divorce. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 60(1), 1-11.
• Amato, P. R., & Rogers, S. J. (1997). A longitudinal study of marital problems and subsequent divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 612-624.
• Arnold, P. D. (1972). MARRIAGE COUNSELEE MMPI PROFILE CHARACTERISTICS WITH OBJECTIVE SIGNS THATDISCRIMINATE THEM FROM MARRIED COUPLES IN GENERAL.
• Arrindell, W. A., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (1986). Marital adjustment, intimacy and needs in female agoraphobics and their partners: A controlled study. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 149(5), 592-602.
• Bauserman, S. A. K., Arias, I., & Craighead, W. E. (1995). Marital attributions in spouses of depressed patients. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 17(3), 231-249.
• Beach, S. R., Sandeen, E., & O'Leary, K. D. (1990). Depression in marriage: A model for etiology and treatment. Guilford Press.
• Bradbury, T. N., & Fincham, F. D. (1988). Individual difference variables in close relationships: A contextual model of marriage as an integrative framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 713.
• Burman, B., & Margolin, G. (1992). Analysis of the association between marital relationships and health problems: an interactional perspective. Psychological bulletin, 112(1), 39.
• Ceyhun, B., & Oral, N. (2003). Minnesota Çok Yönlü Kişilik Envanteri Değerlendirme Kitabı,(2. baskı). Çizgi Tıp Yayınevi, Ankara.
• Chambless, D. L., Fauerbach, J. A., Floyd, F. J., Wilson, K. A., Remen, A. L., & Renneberg, B. (2002). Marital interaction of agoraphobic women: A controlled, behavioral observation study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111(3), 502.
• Davis, M. H., & Oathout, H. A. (1992). The effect of dispositional empathy on romantic relationship behaviors: Heterosocial anxiety as a moderating influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 76-83.
• Du Fort, G. G., Kovess, V., & Boivin, J. F. (1994). Spouse similarity for psychological distress and well-being: A population study. Psychological medicine, 24(2), 431-447.
• Dyrenforth, P. S., Kashy, D. A., Donnellan, M. B., & Lucas, R. E. (2010). Predicting relationship and life satisfaction from personality in nationally representative samples from three countries: The relative importance of actor, partner, and similarity effects. Journal of personality and social psychology, 99(4), 690.
• Earls, F. (1987). Sex differences in psychiatric disorders: origins and developmental influences. Psychiatric developments, 5(1), 1-23.
• Emery, R. E., Shim, H. J., & Horn, E. (2012). Examining divorce consequences and policies and the question: Is marriage more than a piece of paper?.
• Eysenck, H. J., & Wakefield Jr, J. A. (1981). Psychological factors as predictors of marital satisfaction. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 3(4), 151-192.
• Fani, S., & Kheirabadi, A. N. (2011). Personality traits and mental divorce. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 671-675.
• Gattis, K. S., Berns, S., Simpson, L. E., & Christensen, A. (2004). Birds of a feather or strange birds? Ties among personality dimensions, similarity, and marital quality. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(4), 564.
• Good, P. K., & Brantner, J. P. (1961). The physician's guide to the MMPI. Minneapolis: Univer.
• Hartung, C. M., & Widiger, T. A. (1998). Gender differences in the diagnosis of mental disorders: Conclusions and controversies of the DSM–IV. Psychological bulletin, 123(3), 260.
• Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1943). The Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory, Rev. ed., 2nd printing.
• Hendrick, S. S., Hendrick, C., & Adler, N. L. (1988). Romantic relationships: Love, satisfaction, and staying together. Journal of personality and social psychology, 54(6), 980.
• Kelly, E. L., & Conley, J. J. (1987). Personality and compatibility: A prospective analysis of marital stability and marital satisfaction. Journal of personality and social psychology, 52(1), 27.
• Kim, H. K., & McKenry, P. C. (2002). The relationship between marriage and psychological well-being: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of family Issues, 23(8), 885-911.
• Maes, H. H., Neale, M. C., Kendler, K. S., Hewitt, J. K., Silberg, J. L., Foley, D. L., ... & Eaves, L. J. (1998). Assortative mating for major psychiatric diagnoses in two population-based samples. Psychological medicine, 28(6), 1389-1401.
• Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Schutte, N. S., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2010). The five-factor model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 124-127.
• McLeod, J. D. (1995). Social and psychological bases of homogamy for common psychiatric disorders. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 201-214.
• Monajem, A., Aghayousefi, A., & Zare, H. (2013). The comparison of schemas, parenting style, and life traps in married and divorced women. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 7(2), 133-142.
• Murstein, B. I., & Glaudin, V. (1968). The use of the MMPI in the determination of marital maladjustment. Journal of Marriage and the Family.
• O'farrell, T. J., & Birchlery, G. R. (1987). Marital relationships of alcoholic, conflicted, and nonconflicted couples. Journal of marital and Family Therapy, 13(3), 259-274.
• Paris, J. (2015). Mood disorders and personality disorders: Simplicity and complexity. In Borderline Personality and Mood Disorders (pp. 3-9). Springer, New York, NY.
• Prager, K. J. (1995). The psychology of intimacy. New York, NY. Guilford Press. Radloff, LS (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385-401.
• Smith-Dijulio, K. (1998). People Who Depend Upon Substances of Abuse: Foundations of Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing, Varcaloris EM.
• Snyder, D. K., & Regts, J. M. (1990). Personality correlates of marital dissatisfaction: A comparison of psychiatric, maritally distressed, and nonclinic samples. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 16(1), 34-43.
• Solomon, B. C., & Jackson, J. J. (2014). Why do personality traits predict divorce? Multiple pathways through satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 978.
• Taymur, İ., & Türkçapar, M. H. (2012). Kişilik: tanımı, sınıflaması ve değerlendirmesi. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 4(2), 154-177.
• Tezer, E. (2016). Evlilik ilişkisinden sağlanan doyum: Evlilik yaşamı ölçeği. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 2(7).
• Tucker, J. S., & Anders, S. L. (1999). Attachment style, interpersonal perception accuracy, and relationship satisfaction in dating couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(4), 403-412.
• Tyler, P. A. (1988). Assortive mating and human variation. Scientific Progress, Oxford, 72, 451–466.
• Watson, D., Hubbard, B., & Wiese, D. (2000). Self–other agreement in personality and affectivity: The role of acquaintanceship, trait visibility, and assumed similarity. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(3), 546.
• Whisman, M. A., Uebelacker, L. A., & Weinstock, L. M. (2004). Psychopathology and marital satisfaction: The importance of evaluating both partners. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 72(5), 830.
• Widiger, T. A., Verheul, R., Van den Brink, W., Pervin, L. A., & John, O. P. (1999). Handbook of personality: Theory and research.
• Vega, B. R., Bayon, C., Franco, B., Canas, F., Graell, M., & Salvador, M. (1993). Parental rearing and intimate relations in women's depression. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 88(3), 193-197.
• Yakali-Çamoğlu, D. (2007). Turkish family narratives: The relationships between mothers-and daughters-in-law. Journal of Family History, 32(2), 161-178.
• Yurtkuran-Demirkan, S., Ersoz, A. G., Şen, R. B., Ertekin, E., Sezgin, O., Turgut, A. M., & Şehitoğlu, N. (2009). Boşanma nedenleri araştırması. TC Başbakanlık Aile ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara.
• Zareei Mahmoodabadi, H. (2012). Examination of attachment styles and personality factors as predictors of divorce in normal and divorce demandant couples in Yazd, Iran. Journal of Family Counseling and Psychotherapy, 2(4), 554–571.