Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35173651›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model.

Ione Bretaña, Itziar Alonso-Arbiol, Patricia Recio, Fernando Molero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ione BretañaDepartment of Clinical and Health Psychology and Research Methods, Faculty of Psychology, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, San Sebastian, Spain.
Itziar Alonso-ArbiolDepartment of Clinical and Health Psychology and Research Methods, Faculty of Psychology, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, San Sebastian, Spain.
Patricia RecioFaculty of Psychology, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia UNED, Madrid, Spain.
Fernando MoleroFaculty of Psychology, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia UNED, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was conducted with the purpose of analyzing the combined and mediating effect of actor's withdrawal-partner's demand conflict resolution strategies between avoidance attachment dimension and relationship satisfaction. We conducted a dyadic study with 175 heterosexual couples (aged between 18 and 72 years) who filled in the questionnaires. Six hypotheses were tested using the actor-partner interdependence model with mediation analysis (APIMeM). Results showed that the avoidance dimension of attachment was more strongly associated with actor's withdrawal strategy than with demand/aggression strategy. Furthermore, avoidance attachment was negatively associated with both actor's and partner's relationship satisfaction, the actor effect being higher. Withdrawal strategy was a mediator between actor's avoidance and actor's relationship satisfaction, but it was not a mediator for partner's relationship satisfaction. The interactive pattern of actor's withdrawal-partner's demand/aggression was associated with low levels of both actor's and partner's relationship satisfaction. These results point out to the need of discerning the interactive pattern of conflict-solving strategies as well as their intertwined effect on relationship satisfaction.

Indexed as

actor-partner interdependence modelconflict resolutiondemand/aggressionmediation modelrelationship satisfactionromantic attachmentwithdrawal

Identifiers

PMID35173651
PMCPMC8841843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.