Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
Self and Other Conceptions in Courtship and Marriage Pairs
Ist Teil von
Marriage and family living (Menasha, Wis.), 1956-08, Vol.18 (3), p.243-248
Ort / Verlag
National Council on Family Relations
Erscheinungsjahr
1956
Link zum Volltext
Quelle
Alma/SFX Local Collection
Beschreibungen/Notizen
A study of the nature of pairings leading to marriage & of the amount of consensus between pair members as a function of their stage of courtship. The Twenty Statements personality test of Kuhn & McPartland which asks R's to write 20 answers to the question, 'Who am I', was used as a measure of personality. R's were also asked to give 20 answers to the question 'Who is he?' (or she), the referent being the other member of the pair. The responses were classified as consensual or subconsensual, the former indicating the degree of internalization of the soc systems in which one participates, the latter, to statements without positional reference. A consensual score was computed which represents the degree to which a pair member sees the other member as being a member of consensually defined soc categories. 50 couples were divided into 5 categories: (1) new dating, (2) dating frequently, (3) going steady, (4) engaged, (5) married. All R's were Coll undergrad's or grad's except in the case of the married couples, in which at least 1 member was. N is biased by a sociometric chain relationship between subjects. It was found that (1) the hypo that consensual responses decrease in number as a function of advancing courtship is not supported. (2) S's of both sexes & in each category make signif'ly more consensual references for themselves than they do for the other pair member. (3) Data confirmed the hypo that there will be a congruence between the number of consensual responses a pair member makes for himself & the number he makes for the other pair member. (4) The hypo that there will be a congruence between the number of consensual responses the pair members make for each other was confirmed. (5) The hypo that there will be a congruence between the number of consensual responses a pair member makes for himself & the number the other pair member makes for him was not supported, nor was the hypo that there will be a congruence between the number of consensual responses the pair members make for themselves. (6) It seems unwarranted to conclude that there is any pattern of increased congruence as a function of courtship stage. (7) An analysis designed to test for degree of congruence of a function of the time the pair members had known each other showed no signif results. The study supports the assumption of trait homogeneity between pair members but only in regard to characteristics which are readily observable & which are potentially more accommodative through their greater flexibility. S. H. Aronson.