Üniversite öğrencilerinin ilişki inançlarının cinsiyet ve romantik ilişki yaşama durumlarına göre incelenmesi

Bu araştırmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin işlevsel olmayan ilişki inançlarının cinsiyet ve romantik ilişki yaşama durumu değişkenlerine göre farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığını incelemektir. Araştırma grubunu Mersin Üniversitesi’nde öğrenim gören 742 lisans öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Bu çalışmada ölçme aracı olarak “İlişki İnançları Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Araştırma verileri t-testi ve tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) teknikleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulgularına göre, üniversite öğrencilerinin romantik ilişkilere yönelik inançları, cinsiyet ve romantik ilişki yaşama durumuna göre farklılık göstermiştir. Cinsiyet açısından ele alındığında, erkek öğrencilerin romantik ilişkilere yönelik inançlar arasında yer alan “Her şeyi birlikte yapmalıyız”, “Birbirimizin bütün ihtiyaçlarını karşılamalıyız” ve “Birbirimizi değiştirebilmeliyiz” inançlarına kızlara oranla daha yüksek düzeyde sahip oldukları saptanmıştır. Romantik ilişki yaşama durumu açısından incelendiğinde ise “daha önce yaşamayıp, şimdi romantik bir ilişki yaşayan” öğrenciler ile “daha önce ve şimdi romantik bir ilişki yaşayan” öğrencilerin diğer gruplardaki öğrencilere göre daha yüksek düzeyde işlevsel olmayan ilişki inançlarına sahip oldukları belirlenmiştir.

An investigation of the relationship beliefs of the university students regarding gender and dating status

The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference among university students’ relationship-specific irrational beliefs in regard to their gender and dating status. The sample consisted of 742 undergraduate students enrolled at Mersin University. “Relationship Beliefs Questionnaire” was used in the present study. One way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t-test were used to analyze the data. The results of the study revealed that the relationship- specific irrational beliefs of university students differed significantly in terms of their gender and dating status. Specifically, males were significantly more likely to have beliefs about “we should do everything together”, “we should be able to meet all of each other’s needs” and “we should be able to change for each other” than females. When dating status of students considered, it was found that the students involved in a romantic relationship for the first time were significantly more likely to have relationship-specific irrational beliefs than the other groups of students.

___

  • Abowitz, D. A., Knox, D., Zusman, M., & Mcneely, A. (2009). Beliefs about romantic relationships: Gender differences among undergraduates. College Student Journal, 43(2), 276-284.
  • Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.
  • Assad, K. K., & Donnellan, M. B. (2007). Optimism: An enduring resource for romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(2), 285-297.
  • Aukett, R., Ritchie, J., & Mill, K. (1988). Gender differences in friendship patterns. Sex Roles, 19, 57–66.
  • Baucom, D. H., Epstein, N., Sayers, S., & Sher, G. (1989). The role of cognition in marital relationships: Definitional, methodological and conceptual issues. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 31–38.
  • Blair, T. M., Nelson, E. S., & Coleman, P. K. (2001). Deception, power, and self-differentiation in college students’ romantic relationships: An exploratory study. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 27, 57-71.
  • Cairney, J., Boyle, M., Offord, M.R., & Racine, Y. (2003). Stress, social support and depression in single and married mothers. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38, 442-449.
  • Carlson, W., & Rose, A. J. (2007). The role of reciprocity in romantic relationships in middle childhood and early adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 262–290.
  • Collins, W. A. (2003). More than myth: The developmental significance of romantic relationship during adolescence. Journal of Reserach of Adolescence, 13, 1-24.
  • Collins, W. A., & van Dulmen, M. (2006). Friendships and romance in emerging adulthood: Assessing distinctiveness in close relationships. In J. J. Arnett & J. L. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp. 219–234). Washington: American Psychological Association
  • Connolly, J. A., & Konarski, R. (1994). Peer self-concept in adolescence: Analysis of factor structure and of associations with peer experience. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 385–403.
  • Creasey, G., & Ladd, A. (2004). Negative mood regulation expectancies and conflict behaviors in late adolescent college student romantic relationships: The moderating role of generalized attachment representations. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14(2), 235–255.
  • Creasey, G., Kershaw, K., & Boston, A. (1999). Conflict management with friends and romantic partners: The role of attachment and negative mood regulation expectancies. The Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28(5), 523-543.
  • Demir, M. (2008). Sweetheart, you really make me happy: Romantic relationship quality and personality as predictors of happiness among emerging adults. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 57–277.
  • Dugosh, W. J. (2000). Current research in social psychology: On predicting relationship satisfaction from jealousy: The moderating effects of love. Current Research in Social Psychology, 5, 254-263.
  • Eidelson, R. J., & Epstein, N. (1982). Cognition and relationship maladjustment: Development of a measure of dysfunctional relationship beliefs. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 715–720.
  • Erikson, E. H. (1994). Identity: Youth and crisis. Newyork: W.W. Norton and Co. Eryılmaz, A. ve Ercan, L. (2010). Beliren Yetişkinlikte Romantik Yakınlığı Başlatma: Yakınlığa Karşı Yalıtılmışlık mı? Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 4(34), 119-127.
  • Felmlee, D. H. (1994). Who’s on top? Power in romantic relationships. Sex Roles, 31, 215- 295.
  • Fletcher, G. J. O., & Kininmonth, L. (1992). Measuring relationship beliefs: An individual differences measure. Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 371-397.
  • Fokkert, J., & Van Kooten, A. M. (2009). Relationship beliefs: theri association with entering into a relationship, theri change over time and with transitions in relationship status. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Utrecth University, Netherlands. Retrieved on 22-November-2011, at URL: http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl.
  • Furman, W. (2002). The emerging field of adolescent romantic relationships. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 177–180.
  • Gizir, C. A. (2012). İlişki İnançları Ölçeği’nin Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışmaları. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8, 37-45.
  • Haferkamp, C. J. (1999). Beliefs about relationships in relation to television viewing, soap opera viewing and self-monitoring. Current Psychology, 18(2), 193-204.
  • Hansen, G. L. (1985). Dating jealousy among college students. Sex Roles, 12, 713-721.
  • Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. (1989). Research on love: Does it measure up? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 784-794.
  • Honeycutt, J., & Cantrill, J. (2001). Cognition, communication and romantic relationships. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Khaleque, A. (2004). Intimate adult relationships, quality of life and psychological adjustment. Social Indicators Research, 69, 351- 360.
  • Knee, C. R. (1998). Implicit theories of relationships: Assessment and prediction of romantic relationship initiation, coping and longevity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 360–370.
  • Knox, D., Schacht, C., & Zusman, M. E. (1999). Love relationships among college students. College Student Journal, 33(1), 149-151.
  • Kurdek, L. (1992). Dimensionality of the dyadic adjustment scale: Evidence from heterosexual and homosexual couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 64, 22–35.
  • Küçükarslan, M. (2011). Mersin Üniversitesi Öğrencilerinin Romantik İlişkilere Yönelik İnançlarının Cinsiyet, Sınıf Ve Romantik İlişki Yaşama Durumu Değişkenlerine Göre İncelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Mersin Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Mersin.
  • Larson, J. (1988). The marriage quiz: College students’ beliefs in selected beliefs about marriage. Family Relations, 37, 3-11.
  • Larson, R., & Richards, M. H. (1991). Daily companionship in late childhood and early adolescence: Changing developmental contexts. Child Development, 62, 284–300.
  • Levin, J. (2000). A prolegomenon to an epidemiology of love: Theory, measurement and health outcomes. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 117-136.
  • Metts, S., & Cupach, W. R. (1990). The influence of relationship beliefs and problem solving responses on satisfaction in romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 17,170–185.
  • Miga, E. M., Hare, A., Allen, J. P., & Manning, N. (2010). The relation of insecure attachment states of mind and romantic attachment styles to adolescent aggression in romantic relationships. Attachment and Human Development, 12(5), 463–481.
  • Moller, A. T. & Van der Merwe, J. D. (1997). Irrational beliefs, interpersonal perception and marital adjustment. Journal of Rational Emotive and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, 15, 260-290.
  • Montgomery, M. J., & Sorell, G. T. (1997). Differences in love attitudes across family life stages. Family Relations, 46, 55-61.
  • Mosher, C., & Danoff-Burg, S. (2007). College students’ life priorities: The influence of gender and gender-linked personality traits. Gender Issues, 24, 21-33.
  • Myers, D. (2000). The funds, friends and faith of happy people. American Psychologist, 55, 56–67.
  • Neff, K. D., & Suizzo, M. A. (2006). Culture, power, authenticity and psychological wellbeing within romantic relationships: A comparison of European American and Mexican Americans. Cognitive Development, 21, 441–457.
  • Neider, T., & Seiffge–Krenke. I. (2001). Coping with stress in different phases of romantic development. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 297–311.
  • Peplau, L. A. (1994). Men and women in love. In D. L. Sollie & L. A. Leslie, Gender, families, and close relationships: Feminist research journeys (pp. 19-49). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • Pines, A. M. (2010). Aşık Olmak: Sevgililerimizi Neye Göre Seçeriz? (Çeviri: Mercan Yurdakuler Uluengin) İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  • Reis, H. T., Collins, W. A., & Berscheid, E. (2000). The relationship context of human behavior and development. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 844–872.
  • Roisman, G. I., Collins, V. A., Sroufe, L. A., & Egeland, B. (2005). Predictors of young adults’ representations of and behavior in their current romantic relationship: Prospective tests of the prototype hypothesis. Attachment and Human Development, 7(2), 1051-121.
  • Romans, J. C., & DeBord, J. (1995). Development of the relationship beliefs questionnaire. Psychological Reports, 76, 1-3.
  • Schachner, D.A., Shaver, P.R., & Gillath, O. (2008). Attachment style and long-term singlehood. Personal Relationships, 15, 479–491.
  • Sharp, E.A., & Ganong, L.H. (2000). Raising awareness about marital expectations: Are unrealistic beliefs changed by integrative teaching? Family Relations, 49, 71-76.
  • Sprecher, S. (2002). Sexual satisfaction in premarital relationships: Associations with satisfaction, Love, Commitment, and Stability. The Journal of Sex Research, 39, 190-196.
  • Sprecher, S., & Felmlee, D. (1997). The balance of power in romantic heterosexual couples over time from ‘his’ and ‘her’ perspectives. Sex Roles, 37, 361-69.
  • Sprecher, S., & Metts, S. (1999). Romantic beliefs: Their influence on relationships and patterns of change over time. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 834– 851.
  • Stackert, R. A., & Bursik, K. (2003). Why am I unsatisfied? Adult attachment style, gendered irrational relationship beliefs and young adult romantic relationship satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1419–142.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93(2), 119-135.
  • Sullivan, B. F., & Schwebel, A. I. (1995). Relationship belief and expectations of satisfaction in marital relationships: Implications for family practitioners. Family Journal, 3(4), 298-305.
  • Türküm, S. A., Kızıltaş, A. ve Sarıyer, A. (2004). Anadolu Üniversitesi Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Merkezi’nin Hedef Kitlesinin Psikolojik İhtiyaçlarına İlişkin Ön Çalışma. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 3, 15-29
  • Watson, D, Hubbard B., & Wiese D. (2000). General traits of personality and affectivity as predictors of satisfaction in intimate relationships: Evidence from self- and partner- ratings. The Journal of Personality, 68, 413-449.
Eğitim ve Bilim-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-1337
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: Türk Eğitim Derneği (TED) İktisadi İşletmesi
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Almanya’da bavyera eyaleti ilköğretim ders kitaplarında Türk imgesi üzerine bir analiz

Hakan DEDEOĞLU

Perceptions of parents about the duties of primary school administrators related to the attendance education of primary school first grade students’ families to school life

Mehmet ÖZBAŞ

6. - 8. Sınıf öğrencilerinin fiziksel aktiviteye katılımında algıladıkları sosyal desteğin rolü

Hülya AŞÇI, Deniz HÜNÜK, Recep Ali ÖZDEMİR, Gülşen YILDIRIM

Lisans öğrencilerini yükseköğrenim görmeye yönelten nedenler ve sosyalleşme taktikleri

Ceren ÖZKAN, Sıdıka GİZİR

Comparison of 8th grade american and Turkish students’ perceptions about citizenship

Nihal BALOĞLU UĞURLU

Ergen örneklemde beş faktör kişilik envanteri’nin cinsiyetlere göre ortalama ve kovaryans yapılarıyla ölçme eşdeğerliği

Oya SOMER, Mediha KORKMAZ, Duygu GÜNGÖR

Üstün yetenekli ve normal gelişim gösteren çocukların ahlaki yargı düzeyine yaratıcı drama programlarının etkisinin incelenmesi

Saniye KANGAL BENCİK, Meziyet ARI

Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi

Murat KANGALGİL

A regression study: English language teachers’ general and professional sense of self-efficacy

Şaziye YAMAN, Gökçe ESEN, Yusuf İNANDI

An analysis of the relationship between academic career and sex at hacettepe university

Bahar Şevkat ÖZVARIŞ, Tanfer Emin TUNÇ, Şenay AKGÜN, İlknur. M GÖNENÇ