Family Conflict Resolution: Its Measurement and Relationship with Family Conflict and Psychological Adjustment

Abstract

Based on family conflict literature, there is a need for the development of a measure of family conflict resolution. This study aimed to develop items based on established instruments and rationally construct new items in order to pilot a measure of family conflict resolution. Preliminary reliability and validity data were obtained using a sample of young adults. Results indicate that the proposed measure of conflict resolution produced valid factor analytic solutions, adequate internal consistency, and construct validity. The results of this study also revealed avoidance of conflict as a factor that is related to adjustment. Future research into conflict avoidance as a salient contributor to psychological adjustment appears warranted.

Calibration of the Langner Symptom Survey for the College Population

“…In the subsample collected by Cruce et al (2012), the LSS' M=3.81, (SD=8.82); in the subsample collected by Roskos et al (2010), the LSS' M=4.23, (SD=3.42); in the subsample collected by Ross et al (2009), the LSS' M=3.91 (SD=3.18); and in the subsample collected by [citation removed for blinding purposes], the LSS' M=3.97 (SD=3.26). Thus, the subsample means ranged narrowly from 3.81 to 4.23, with standard deviations plenty wide enough to assure no significant differences.…”

“…This study examined archival data from four studies (Cruce et al 2012;Roskos et al 2010;Ross et al 2009; [fourth citation removed for blinding purposes]) that were conducted at Midwestern universities. Participants in the original studies, which occurred between 2003 and 2009, were recruited through undergraduate psychology courses, and received extra credit as compensation.…”

“…An exact demographic description of the participants' ages was unable to be achieved due to the researchers' differing approaches to collecting that information (e.g., age-ranges versus open-ended response). However, all participants were at least 18 years old and the sub-sample descriptions are as follows: of the 390 participants (29.9 % of total sample) in the study by Cruce et al (2012), the ages ranged from 18 to 21 with M=19.51 years (SD=1.10); of the 332 participants (25.4 % of total sample) in the study by Roskos et al (2010), the ages ranged from 18 to "23 or older" with M=19.40 years, (SD=1.29); of the 189 participants (14.5 % of total sample) in the study by Ross et al (2009), ages ranged from 18 to "23 or older" with M=20.0 years (SD=1.24); and of the 395 participants (30.2 % of total sample) in the study by [citation removed for blinding purposes], ages ranged from 18 to 23 with a median age of 18 years.…”

Az elkerülés mint folyamat – az elkerülés kérdőív bemérése 15 és 18 évesek körében

“…A kizárólag az elkerülést mérő eszközök legtöbbje szintén csak néhány forma jellemzőjének feltárására alkalmas (pl. Roskos, Handal, & Ubinger, 2010;Ubinger et al, 2012).A mérőeszközök kidolgozóinak döntő többsége szerint az elkerülés alapvetően inadekvát (diszfunkcionális) megoldási, megküzdési mód, ám hangsúlyozzák, hogy vá-lasztása nem minden esetben tudatos, illetve nagymértékben személy-és helyzetfüggő (pl. Frauenknecht & Black, 2009), így csak ezeket figyelembevéve állapítható meg, hogy az elkerülés az adott szituációban pozitív vagy negatív az egyén és környezete számára.…”

“…A kizárólag az elkerülést mérő eszközök legtöbbje szintén csak néhány forma jellemzőjének feltárására alkalmas (pl. Roskos, Handal, & Ubinger, 2010;Ubinger et al, 2012).…”