Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
For all of the importance physical affection may hold on romantic relationships, little research has been conducted on the extent to which physical ...
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 111
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
By MICHAEL TALMADGE HILL
Saint Olaf CollegeBachelor of Arts Northfield, Minnesota 2002 Master of Arts University of North Dakota Grand Forks, North Dakota 2004 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of Oklahoma State University In partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May, 2009
ii
Dissertation Approved: Al Carlozzi, Ed.D.
Dissertation Advisor John Romans, Ph.D.
Diane Montgomery, Ph.D.
Don Boswell, Ph.D.
Carolyn Henry, Ph.D.
A. Gordon Emslie, Ph.D.
Dean of Graduate College
Chapter Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..........................................................................................iii
vii
Figure Page 1 Scree Plot for Varimax Rotation Factor Analysis............................................. 2 Gender Differences in Hot Physical Affection Across Relationship Stages…
Since the days of Freud, the question of love and the attempt to define it have continued to baffle psychologists and researchers. According to Nicholi (2002), “Freud said that when you look at people’s behavior, their one purpose in life is to be happy and that ‘sexual (genital) love…[is] the prototype of all happiness’ (p. 126).” It has been made clear by the many and various theories of love that have been proposed in the last 40 years that our understanding of love is still quite rudimentary (Berscheid & Reis, 1998; Rubin, 1988). It has been hypothesized that love is not a single construct, and he identified six styles of love: eros (erotic love), ludus (game-playing love), storge (friendship love), mania (jealous love), agape (altruistic love), and pragma (practical love). There has been some empirical support of this theory of love (Engel, Olson, & Patrick, 2002). Hatfield and Rapson (1995) attempted to clarify the meaning of love by defining four categories of people’s experience of love: secure (comfortable with intimacy and independence), skittish (uncomfortable with intimacy, but comfortable with independence), clingy (comfortable with intimacy, but afraid of independence), and fickle (comfortable with neither intimacy nor independence). Yet another theory of love proposes that love begins with passionate feelings toward the loved one and is characterized by strong sexual attraction. However, as love matures and the relationship progresses, love becomes more
bond formation). This line of research suggests love and other positive constructs such as trust may be linked to the release of peptide hormones such as oxytocin and vasopressin (Bales & Carter, 2003; Bielsky & Young, 2004; Carter, 1998, 1999; Cho, De Vries, Williams, & Carter, 1999; Insel, 2000; Insel, Preston, & Winslow, 1995; Liu, Curtis, & Wang, 2001; Porges, 1998; Young, 2002). Other studies underscore the importance of love to physical and psychological well-being. Myers (2000) found that people who were single or divorced were typically not as happy as people who were married. Furthermore, people who are married tend to be healthier than people who are single (Stack, 1998). Love is extremely complex, and it can be difficult to measure due to the inherent subjectivity of the experience of love. One line of research on love attempts to study the subjective experience of love through self-report measurements (Sternberg, 1997). Other lines of research attempt to measure the manifestations of love such as physical affection either through self-report (Gulledge, Gulledge, & Stahmann, 2003) or through observation of couples (Stier & Hall, 1984). Physical Affection Physical affection is commonly considered an important component of loving relationships. Physical affection is defined as “any touch intended to arouse feelings of love in the giver and/or the recipient” (Gulledge et al., 2003, p. 234). Therefore, romantic physical affection refers to any touch intended to arouse feelings of love in the giver and/or the recipient in a romantic relationship. While (interpersonal) touch and physical affection are often used interchangeably, there are differences between the two terms. Interpersonal touch refers to any physical contact between two people. This could include forms of touch ranging from hitting to kissing, to shaking hands, to breastfeeding.
Physical affection can be thought of as a subcategory of touch. If physical affection is “any touch intended to arouse feelings of love in the giver and/or the recipient” (Gulledge, et al., 2003, p. 234), then this presents researchers with difficulties in determining exactly which forms of interpersonal touch are physical affection and which forms of interpersonal touch are not physical affection. Unfortunately for researchers, there are few if any types of interpersonal touch that can be ruled out from being physical affection based entirely on the type of interpersonal touch. Punching another person typically is not physical affection, but under the right circumstances it could be considered as such. A light tap on the shoulder in a playful manner could be considered physical affection. Conversely, holding hands is typically considered to be a form of physical affection, but there are times where grabbing and holding someone’s hand could be considered controlling, and is therefore not physical affection. Another factor in determining whether or not a specific instance of interpersonal touch is physical affection is the motivation behind the touch. For example, a man who holds his partner’s hand may appear to be doing so out of love and a desire to touch his partner, or the motivation behind the action could be an attempt to control his partner. His partner may view the act as either controlling or loving, which would have an impact on determining whether or not such touch was indeed perceived as physical affection. After all, the man may believe that controlling his partner is done out of love, when his partner does not share his view. Similarly, a woman who puts her arm around her partner in public could be doing so out of love and a desire to be physically closer to her partner, or she could be territorial, and she is doing so to send a message to other women that her partner is currently in a romantic relationship (Guerrero & Andersen, 1994, 1999).
Dworkin and O’Sullivan (2005) found that men reported initiating sexual physical affection more frequently than their female partners. One possible reason for this phenomenon is that men are expected to be more aggressive in romantic relationships, whereas women who initiate sexual physical affection are seen as violating social norms. Men may view the initiation of sexual physical affection as being part of their social role (Mongeau, Carey, & Williams, 1998). Men may feel more comfortable with sexual intimacy than they do with non-sexual intimacy such as emotional intimacy or non-sexual physical affection (L’Abate, 2001). In spite of the difficulties inherent in studying physical affection, there has been moderate research on physical affection and interpersonal touch (Gulledge, Hill, Lister, & Sallion, 2007). The main reason for the continuing research on physical affection probably lies in the importance physical affection has to human well-being. For example, physical affection has been associated with various health benefits such as decreased blood pressure (Fishman, Turkheimer, & DeGood, 1995), decreased anxiety (Olson & Sneed, 1995), decreased aggression (Field, 1999, 2002), reduction of pain (Fishman et al., 1995), and the release of the hormones oxytocin and vasopressin, which are associated with pair bond formation and healthy social interactions (Carter, 2003). There is emerging evidence that physical affection is associated with relationship satisfaction (Gulledge et al., 2003; Hill, 2004). Healthy interpersonal relationships are very important to human beings. Most, if not all of the DSM-IV diagnoses involve at least some degree of impaired social functioning (Teyber, 2000). Therefore the absence of healthy interpersonal relationships can be indicative of poor mental health, whereas the presence of healthy interpersonal
relationships can be indicative of good mental health. Similarly, healthy romantic relationships are associated with physical health and happiness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), while unhealthy romantic relationships are associated with physical health problems such as sexual dysfunction (Metz & Epstein, 2002) and eating disorders. Stages of Relationship For all of the importance physical affection may hold on romantic relationships, little research has been conducted on the extent to which physical affection is affected by stage of a romantic relationship. There is difficulty in defining relationship stages based on the actual status of the relationship. One barrier to operationalizing relationship stages is the unique nature of each relationship. Not all relationships progress at the same rate, which makes chronological categorization unreliable. The nature of romantic relationships varies from couple to couple. Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love may provide some insight into this problem. Various relationships contain varying levels of intimacy, passion, and commitment. One relationship may progress quickly with regard to passion; whereas a different relationship may progress more quickly with regard to intimacy and commitment, and passion develops later on, if at all. One solution to this problem has been to categorize relationship stages based on self-reported measures of relationship stages. Interestingly, these categories seem to be strongly related to the level of commitment in the relationship. Guerrero and Andersen (1991, 1994, 1999) categorized relationship stages into casual dating, serious dating, and married. Hill (2004) used similar measures of relationship stages. One problem with the classification system used by Guerrero and Andersen is that it may categorize people whose relationships are more similar to the married stage as being in the serious dating
traditions cover this topic, but it may also be due to the complexity of relationships themselves. According to Berscheid and Reis (1998), “No single factor has proved to be an especially potent predictor of satisfaction, and even groups of variables often account for a relatively small portion of the variance” (p. 234). Sternberg (1986) hypothesized that relationship satisfaction was high when the self-reported dimensions of love (intimacy, passion, commitment) closely resembled the ideal dimensions of love. The greater the discrepancy between the love and satisfaction, the greater the dissatisfaction. Additionally, Contreras, Hendrick, and Hendrick (1996) found that romantic love and marital satisfaction are closely associated. While there are many available measures of relationship satisfaction, many of these measures assume a marital relationship is present, and therefore they may not be valid when measuring relationship satisfaction among unmarried couples (Berscheid & Reis, 1998). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction that does not assume the status of the relationship would be most appropriate for a study that is inclusive of married and unmarried people.
Definition of Terms
Physical affection is “any touch intended to arouse feelings of love in the giver and/or the recipient” (Gulledge et al., 2003, p. 234). The concept of physical affection includes both sexual and non-sexual physical affection.
Relationship stage is a construct of the status and development of a romantic relationship. Based on Guerrero and Andersen (1994, 1999), there are three stages to romantic relationships: casual dating, serious dating, and committed. Relationship satisfaction is an abstract psychological concept which represents the level of contentment a person has for the romantic relationship in which they are involved. Intimacy “refers to feelings of closeness, connectedness, and bondedness in loving relationships” (Sternberg, 1997, p. 315). Passion “refers to the drives that lead to romance, physical attraction, sexual consummation, and related phenomena in loving relationships” (Sternberg, 1997, p. 315). Commitment (or decision) “refers, in the short-term, to the decision that one loves a certain other, and in the long-term, to one’s commitment to maintain that love” (Sternberg, 1997, p. 315).
Statement of the Problem
There has been relatively little research that examines the effects physical affection has on romantic relationship satisfaction (Gulledge et al., 2007). What little research and literature may exist on the frequency and initiation patterns of physical affection during the course of romantic relationships is typically observational in nature (Guerrero & Andersen, 1991, 1994, 1999), which leaves a vacuum of knowledge with regards to physical affection that occurs in private settings.
Hypotheses
Since this study is exploratory in nature, null hypotheses will be used. Null Hypothesis 1 There are no stable and valid factors associated with physical affection. Null Hypothesis 2 The factors of physical affection and love are not associated with romantic relationship satisfaction. Null Hypothesis 3 The physical affection factors do not vary across gender and romantic relationship stage.
Significance of the Study
Since healthy romantic relationships are associated with improved health and increased happiness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), it is beneficial to better understand which factors play an important role in the formation and maintenance of romantic relationships. Physical affection may be a significant factor in the formation and maintenance of healthy and fulfilling romantic relationships by increasing relationship satisfaction and improving the quality of the relationship. Given the recent increase in divorce rates in the United States (Berscheid & Reis, 1998), new interventions involving
the use of physical affection could be utilized in couples counseling in order to increase relationship satisfaction and stability, which could in turn reduce the divorce rate. Physical affection results in the release of oxytocin in mammals (Carter, 2003; Uvnas-Mober, 1998). Emerging evidence suggests deficits in oxytocin may be linked to a variety of mental disorders such as depression (Arletti & Bertolini, 1987; Uvnas-Mober, 2003; Uvnas-Mober et al., 1999), anxiety (Bale, Davis, Auger, Dorsa, & McCarthy, 2001), stress (Heinrichs Baumgartner, Kirshbaum, & Ehlert, 2003) excessive aggression in adolescents (Field, 2002), or even autism (Insel, 2000). So perhaps physical affection interventions could be designed and used to treat or help control the symptoms of such disorders. Furthermore, physical affection, through the release of oxytocin, may promote faster healing of wounds, and it may help reduce obesity and increase energy by causing increased mobilization of the body’s energy reserves (Stock Fastbom, Bjorkstrand, Ungerstedt, & Uvnas-Mober, 1990). Therefore, increased understanding of factors associated with physical affection has implications for the promotion of not only healthy relationships, but for physical and mental health in general.
Limitations
There are some limitations to this study. One of the greatest limitations is the use of the Physical Affection Behavior-Rating Scale, as this study attempts to establish validity or reliability of potential scales. Another limitation of this study is that the participants were university students from the Southwestern area of the United States. The sample was predominantly young well-educated heterosexual Caucasians; therefore,
