Personal Assessment Of Intimacy In Relationships Research Articles

(095) The Elicitors of Intimacy: A Behavioral Checklist

Abstract Introduction Intimacy is crucial for developing successful relationships as it strengthens bonds between partners. Intimacy has been ill-defined and inconsistently measured for decades; however, theorists and researchers consistently agree that intimacy features components of love, affection, self-disclosure, and mutual validation. These constructs feature both cognitive and behavioral aspects of human connection. Despite the importance of intimacy in relationships, there is no widely accepted measure that captures the full spectrum of this multidimensional construct. Popular measures like the Miller Social Intimacy Scale (MSIS), the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR), and the Fear of Intimacy Scale (FIS) each address assess subjective feelings of intimacy. Though they may include behavioral items, the outcome of the scale is cognitive conceptualizations of feelings of intimacy. Extant scales do not sufficiently focus on the behavioral aspect of intimacy in relationships. The widely-accepted Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy suggests that the exchange of intimate behaviors and experiences over time create these feelings of intimacy and its theorized components in a couple. As such, the development of a more inclusive, behavioral intimacy assessment would benefit both researchers and clinicians and help advance our understanding of this construct. Objective The current study aimed to identify specific acts or behaviors that elicited feelings of intimacy for individuals in order to develop a more nuanced, behavioral measure for use in future research and clinical practice. Methods In Study 1, 297 participants nominated over 2,700 items that “elicited feelings of intimacy” for them. Examples of nominations included: trust, communication, touch, attraction, and sex. Trained raters condensed duplicate items (e.g., kiss, kissing) and created a final list of unique nominations for use in Study 2. Five experts in the field of sex research submitted additional items for consideration in Study 2 based on previous conceptualizations of this construct. This process results in 45 distinct items; however, some of the items were behaviors like “sex, acts of service, and attention.” As such, the authors created items for self and partner initiated acts to reflect both the giving and receiving of intimate behaviors (e.g. giving and receiving acts of service). 105 items were compiled from Study 1 and Study 2. Results These 105 behavioral elicitors of intimacy comprise the Intimacy Checklist. In Study 2, 301 participants rated and confirmed that the items created in Study 1 were important to intimacy in varying degrees. Study 2 attempted but failed to identify a significant factor structure for the items. Conclusions The lack of a clear factor structure speaks to the complexity of this multidimensional construct; this is actually consistent with previous literature as there are numerous studies that suggest different factor structures of the same construct (i.e., 4 factor versus 8 factor models). The resulting Intimacy Checklist is a potentially powerful tool for identifying person-specific experiences of intimacy and preferences for intimate interactions in both clinical work and research. A follow up study will be conducted to determine if individuals who feel more satisfied with their intimate interactions are more sexually and relationally satisfied overall. Disclosure No

A Multidimensional Evaluation of Intimacy

ABSTRACT Introduction Intimacy is crucial for developing successful relationships as it strengthens bonds between partners. Intimacy has been hypothesized to comprise four central components: self-disclosure, love and affection, validation, and trust. Despite the importance of intimacy in developing strong relationships, to our knowledge, there is not a widely accepted measure that captures the full spectrum of intimacy. Popular measures like the Miller Social Intimacy Scale (MSIS), the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR), and the Fear of Intimacy Scale (FIS) each address only some facets of this multidimensional construct. As such, the development of a more inclusive relational intimacy scale would benefit both researchers and clinicians and help advance our understanding of this construct. Objective The current study had two primary aims: (1) to identify what acts and experiences elicit feelings of intimacy among individuals in order to develop a more nuanced, complete measure for use in future research and clinical practice; and (2) to evaluate how the factor structure of these items compares to pre-existing measures of intimacy. Methods In Study 1, participants nominated over 2,700 items that “elicited feelings of intimacy” for them. Examples of nominations included: trust, communication, touch, attraction, and sex. Trained raters condensed duplicate items and created a final list of unique nominations for use in Study 2. Five experts in the field of sex research submitted additional items for consideration in Study 2 based on previous conceptualizations of this construct. Study 2 identified the factor structure of these items and validated the measure. Results Data collection for Study 2 is ongoing, but will be completed in January 2021. Results will be updated with an addendum after data analysis. Conclusions Discussion will focus on individual differences in the factor structure of intimacy based on gender, age, and relationship duration and status. We will conclude by positioning our new model of intimacy within the existing theoretical framework of this construct, and elucidate how our measure can improve psychological and clinical research. Disclosure No

Patients and spouses coping with inflammatory arthritis: Impact of communication and spousal perceived social support and burden.

To guide Therapeutic Patient Education (TPE) programs to improve patients' and spouses' perceived health, we aimed to analyze the effect of the spouse health state and patient-spouse relationship on functional impairment, mental health and self-efficacy of patients with RA or SpA. In this observational cross-sectional study, inclusion criteria were age≥18years and diagnosis of RA or SpA. The outcome criteria were functional impairment and mental health measured by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 12-item version (SF-12-MCS); mental health measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12); and self-efficacy by the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE Scale). Caregiver-patient relationship was assessed by the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) questionnaire and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS); social support by the Social Support Questionnaire-6 and spousal burden by the Zarit questionnaire. A total of 88 patient-spouse couples were included. Patients were mostly female (n=68, 77%), with mean age 59 (SD 12.6) years; 69% had RA. On bivariate analyses, only spousal burden was associated with patients' functional impairment. Patients' mental health was associated with satisfaction with social support and the dyad relationship. Self-efficacy of patients was associated with spousal burden, satisfaction with social support, spousal anxiety/depression and the dyad relationship. On multivariate analysis, improved mental health and perceived self-efficacy of patients were associated with spousal satisfaction with social support (Beta=0.8, P=0.1 with GHQ-12) good communication in the couple (Beta=0.5, P=0.04 with SF-12-MCS and Beta=0.4, P=0.04 with GSE Scale) and low spousal-assessed burden (Beta=-0.2, P=0.003 with GSE Scale). This study has identified potential focus for intervention. It has highlighted the importance of recognizing the role of couple communication (experiencing an open and fluent exchange of ideas) in the patient's mental health and self-efficacy but also perceived satisfaction with social support of both members of the couple on the patient's mental health.

ЗВ'ЯЗОК АКТИВНОСТІ В СОЦІАЛЬНИХ МЕРЕЖАХ І ЗАДОВОЛЕНОСТІ РОМАНТИЧНИМИ СТОСУНКАМИ

The active use of social media can potentially jeopardize the quality of romantic relationships. The present study contributes to the existing research body investigating the connection between social media use and relationship satisfaction, by focusing on the users’ social media activity, their relationship visibility, relationship satisfaction and the different types of intimacy. We conducted a web-based data collection where participants (n 418) completed various types of questionnaires, namely the Social Media Use Integration Scale (SMUIS) (Jenkins-Guarnieri, 2013), the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (Diener, 1985), the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) (Hendrick, 1988), Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) (Schaefer & Olson, 1981), and an additional questionnaire created to study the visibility of romantic relationships on social media. To analyze the collected data, first a correlation analysis was conducted. The findings show that there is a negative correlation between social media activity and romantic relationship satisfaction. Besides, social media activity is negatively associated with emotional, intellectual, recreational and social intimacy. No negative correlation has been found regarding social media activity and sexual intimacy. The correlation analysis also indicates that the users’ visibility on social networks is negatively associated with relationship satisfaction and with all types of intimacy, predominantly with social and recreational intimacy. In the second part of the study, a series of moderated regression analysis were carried out. These analyses have shown that social media activity does not moderate the association between romantic relationships’ visibility on social media and relationship satisfaction.

War can harm intimacy: consequences for refugees who escaped Syria.

BackgroundSyrians seeking refuge have been exposed to atrocities and trauma beyond comprehension. This study examines how personal, interpersonal, displacement and war-related factors have impacted married refugees’ intimate lives.MethodsData included 158 married Syrian refugee individuals who live in the host communities of Jordan. Refugees reported on their personal, interpersonal, current-displacement and past-war related experiences. Traumatic impacts were assessed using the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire (HTQ), K6 screening scale for serious mental illness (SMI), The War Events Questionnaire (WEQ), and Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR). Stepwise multiple regressions were used to determine the factors associated with refugees’ intimacy-total score and its six dimensions.ResultsMost refugees (94.2%) experienced war events, and 34% screened positive on the PTSD-HTQ scale. Overall intimacy scores were low, scoring M (±standard deviation) = 2.4 (±1.1) of a possible five on average. Intimacy scores were lower for refugees who screened positive on the PTSD-HTQ (M = 1.95 ± 65) compared to the ones screening negative, respectively (M = 2.23 ± 66). Furthermore, the higher the PTSD symptoms reported, the lower the couples’ intimacy. PTSD and forced marriage were the strongest factors to predict decreased total-intimacy scores (β = -0.23, P = 0.002; β = -0.32, P < 0.001), and decreased scores on four dimensions of intimacy (emotional, sexual, intellectual and recreational). Whereas gender was the second strongest factor associated with decreased total-intimacy scores (β = -0.29, P < 0.001), and decreased scores on three dimensions of intimacy (emotional, social and anger), meaning that women reported suffering more than men from deteriorated intimacy in their marital relationships. Other displacement and war-related factors associated with intimacy were: decreased sexual intimacy associated with having been raped; increased intellectual intimacy associated with escaped from Syria with one’s spouse; decreased recreational intimacy associated with the number of family members lived with; decreased sexual, emotional and total-intimacy scores associated with number of children; and years of education as a seemingly personal protective factor associated with increased intellectual and recreational intimacy.ConclusionsAddressing Syrian refugees’ intimacy issues in interventions is essential, as well as raising the awareness of stakeholders and community leaders to the negative impacts of PTSD, forced marriage, rape, and displacement difficulties endured by the already challenged and distressed married refugees.

Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships with Individuals in Same-Sex Couple Relationships

ABSTRACTAs a concept, romantic intimacy may be examined through Schaefer and Olson's (1981) measure, the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR), which identified five dimensions of intimacy: emotional, intellectual, recreational, sexual, and social intimacy. Moore, McCabe, and Stockdale's (1998) attempt to replicate this five-factor model was not successful, and they instead proposed a three-factor model of intimacy: engagement, communication, and shared friendships. The objective of the present study was to examine the psychometric properties of the PAIR with individuals involved in same-sex couple relationships using these two models. Three hundred fifty participants completed the PAIR, the Experiences in Close Relationships, and the brief 4-item version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Confirmatory factor analyses were not able to replicate both the original five-factor structure and the proposed three-factor structure of the PAIR. Rather, results supported the factor structure, reliability, and concurrent validity of our revised version of Moore et al.'s (1998) three-factor model of intimacy, which retained the three dimensions after various modifications (i.e., addition of covariance terms, deletion of an item, and transference of items) were made. Links were found between these three dimensions of intimacy and insecure romantic attachment, as well as relationship happiness.

Adult Romantic Attachment and Couple Conflict Behaviors: Intimacy as a Multi-Dimensional Mediator

This study investigated associations between adult romantic attachment and couples’ conflict behaviors and the potential mediating role of intimacy. A community sample of 74 couples reported on their attachment security style on the Attachment Style Measure (ASM) (Simpson, 1990) and on multiple dimensions of intimacy on the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) (Schaefer & Olson, 1981). Couples’ conflict behaviors were assessed via behavioral observations and coded for positive and negative dimensions of conflict. Path analyses indicated numerous actor and partner effects in the links between attachment, intimacy, and conflict. For men, both avoidant and anxious attachment styles were predictive of their own and their partner’s intimacy. For women though, both secure and avoidant attachment styles were predictive of their own and their partner’s intimacy. For men, all domains of intimacy were predictive of their own or their partner’s conflict behaviors. For women, only emotional intimacy was predictive of conflict behaviors. All domains of men’s intimacy emerged as significant mediators of associations between attachment and couples’ conflict behaviors. For women, only emotional intimacy mediated these associations. Implications for the treatment of relationally-discordant couples are discussed.

Intimacy and Marital Satisfaction in Spouses

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between intimacy and marital satisfaction of couples in different stages of the family life cycle. The Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) questionnaire (Schaefer & Olson, 1981) and a subscale of the Enriching and Nurturing Relationship Issues, Communication and Happiness (ENRICH) questionnaire (Olson, Fournier, & Druckman, 1982) were administered to 57 couples. Significant differences between men and women were found on two of the five aspects of experienced intimacy (sexual and recreational) as well as for social and sexual discrepancy scores (difference between experienced and desired intimacy). With the exception of social intimacy as experienced by women, a positive correlation was found for both sexes between all the components of experienced intimacy and marital satisfaction. No differences were found for experienced intimacy or marital satisfaction according to family developmental stages.

Fear of Intimacy among Dating Couples

Fear of intimacy among heterosexual dating couples was examined with the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale (FIS) and the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR). Following a 6-month interval, couples were again contacted to determine whether they continued to date. Males reported higher FIS scores than females, and FIS scores were positively correlated within couples. Also, FIS scores of males and females were significantly correlated with indices of actual and desired intimacy; however, for females, correlations of FIS scores with desired intimacy were significantly lower than correlations with actual intimacy. Females who were no longer in the dating relationship at the 6-month follow-up had higher FIS scores than those who were continuing in their dating relationship. These findings increase our understanding of fear of intimacy, especially gender differences in dating couples.

Factor analysis of the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships Scale (PAIR): Engagement, communication and shared friendships

The Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) was developed by Schaefer & Olson (1981) to assess both the actual and ideal levels of intimacy in relationships. Attempts to replicate the original factor structure have not been reported. In Stage 1 of the present study, 157 volunteers (34 males, 123 females; mean age 27.76 years) who were currently in committed relationships completed the PAIR. Factor analysis failed to replicate the original structure but yielded a reliable, independent three-factor solution: engagement, communication and shared friendships. There were no gender differences on these factors. Confirmatory factor analysis failed to confirm this three-factor solution in a group of 145 clients (77 males, 68 females; mean age 35.79 years) presenting to a clinic for the treatment of sexual dysfunction. Principal components analysis yielded a unifactorial solution. These results suggest that people from the general population demonstrate three independent but increasingly involved aspects of intimacy, ranging from engagement to communication to shared friendships. People with sexual dysfunction seem to experience a decrement in all aspects of intimacy. The implications of these findings for the treatment of sexual dysfunction are discussed.

Gender and Marital Intimacy

This study is based on the hypothesis that spouses presenting for couples counseling will present similar intimacy complaints. The sample of 100 couples accessing two community mental health centers completed the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) questionnaire to describe their expectations and perceptions of current marital intimacy. Correlational analyses reveal no relationships between spouses' expectations of marital intimacy but significant positive relationships between spouses perceptions of marital intimacy on thefive intimacy subscales of the PAIR. Tests of difference did not support the original hypothesis; instead, they specified that husbands and wives came to counseling with different intimacy complaints. The implications of these results for case conceptualization and clinical intervention are discussed.

Intimacy, Fusion and Frequency of Sexual Contact in Lesbian Couples

It is generally accepted in the literature that, of all couple types, lesbian couples tend to have the lowest frequencies of sexual contact. It has been hypothesized that a reason for this is that lesbian couples are more subject than others to fusion. This study examines the relationship between frequency of sexual contact and fusion in lesbian relationships of duration longer than one year. The concept of fusion has, however, not been clearly defined. Although Mencher (1990), for example, states that fusion is akin to, but not the same as, intense intimacy, fusion is treated within the literature as if it lay on a continuum of intimacy. In the design of this study, fusion was thus defined as a very high level of intimacy, as measured on the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) Inventory. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated and scatter graphs plotted to explore the possible existence of significant linear and non-linear relationships between fusion and frequency of sexual contact. The results of this study indicate that the conceptualization of fusion as very high intimacy should be questioned. The results suggest that fusion is not synonymous with intense intimacy and this article argues for a clearer definition and operationalizatian of the important concept of fusion.

Intimacy, Conversational Patterns, and Concomitant Cognitive/Emotional Processes in Couples

This study relates the conversational behavior of 30 couples to their level of intimacy, perception of their interaction, and affect about it. Each couple discussed a problem for 10 minutes in a social psychology laboratory, during which vocal measures were computer-recorded. They completed a problem inventory and the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) inventory, which yields six intimacy scores, and independently rated their affective reaction to and answered questions about their interaction during an audiotape playback. Positive affect was associated with faster cycles of alternating in talking and with increased emotional intimacy. Partners were similar to one another in switching pauses and interruptions. The difference between partners in intimacy was more important than level of intimacy in predicting other variables. Men felt less sexual intimacy than women did but valued it more. Women were happier when they felt emotionally intimate. Greater age and length of relationship was negatively correlated with subjective intimacy but positively correlated with smoothness in interaction.

Determinants of Marital Quality in Dual-Career Couples

This study identified themes differentiating high quality and low quality dualcareer marriages. Thirty-four professional dual-career couples completed the Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR) Inventory and the Careern Marital Stress of Women Inventory (CMSWI). Lewis and Spanier's (1979) model of marital quality was selected as the theoretical framework for a qualitative analysis. Themes related to socioeconomic adequacy, wife's satisfaction with her employment, degree of husband's approval of wife's employment, optimal household composition, community embeddedness, positive regard for spouse, emotional gratification, effectiveness of communication, role-fit, and amount of interaction emerged. Implications are discussed.