All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Attributions and Outcomes: Hurtful Communication in Families
Unformatted Document Text:  Attributions and Outcomes 13 (1) Does not describe the reaction at all to (7) Describes the reaction completely. This measure has been found to be strong in terms of its convergent and discriminant validity when correlated with other similar measures (Guerrero et al., 1995). The final measure used in the current study was a modified version of Huston, McHale, and Crouter’s (1986) Marital Opinion Questionnaire (MOQ). The instructions for this measure were altered for the current investigation so that participants reported the way they felt about their relationship with the family member who had hurt their feelings (or whose feelings they had hurt). The MOQ consists of two parts: (a) Ten 7-point semantic differential scales that require respondents to rate their relationship on bipolar adjectives (e.g., miserable-enjoyable, hopeful-discouraging [reverse coded], rewarding-disappointing [reverse coded]), and (b) a single-item global assessment of participants’ relational satisfaction. Two of the items on this measure were fillers: (1) Free to (7) Tied down and (1) Hard to (7) Easy. This measure has been employed in previous studies on hurtful messages (e.g., Vangelisti & Young, 2000). The alpha reliability for the first part of the instrument was .94 (p < .001), and the Pearson Correlation Coefficient (r) between part one and the final item (completely satisfied - completely dissatisfied [reverse coded]) was .51. Scores on this measure ranged from 1 to 7, with a mean of 4.53 (SD = 1.43). Results Hypothesis one suggested that individuals who sent hurtful messages to family members would perceive their messages to be less intentional than would those who received hurtful messages from family members. An independent samples t-test showed no significant difference (t (356) = -1.25, ns) between senders (M = 4.24, SD = 1.57) and receivers (M = 4.02, SD = 1.66) for the perceived intentionality of hurtful messages. The data failed to confirm this hypothesis.

Authors: Young, Stacy., Kubicka, Tara., Tucker, Caralyn., McCoy, Jamie., Kanaan, Kanaan., Johnson, Jarvis., Chavez-Appel, Desi. and Dinger, Michelle.
first   previous   Page 13 of 23   next   last



background image
Attributions and Outcomes
13
(1) Does not describe the reaction at all to (7) Describes the reaction completely. This measure
has been found to be strong in terms of its convergent and discriminant validity when correlated
with other similar measures (Guerrero et al., 1995).
The final measure used in the current study was a modified version of Huston, McHale,
and Crouter’s (1986) Marital Opinion Questionnaire (MOQ). The instructions for this measure
were altered for the current investigation so that participants reported the way they felt about
their relationship with the family member who had hurt their feelings (or whose feelings they
had hurt). The MOQ consists of two parts: (a) Ten 7-point semantic differential scales that
require respondents to rate their relationship on bipolar adjectives (e.g., miserable-enjoyable,
hopeful-discouraging [reverse coded], rewarding-disappointing [reverse coded]), and (b) a
single-item global assessment of participants’ relational satisfaction. Two of the items on this
measure were fillers: (1) Free to (7) Tied down and (1) Hard to (7) Easy. This measure has been
employed in previous studies on hurtful messages (e.g., Vangelisti & Young, 2000). The alpha
reliability for the first part of the instrument was .94 (p < .001), and the Pearson Correlation
Coefficient (r) between part one and the final item (completely satisfied - completely dissatisfied
[reverse coded]) was .51. Scores on this measure ranged from 1 to 7, with a mean of 4.53 (SD =
1.43).
Results
Hypothesis one suggested that individuals who sent hurtful messages to family members
would perceive their messages to be less intentional than would those who received hurtful
messages from family members. An independent samples t-test showed no significant difference
(t (356) = -1.25, ns) between senders (M = 4.24, SD = 1.57) and receivers (M = 4.02, SD = 1.66)
for the perceived intentionality of hurtful messages. The data failed to confirm this hypothesis.


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 13 of 23   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.