Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/wiley/attachment-theory-and-methods-for-meanings-of-couple-intimacy-kLCyXCxO7o
References (2)
-
J. Malouff, E. Thorsteinsson, N. Schutte, Navjot Bhullar, S. Rooke (2010)
The Five-Factor Model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta-analysisJournal of Research in Personality, 44
-
Stacy Ridge, Judith Feeney (1998)
Relationship History and Relationship Attitudes in Gay Males and Lesbians: Attachment Style and Gender DifferencesAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 32
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Copyright
- © 2015 The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues
- ISSN
- 1529-7489
- eISSN
- 1530-2415
- DOI
- 10.1111/asap.12096
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
We provide comments on “Meaning of Intimacy: A Comparison of Members of Heterosexual and Same‐Sex Couples,” noting that there are both content and methodological issues that should be addressed in the article. First, attachment theory, used by social psychologists as a major component of the study of relationships, is entirely omitted. Second, both qualitative and quantitative issues are raised by the ways in which intimacy categories are developed and participant stories assigned to them. Finally, none of the results are statistically significant. We address these issues in detail.
Journal
Analyses of Social Issues & Public Policy – Wiley
Published: Dec 1, 2015