Desk step 3
Weighed against expectations, although not, along with contrast as to what has been seen for the research into dating relationship (DeWall ainsi que al., 2011), very own accessory protection was not related for unfaithfulness. This null perception don’t differ around the husbands and you can spouses, B = ?0.46, SE = 0.forty, t(393) = ?step 1.14, p = .25, the two training, B = 0.62, SE = 0.49, t(393) = 1.forty, p = .16, or the attrition dummy-password, B = 0.47, SE = 0.53, t(393) = 0.89, p = .37, and you may remained non-significant whenever lover connection stress and you will avoidance weren’t regulated, B = 0.03, SE = 0.twenty-four, t(399) = 0.11, p = .91. Significantly, low power you should never describe why connection protection was not absolutely associated with very own cheating as the direction of the non-tall perception is bad.
In line with traditional, lover’s connection anxiety try certainly associated with own infidelity, proving that folks with partners who were full of accessory anxiety have been very likely to engage in unfaithfulness. That it perception did not disagree round the husbands and you may spouses, B = 0.19, SE = 0.58, t(393) = 0.33, p = .75, the two degree, B = ?0.02, SE = 0.40, t(393) = ?0.05, p = .96, and/or attrition dummy-password, B = ?0.forty eight, SE = 0.sixty, t(393) = ?0.80, p = .42.
In contrast to expectations, partner’s attachment avoidance was negatively associated with own infidelity, indicating that spouses with partners who were high in attachment avoidance were less likely to engage in infidelity. Specifically, people who had partners who scored one point higher than the mean on the attachment avoidance subscale were .45 times less likely to perpetrate infidelity as people who had partners that scored at the mean on the scale. This effect did not differ across husbands and wives, B = .57, SE = 0.76, t(393) = 0.75, p = .46 or the attrition dummy-code, B = ?0.98, SE = 0.82, t(393) = ?1.19, p = .24, but did differ across the two studies, B = ?2.00, SE = 0.57, t(393) = ?3.50, p < .01. Specifically, partner attachment avoidance was negatively associated with infidelity in Study 1, B = ?2.26, SE = 0.44, t(393) = ?5.09, p < .01, but not in Study 2, B = ?.26, SE= 0.39, t(393) = ?0.67, p = .50.
To check if partner attachment low self-esteem moderated either association anywhere between own low self-esteem and you can individual infidelity, i projected yet another a few-peak model you to definitely regressed records regarding individual unfaithfulness on to all covariates, mean-built versions of all of the four attachment insecurity scores, and all sorts of five you can interactions (molded because of the multiplying together the fresh indicate-established beliefs of details active in the interaction)-we.age., the Very own Connection Stress X Mate Attachment Stress interaction, the new Individual Connection Stress X Lover Connection Avoidance interaction, this new Own Connection Avoidance X Companion Attachment Nervousness correspondence, together with Own Connection Cures X Companion Attachment Cures communication.
Results can be found in Table cuatro , where the chief outcomes and covariates is actually omitted to avoid redundancy which have Table step three . As well as rise above the crowd, precisely the Own Attachment Stress X Partner Connection Nervousness correspondence is extreme. That it communications don’t differ all over husbands and wives, B = ?0.20, SE = 0.29, t(385) = ?0.66, p = .51, the two education, B = ?0.forty-five, SE = 0.68, t(385) = ?0.67, p = .51, or the attrition dummy-code, B = ?0.66, SE = 0.57, t(385) = ?step one.fifteen, p = https://datingranking.net/fr/lgbt-fr/ .25.
Dining table 4
Entertaining Ramifications of Own Connection Anxiety, Own Attachment Prevention, Partner Accessory Stress, and you can Companion Attachment Cures for the Odds of Unfaithfulness
“She actually drawn to myself anymore. She never will act as excited observe me personally whenever i come home. As to why are unable to it really resemble it was initially?” My buddy recently registered towards firstly one or two preferred stages off dating insecurity: rhetorical questioning. The interior study continues which have, “She requires permanently to resolve my texts. Will not she miss me personally when I’m moved? She familiar with constantly laugh inside my laughs. Do you think she actually is interested in other people?”