Validation of the dyadic ajustment scale (DAS) in russian sample

 
PIIS020595920007907-3-1
DOI10.31857/S020595920007907-3
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation: Department of Family and Childhood Psychology, Institute of Psychology named by L.S. Vygotsky, Russian State University for the Humanities
Address: Moscow, Miusskaya square, 6
Occupation: Associate Professor
Affiliation: Department of Family and Childhood Psychology, Institute of Psychology named by L.S. Vygotsky, Russian State University for the Humanities
Address: Miusskaya square, 6
Occupation: Professor
Affiliation:
Institute of Higher and Supplementary Professional Education, Federal Science-Clinical Center of Rheumatology and Reabilitology
Law Institute, Altai State University
Address: Russian Federation
Occupation: Associate Professor
Affiliation: Institute of Psychology and Pedagogics, Altai State Pedagogical University
Address: Molodezhnaya str., 55
Journal namePsikhologicheskii zhurnal
EditionVolume 41 issue 1
Pages112-131
Abstract

The authors evaluated the psychometric properties of the “Dyadic Adjustment Scale” (DAS, G.B. Spanier) in the Russian context. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed the four-factor original structure of the questionnaire, proved its convergent and discriminant validity, internal consistency of the subscales, test-retest reliability. Psychometric characteristics of the test and descriptive statistics are presented.

KeywordsDyadic adjustment, DAS questionnaire, marital satisfaction, validity, reliability
Received13.12.2019
Publication date27.12.2019
Number of characters30901
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 3012

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Ajvazova D.G. Metodicheskie vozmozhnosti issledovanija udovletvorennosti brachnymi otnoshenijami // Sibirskij psihologicheskij zhurnal. 2014. № 51. P. 148–155. (In Russian)

2. Ajvazova D.G. Primenenie shkaly diadicheskoj adaptacii v brachnoj terapii: issledovatel'skaja nauchnaja rabota Jenn M. Prauti i dr. // Lichnost' kak predmet klassicheskoj i neklassicheskoj psihologii: mater. XIII Mezhdunarodnyh chtenij pamjati L.S. Vygotskogo / Ed. V.T. Kudrjavceva. Moscow: RGGU, 2012. Ch. 2. P. 196–198. (In Russian)

3. Aleshina Ju.E. Udovletvorennost' brakom i mezhlichnostnoe vosprijatie v supruzheskih parah s razlichnym stazhem semejnoj zhizni: Avtoref. diss. …kand. psihol. nauk. Moscow, 1985. (In Russian)

4. Aleshina Ju.E., Gozman L.Ja., Dubovskaja E.M. Social'no-psihologicheskie metody issledovanija supruzheskih otnoshenij. Specpraktikum po social'noj psihologii. Moscow: MGU, 1987. (In Russian)

5. Andreeva T.V. Psihologija sovremennoj sem'i. St. Petersburg: Rech', 2006. (In Russian)

6. Enikolopov S.N., Cibul'skij N.P. Psihometricheskij analiz russkojazychnoj versii Oprosnika diagnostiki agressii A. Bassa i M. Peri // Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2007. V. 28. № 1. P. 115–124. (In Russian)

7. Karabanova O.A. Psihologija semejnyh otnoshenij i osnovy semejnogo konsul'tirovanija. Moscow: Gardariki, 2005. (In Russian)

8. Kashirskij D.V. Diagnostika projavlenij odinochestva: adaptacija oprosnika D. Rassela, L. Piplo i M. Fergjusona na rossijskoj vyborke // Jemocional'nye svjazi i otnoshenija privjazannosti v zameshhajushhej sem'e: materialy seminara dlja specialistov sluzhb soprovozhdenija zameshhajushhih semej v Altajskom krae / Eds. N.V. Sabel'nikova, D.V. Kashirsk, B.A. Sosnovskij. Barnaul: Izd-vo AAJeP, 2013. P. 159–163. (In Russian)

9. Panina N.V. Indeks zhiznennoj udovletvorennosti // LifeLine i drugie novye metody psihologii zhiznennogo puti / Sost., ed. A.A. Kronik. Moscow: Progress-Kul'tura, 1993. P. 107–114. (In Russian)

10. Poljakova Ju.M., Sorokova M.G., Garanjan N.G. Faktornaja struktura i nadezhnost' shkaly vzaimnoj adaptacii v pare (DAS) v rossijskoj vyborke // Konsul'tativnaja psihologija i psihoterapija. 2018. V. 26. № 3. P. 105–126. (In Russian)

11. Sabel'nikova N.V. Kashirskij D.V. Oprosnik privjazannosti k blizkim ljudjam // Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2015. V. 36. № 4. P. 84–97. (In Russian)

12. Sopun S.M., Liderc A.G. Psihologicheskaja sovmestimost' supruzheskoj pary i udovletvorennost' brakom // Sibirskij psihologicheskij zhurn. 2007. № 25. P. 156–162. (In Russian)

13. Stolin V.V., Romanova T.A., Butenko G.P. Oprosnik udovletvorennosti brakom // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Serija 14. 1984. № 2. P. 54–61. (In Russian)

14. Sychev O.A. Russkojazychnaja versija shkaly ocenki otnoshenij // Psihologija. Zhurnal Vysshej shkoly jekonomiki. 2016. V. 13. № 2. P. 386–409. (In Russian)

15. Sychev O.A. Social'no-psihologicheskie faktory udovletvorennosti otnoshenijami v molodyh supruzheskih parah // Social'naja psihologija i obshhestvo. 2017. V. 8. № 1. P. 56–74. (In Russian)

16. Brassard A., Lussier, Y., Shaver P.R. Attachment, perceived conflict, and couple satisfaction: Test of a mediational dyadic model // Family Relations. 2009. V. 58. P. 634–646.

17. Bouchard G., Sabourin S., Lussier Y., Wright J., Boucher C. La structure factorielle de la version française de l’échelle d’ajustement dyadique (The factor structure of the French version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale) // Canadian Journ. of Counselling. 1991. V. 25. P. 4–11.

18. Cano-Prousa A., Martín-Lanasa R., Moyá-Querejetab J., María Isabel Beunza-Nuina M.-I., Lahortiga-Ramosa F., García-Graneroc M. Psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2014. V. 14. P. 137–144.

19. Carey M.P., Spector I.P., Lantinga L.J., Krauss D.J. Reliability of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Psychological Assessment. 1993. V. 5. P. 238–240.

20. Chritensen A., Atcins D.C, Berns S., Wheeler J., Bauco D.H., Simpson L.E. Traditional versus integrative behavioral couple therapy for significantly and chronically distressed married couples // Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2004. V. 72 (2). P. 176–191.

21. Cuenca Montesino M.L., Graña Gómez J.L., Peña Fernández M.E., Andreu Rodríguez J.M. Psychometric properties of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) in a community sample of couples // Psicothema. 2013. V. 25 (4). P. 536–541.

22. Crane D., Busby D., Larson J. A factor analysis of the dyadic adjustment scale with distressed and non-distressed couples // The American Journal of Family Therapy. 1991. V. 19. P. 60–66.

23. Dainton M., Stafford L., Canary D.J. Maintenance strategies and physical affection as predictors of love, liking, and satisfaction in marriage // Communication Reports. 1994. V. 7. P. 89–98.

24. Fincham F.D., Linfield K. A new look at marital quality: Can spouses feel positive and negative about their marriage? // Journal of Family Psychology. 1997. V. 11. P. 489–502.

25. Fişiloǧlu H., Demir A. Applicability of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale for Measurement of Marital Quality with Turkish Couples // European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 2000. V. 16 (3). P. 214–218.

26. Garbarini C., Gerino E., Marino E., Rollé L., Brustia P. Psychometrical properties of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale for Measurement of Marital Quality with Italian Couples // Procedia ― Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014. V. 127. P. 449–503.

27. Graham J.M., Liu Y.J., Jeriorski J.L. The Dyadic Adjustment Scale: A Reliability Generalization Meta-Analysis // Journal of Marriage and Family. 2006. V. 68 (3). P. 701–717.

28. Hahlweg K., Klann N., Hank G. Zur Erfassung der Ehequalitat: Ein Vergleich der “Dyadic Adjustment Scale” (DAS) und des “Partnerschaftsfragebogens” (PFB) [Partnership Questionnaire] // Diagnostica. 1992. V. 38. P. 312–327.

29. Hahlweg K. Fragebogen zur Partnerschaftsdiagnostik (FPD) [Partnership Questionnaire (PFB)]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe, 1996.

30. Hendrick S.S. A Generic Measure of Relationship Satisfaction // Journal of Marriage and Family. 1988. V. 50 (1). P. 93–98.

31. Kazak A., Jarmas A., Snitzer L. The assessment of marital satisfaction: An evaluation of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Journal of Family Psychology. 1988. V. 2. P. 82–91.

32. Kliem S., Kröger C., Stöbel-Richter Y., Hahlweg K., Brähler E. Die faktorielle Struktur des Partnerschaftsfragebogens [The factorial structure of the Partnership Questionnaire] // Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie. 2012. V. 41. P. 109–113.

33. Kurdek L.A. Dimensionality of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale: Evidence from heterosexual and homosexual couples // Journal of Family Psychology. 1992. V. 6. P. 22–35.

34. Lee G. R., Seccombe K., Shehan C.L. Marital status and personal happiness: An analysis of trend data // Journal of Marriage and Family. 1991. V. 53. P. 839–844.

35. Lee M.S., Kim Z.S. A preliminary study on the standardization of the Korean Dyadic Adjustment Scale [Korean] // Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1996. V. 15 (1). P. 129–140.

36. Lenthal G. Marital Satisfaction and Marital Stability // Journañ of Marital and Family Therapy. 1977. V. 3 (4). P. 25–32.

37. Lewis R.A., Spanier G.B. Theorizing about the quality and stability of marriage // W.R. Burr, R. Hill, F.I. Nye, I.L. Reiss. Contemporary theories about the family. New York: The Free Press, 1979. P. 268–294.

38. Mikulincer M., Shaver P.R. Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press, 2007. P. 307–323.

39. Özmen O., Atik G. Attachment styles and marital adjustment of Turkish married individuals // Procedia ― Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2010. V. 5. P. 367–371.

40. Prouty A.M., Markowski E.M., Barnes H.L. Using the Dyadic Adjustment Scale in Marital Therapy: An Exploratory Study // The Family Journal: Counseling and therapy for couples and families. 2000. V. 8 (3). P. 250–257.

41. Rossier J., Rigozzi Ch., Charvoz L., Bodenmann. G. Marital Satisfaction: Psychometric Properties of the PFB and Comparison with the DAS // Swiss Journal of Psychology. 2006. V. 65 (1). P. 55–63.

42. Sabourin S., Lussier Y., Laplante B., Wright J. Unidimensional and multidimensional models of dyadic adjustment: A hierarchical reconciliation. Psychological Assessment // Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1990. V. 2. P. 333–337.

43. Shaver P.R., Schachner D.A., Mikulincer M. Attachment style, excessive reassurance seeking, relationship processes, and depression // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2005. V. 31. P. 343–359.

44. Sharpley C., Cross D. A psychometric evaluation of the Spanier Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1982. V. 44. P. 739–741.

45. Shek D. Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Psychologia. 1994. V. 37. P. 7–17.

46. Shek D., Cheung C. Dimensionality of the Chinese dyadic adjustment scale based on confirmatory factor analyses // Social Indicators Research. 2008. V. 86. P. 201–212.

47. Spanier G.B. Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads // Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1976. V. 38 (1). P. 15–28.

48. Spanier G.B. The measurement of marital quality // Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy. 1979. V. 5. P. 288–300.

49. Spanier G.B. Assessing the strengths of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Journal of Family Psychology. 1988. V. 2 (1). P. 92–94.

50. Spanier G.B., Cole C.L. Toward clarification and investigation of marital adjustment // International Journal of Sociology of the Family. 1976. V. 6. P. 121–146.

51. Spanier G., Lewis R. Marital quality: A review of the seventies // Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1980. V. 42. P. 825–839.

52. Spanier G., Lewis R. Marital quality and marital stability: A reply // Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1981. V. 43. P. 782–783.

53. Spanier G.B., Thompson L. A confirmatory analysis of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1982. V. 44. P. 731–738.

54. Vandeleur C.L., Fenton B.T., Ferrero F., Preisig M. Construct validity of the French version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale // Swiss Journal of Psychology / Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Revue Suisse de Psychologie. 2003. V. 62 (3). P. 167–175.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up