EXPECTATIONS IN HIGH CONFLICT HOMES. Thesis. Submitted to. The College of Arts and Sciences of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON

Transcription

1 THE EFFECTS OF SIBLING RELATIONSHIPS ON ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP EXPECTATIONS IN HIGH CONFLICT HOMES Thesis Submitted to The College of Arts and Sciences of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Clinical Psychology by Ryan Thomas Sinclair UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON Dayton, Ohio August 2010

2 THE EFFECTS OF SIBLING RELATIONSHIPS ON ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP EXPECTATIONS IN HIGH CONFLICT HOMES APPROVED BY: Carolyn Roecker Phelps, Ph.D. Faculty Advisor Catherine Lutz Zois, Ph.D. Committee Member Melissa Layman-Guadalupe, Ph.D. Committee Member Concurrence: Carolyn Roecker Phelps, Ph.D. Chair, Department of Psychology ii

3 ABSTRACT THE EFFECTS OF SIBLING RELATIONSHIPS ON ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP EXPECTATIONS IN HIGH CONFLICT HOMES Name: Sinclair, Ryan Thomas University of Dayton Advisor: Dr. Carolyn Roecker Phelps The current study examined the effects of sibling relationship quality on adolescent romantic relationship expectations and conflict beliefs. The impact of the sibling relationship and interparental conflict were analyzed for their role in romantic relationship expectations. No significant correlations were found between sibling relationships and romantic relationship expectations. Desirable sibling relationship qualities shared a positive relation with romantic relationship expectations for cross-gender sibships. Same-gender sibships, on the other hand, demonstrated a negative relation between undesirable sibling relationship qualities and romantic expectations. The potentially moderating effects of a positive sibling relationship on romantic relationship expectations within high conflict homes were unable to be examined due to a lack of relation between measures examining these factors. The findings suggest differing impacts of cross- and same-gender sibships on romantic relationship expectations iii

4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My sincerest thanks go to Dr. Carolyn Roecker Phelps, my advisor, whose commitment, support, advice, time, and energy went into the conceptualization and completion of this thesis. Her expertise and willingness to provide recommendations and suggestions helped to shape this thesis and bring its ideas to fruition. I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Catherine Lutz Zois and Dr. Melissa Layman-Guadalupe, my thesis committee, for their support and feedback throughout this process. I also deeply appreciate the mentorship of Dr. Robin Bartlett, whose guidance and encouragement during my time at Northern Kentucky University helped to refine my research interests in psychology. Her willingness to work with me as professor, friend, and colleague has been invaluable. iv

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract..iii Acknowledgements.iv List of Tables vi Introduction.1 Method 12 Results.19 Discussion.30 References.42 Appendices A. Sibling Relationship Questionnaire 48 B. The Beliefs about Conflict Inventory.54 C. Children s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale...56 D. Relationship Expectations Measure Vignettes 58 E. Romantic Relationship Expectations Measure Response Sheet 60 F. Relationship Expectations Measure Descriptive Statistics...61 G. Relationship Expectations Measure Open Responses.62 H. Demographic Sheet...66 I. Means and Standard Deviations for All Variables 67 v

6 LIST OF TABLES 1. Correlations between SRQ Scales and Relationship Expectations Correlations between SRQ Scales and BACI Scales Correlations between CPIC Scales and Relationship Expectations Correlations between SRQ Scales and Relationship Expectations for Cross- and Same-gender Sibling Groups Statistically Different Correlations between Cross- and Same-Gender Sibships.27 vi

7 1 The Effects of Sibling Relationships on Romantic Relationship Expectations in High Conflict Homes Conflict is an inevitable part of interpersonal relationships (Shantz & Hartup, 1992). Consequently, children will grow up in an environment that has a number of conflictual encounters in a variety of different relationships, including: parent-child, parent-parent, sibling, and other social relationships such as with peers or romantic partners. Children s participation in or observation of relationships may serve as a model by which to view later interpersonal relationships, including romantic relationships (Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Simon & Marcussen, 1999). This is consistent with Bowlby s (1969) theory that individuals develop internal relationship models that are later applied to relevant situations. These early interpersonal experiences can influence not only attitudes in later relationships but also their expectations of romantic relationships. Self-fulfilling prophesy research suggests that an individual s expectations of a romantic relationship may influence how he or she behaves in the relationship; for example, if an individual has unhappy expectations for a relationship, behaviors will be consistent with those unhappy expectations (Downey, Freitas, Michaelis & Khouri, 1998). Thus, the environment in which children grow up and the relationships they observe (i.e., marital relationship) or in which they participate (i.e., sibling relationship) can influence their perceptual representations of romantic relationships.

8 2 The family is most commonly conceptualized as a system consisting of several subsystems: marital, parent-child, and sibling. All of these subsystems interact with and influence each other, so changes in one subsystem may reflect changes in another (e.g., Erel & Burman, 1995). For example, with regard to conflict resolution, Reese-Weber and Kahn (2005) found that the parent-adolescent relationship mediated the relationship between interparental and sibling conflict resolution. This suggests that interparental conflict, which is an important influence on how a child models his or her conflict resolution behaviors in interpersonal relationships, may interact with other family subsystems and result in mediating effects. Positive relationships within these familial subsystems can often provide protection against the negative effects of frequent and intense conflict within the home. Caya and Liem (1998) demonstrated that positive sibling support within homes with high levels of marital conflict served as a buffer, protecting the child from the negative effects of discord. Thus, the present study will further explore whether positive sibling relationships moderate the relationship between interparental conflict and social relationship expectations, specifically with regard to expectations in romantic relationships. Even though Davies and Cummings (1994) noted the inevitability of conflict within the family, particularly within marital relationships, they found that it does not always have a negative effect on familial relations and child adjustment. For example, if conflict is dealt with constructively, is not too intense, and reaches some sort of resolution noticed by the child, it may result in lessons on how to appropriately engage in and resolve conflict. More destructive and intense

9 3 interparental conflict, however, has been linked with poor psychological and emotional adjustment in the child (e.g., Davies & Cummings, 1994; Grych & Fincham, 1990). The Impact of Conflict on Interpersonal Relationships Exposure to high conflict marital relationships has been implicated in the development of adjustment problems in children, including the development of negative interpersonal relationships with individuals outside of the family. Kinsfogel and Grych (2004) conducted a study that sampled 391 adolescents and found that boys living in homes with high parental conflict rated aggression in romantic relationships as being more justifiable, over-estimated the use of aggression in dating relationships of their peers, and had more difficulty with managing anger. Additionally, children from high conflict homes expressed higher levels of anger, which predicted boys reports of abuse toward a romantic partner (Kinsfogel & Grych, 2004). Further, exposure to interparental conflict without a constructive resolution can also result in problematic peer and romantic relationships (Davies & Cummings, 1994). Conflict in other significant relationships has also been implicated in children s adjustment problems. Difficulties in sibling and peer relationships have been linked with lower adjustment outcomes (Stocker, 1994) and the literature indicates that there is an association between exposure to interparental conflict and development of poor social competence and poor peer relationships (Kerig, 1996). O Neil, Parke, Flyr, and Wild (1999) examined the relation of marital discord and peer group social relationships in adolescents. Using a sample of 50 families, it was

10 4 found that greater use of negative conflict resolution strategies by parents were associated with both higher peer-rated avoidance and lower teacher-rated acceptance of the adolescent. Impact of Conflict on Romantic Relationship Expectations Adolescents expectations of conflict in their own romantic relationships may be influenced by their observations of conflict from other meaningful sources, including parent-parent, siblings, and peers romantic relationships (Crick and Dodge, 1994). This is consistent with Bandura s (1989) Social Learning Theory, which posits that individuals learn from one another through observation, imitation, and modeling. Thus, parents serve as models for the ways in which to handle conflict in the marital relationship and children may imitate those same behaviors. Kinsfogel and Grych (2004) have concluded that interparental conflict, in particular, may have negative implications for adolescent s development of healthy romantic relationships because of the parallels between these relationships. A study using a sample of 494 college students found that conflict beliefs shape conflict behavior in romantic relationships (Simon, Kobielski, & Martin, 2008). For example, if a student had constructive conflict beliefs, they were more likely to use proactive conflict behavior, such as conflict negotiation. On the other hand, if an individual had negative or destructive conflict beliefs, these were associated with more aggressive conflict behaviors in the relationship. Simon et al. (2008) suggested that beliefs about romantic relationship conflict may have a direct influence on the individual s conflict behaviors. Additionally, parents and siblings can provide very strong influences from which to learn these behaviors.

11 5 Studies have also demonstrated that beliefs about interparental conflict may influence adolescents beliefs about their own romantic relationships. Steinberg, Davila, and Fincham (2006) found that females who had higher perceptions of interparental conflict within the home were more likely to expect unhappiness and divorce in future marital relationships. Furthermore, perceptions of high interparental conflict were also linked with pessimism about their own future romantic dating relationships. The researchers cited the self-fulfilling prophesy research conducted by Downey et al. (1998) in that adolescents may behave in ways that are congruent with their expectations about these future relationships; thus, pessimistic relationship beliefs can lead to negative behaviors within relationships. The Impact of Sibling Relationships on Social Development Despite the importance of the adult relationships, sibling relationships (sibships) also strongly influence children s understanding of interpersonal relationships (Buhrmester & Furman, 1990). For example, siblings may influence the identity formation of children as as parents because children tend to turn to one another when parents are interacting in negative ways. Also, siblings may act as interpreters of society (Bank & Kahn, 1975). In other words, a child may perceive society consistent with how the sibling perceives the world. Buhrmester and Furman (1990) also found evidence in which same-sex siblings feel closer than opposite-sex siblings. This may suggest that same-sex siblings have a greater influence on the development of interpersonal skills than do opposite sex siblings. Sibling relationships may play a more important role than parental relationships in how children act in and perceive interpersonal relationships.

12 6 Demographic information has revealed that approximately 95% of adults in the United States have at least one sibling, whether biological or non-biological (Crispell, 1996). Time spent in these sibling relationships actually exceeds the time spent with parents (Waters, 1987) and, because of the time spent with siblings, children are likely to model social interaction strategies based on their own sibships (MacDonald & Parke, 1984). Social information processing theory explains that individuals process and respond to social encounters based on their own general knowledge of social behaviors (Crick and Dodge, 1994). Sibling relationships may be particularly strong influences due to mutual regulation (Bank & Kahn, 1975). In mutual regulation, participants in the relationship are equals, so the relationship is one in which new social behaviors can be tested. In sibling relationships, these behaviors will then be critiqued by a sibling and will result in cognitive processing to determine if the behaviors should be applied to other social situations. Thus, a child s social identity, in part, develops based on the feedback provided by the other sibling. With respect to conflict specifically, resolution styles in sibling relationships have been found to be significantly related to resolution in other social relationships. Reese-Weber and Bartle-Haring (1998) found that attack and avoidance resolution styles in sibling relationships were significantly related to similar styles in romantic relationships. It is important to note, however, that the relationship between the sibling dyad and romantic relationships may exist for certain resolution styles, but not all resolution styles. For example, Reese-Weber and Bartle-Haring (1998) point out that some resolution styles, such as

13 7 compromise, require increased effort and are less automatic behaviors than negative resolution styles such as attack. Thus, the influence of the sibling dyad on the romantic dyad may be less pronounced. Although more positive resolution styles in the sibling relationship were not found to be significantly related to conflict resolution behaviors in the romantic relationship, the significance of certain more automatic resolution styles offers evidence that sibling relationships may impact the way adolescents behave in future romantic relationships (Reese-Weber & Bartle-Haring, 1998). Studies support the importance of not only the sibling relationship in the social development of a child but also the positive effects of constructive conflict between siblings. Vandell and Bailey (1992) report that in high conflict homes, constructive conflict between siblings results in developmental changes, including increases in the following areas: social cognitive skills; the potential for sophisticated living; social problem solving; and compromise. Parke et al. (2001) suggest that sibling relationships may also provide the child with a framework of conflict resolution skills, as they learn through the sibling interaction how to agree, disagree, compromise, and reconcile. These are positive and useful tools that may potentially influence children s and adolescent s expectations of and interaction in social relationships with both peers and romantic partners. Sibling relationship interactions have also been found to be positively correlated with social adjustment in peer relationships (Stormshak, Bellanti, & Bierman, 1996). For example, children in more aggressive sibling relationships were involved in more aggressive peer relationships. It has been stated that sibling

14 8 relationships result in a carryover effect that predicts similarity in peer and sibling relationship quality (Lockwood, Kitzmann, & Cohen, 2001). The carryover effect can occur prospectively in which early interactions with a sibling may shape how an individual acts in future peer relationships, and concurrently in which behavior in peer relationships parallels that of the current sibling relationship. Dunn and Davies (2001) provide evidence for the prospective carryover effect and note that the quality of sibling relationships is also related to improved social understanding. In other words, positive sibling relationships result in other quality interpersonal relationships as a result of improved ability to read and respond to interpersonal cues. With regard to the concurrent carryover effect, Tseung and Schott (2004) examined links between sibling relationships and other significant relationships. Using a sample of 165 adolescent boys and girls, the researchers discovered a small but positive correlation between sibling affection and close friendships. The researchers explained that this reflects an additive model in which positive and affectionate sibling relationships result in a perceived ability to form meaningful peer relationships. It is possible that these perceptions may carry over to romantic relationships due to similar relationships qualities, such as care, support, and trust. Links between Interparental Conflict and Sibling Relationships Stocker and Youngblade (1999) conducted a study to examine marital conflict and links with children s sibling and peer relationships. From a sample of 136 children from intact two-child families, the researchers discovered that homes with marital conflict were associated with problematic peer and sibling relationships. As marital conflict increased, sibling warmth was shown to decrease.

15 9 Other studies, however, claim that in high conflict homes, siblings develop a closer, more positive sibling relationship. These positive sibling relationships have been associated with improved ability to handle conflict in more constructive ways (Vandell & Bailey, 1992). Despite these conflicting results, it is clear that sibships, as well as interparental conflict, have been shown to have effects on a child s social development. Consequently studies have examined the role of sibling relationships in homes with a high degree of parental discord. Evidence has shown that children seek comfort and support from siblings during periods of interparental conflict, suggesting that homes with high interparental conflict may result in more positive sibling relationships (Jenkins, 1992). Other studies have found similar results. In homes with high stress and conflict, the sibling relationship experiences increased closeness, cooperation, and protection or in other words, provides a buffering effect from the high emotional climate in the home (Bank & Kahn, 1982; Hetherington, 1988). Studies illustrate the protective effect that may result from a supportive sibling relationship. For example, Caya and Liem (1998) conducted a study to examine the role of sibling support in high conflict families. Using a sample of 194 university students, results indicated that sibling support has a direct effect on psychological adjustment and provides a buffering effect in high-conflict homes. Participants indicated that siblings could be used for support and strategy when conflict was occurring within the home. This research supports the notion that siblings provide a protective effect in high-conflict homes through offered comfort

16 10 and support. Thus, a positive sibling relationship protects the individual from developing behavioral or adjustment problems that may result from exposure to or involvement in poor relationships (Stocker, 1994). Even if a child is exposed to various other high-conflict relationships, the sibling relationship has the potential to provide the child with an alternative but satisfying social relationship, protecting the child from maladaptive social development (Parke & O Neil, 1997). Studies have demonstrated the effects of conflict on family and peer relationships, but have not examined whether sibling relationships can moderate the effects between interparental conflict and romantic relationship expectations. With the research demonstrating the protective, buffering, and overall important effects of a positive sibling relationship, one must ask an important question: Does a sibling relationship moderate the effects of interparental conflict on social relationship expectations in adolescents? In other words, is a positive sibling relationship able to buffer the child from the negative effects of experiencing high marital discord so that they may still perceive and engage in healthy romantic relationships? Given the potential of the sibling relationship to moderate the effects of interparental conflict, this study attempted to establish a link between the following variables: interparental conflict, sibling relationship quality, and romantic relationship expectations. It was hoped that the current study would support the importance of a positive sibling relationship in high conflict homes. This study also examined a more neglected area, specifically the effect of conflict on children s expectations of romantic relationships in homes with at least one sibling. In

17 11 addition, the effects of sibling gender were assessed. Although there is currently no research to support this, it is possible that a cross-gender sibling relationship will be more likely to share parallels with a romantic relationship. The following hypotheses were proposed: (1) Sibling relationship quality was hypothesized to correlate positively with optimistic romantic relationship expectations; (2) sibling relationship quality was hypothesized to correlate positively with adaptive beliefs about conflict in romantic relationships; (3) positive qualities of cross-gender sibling relationships were hypothesized to correlate more strongly with romantic relationship expectations than same-gender sibling relationships; (4) interparental conflict was hypothesized to correlate negatively with positive romantic relationship expectations; and (5) when relationships with the sibling are positive, it was hypothesized that the relationship between interparental conflict and romantic relationship expectations would be diminished. Negative sibling relationships, on the other hand, were hypothesized to increase the correlation between interparental conflict and romantic relationship expectations.

18 12 Method Participants Participants were 95 college students, 48.3% male and 51.7% female, enrolled in Introductory Psychology courses at the University of Dayton. Participants must have lived with at least one close-in-age sibling (within 3 years of age) or a non-biological sibling for at least 6 years in a two adult household when they were growing up. If the individual had more than one close-in-age sibling, half of these individuals were asked to choose their older sibling while half were asked to choose their younger sibling. Six participants were excluded because they were not within three years of age with their closest in-age sibling or did not live with a non-biological sibling for at least six years. The final subject pool consisted of 89 participants. The age of participants ranged from 16 to 22 years with the mean age being years (SD = 1.2). Participants were predominantly Caucasian (89.9%), but there were also African American (3.4%), Hispanic (4.5%), and Asian (2.2%) participants. The majority of participants had a biological sibling (96.6%) with 3.4% having a non-biological sibling. The marital status of parents was predominantly married (87.6%), with the other most frequent statuses as divorced (6.7%), single (4.5%), and widowed (1.1%). Participants earned experimental credit for participating in this study.

19 13 Measures Quality of sibling relationships. The Sibling Relationship Questionnaire (SRQ; Furman & Buhrmester, 1985) is a self-report inventory that assesses relationships with closest-in-age siblings (See Appendix A). The SRQ consists of 48 items that form four factors related to the siblings relationship (Warmth/Closeness, Relative Power/Status, Conflict, and Rivalry). On each of the items, participants respond using a 5-point Likert scale (from hardly to extremely ). Higher scores indicate a particular feature is more characteristic of the sibling relationship (i.e., How do you tell this sibling what to do? ; How do you and this sibling love each other? ). In order to develop the SRQ, a list of the primary qualities of sibling relationships was established using a sample of 49 fifth- and sixth-grade children, ranging in age from years old. The participants were administered an openended interview about sibling relationships. The children s responses resulted in an average of 8.2 different relationship qualities. The most positive qualities generated were companionship and admiration of sibling (93% and 81%, respectively) and the most commonly mentioned negative qualities were antagonism and quarreling (91% and 79%, respectively). The sample resulted in a total of 16 qualities. To further develop and validate this self-report measure, a second study used 198 fifthand sixth-grade children drawn from two parochial schools and one public school. The SRQ was administered and contained 17 scales, which measured 15 of the 16 qualities identified from Study 1. The remaining two scales examined (a) satisfaction with the relationship and (b) importance of the relationship. Each scale v

20 14 consisted of three items; scores were computed for each scale by averaging the three items designed to assess the quality. The internal consistency coefficients for these qualities all exceeded.70 except for the competition scale (.63) (M =.80). Test-retest reliability was also found to be high (r =.71, ranging from.58 to.86). A principal components analysis was performed on the scales and four factors were extracted, accounting for 71% of the common variance. In the current study, Cronbach s alphas ranged from.75 to.94 for all scales, with the exception of Antagonism (α =.55). Adolescent s beliefs about conflict in romantic relationships. The Beliefs about Conflict Inventory (BACI; Simon & Kobielski, 2006) is an 18-item questionnaire that measures adolescents beliefs about conflict in romantic relationships (See Appendix B). The BACI contains 3 scales that assess adolescent views about the normalcy and meaning of conflict in romantic relationships: Six items assess beliefs about the normalcy of romantic relationship conflict (i.e., Conflicts or disagreements are bound to come up when two people spend a lot of time together ); six items assess destructive beliefs about romantic conflict (i.e., Conflicts or disagreements are a sign that someone s looking to break off the relationship ); and six items assess constructive beliefs about romantic conflict (i.e., Conflicts or disagreements can be a healthy way to work out differences ). For each item, participants respond using a 5-point Likert scale, with higher ratings indicating greater agreement with the normalcy and meaning of conflict in romantic relationships. Mean scores will be computed for each of the scales.

21 15 Simon and Kobielski (2006) reported that a factor analysis of the BACI items generated a structure resulting in the conceptual structure of the measure. Results from a principal axis factor analysis indicated the three factors (Normalcy of conflict, Constructive conflict beliefs, and Destructive conflict beliefs) that explained 68.15% of the variance. Internal consistency coefficients for these three factors are as follows: Normalcy, α =.74; Constructive, α =.80; and Destructive α =.86. For this study, the Cronbach s alphas were lower: Constructive, α =.78; Destructive, α =.61; and Normalcy of Conflict, α =.67. Perceptions of marital conflict. The Children s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale (CPIC; Grych, Seid & Fincham, 1992) is a 51-item measure used to assess participant s perceptions of marital conflict between parents (See Appendix C). This measure consists of three scales: Conflict properties (perceptions of the frequency, intensity, and resolution of parental conflict), Selfblame (the extent to which the individual blamed themselves for or felt they were the topic of parents marital conflict), and Threat (individual s feelings of being threatened by parental marital conflict and their coping efficacy). Additionally, nine subscales resulted: Frequency, Instensity, Resolution, Content, Perceived Threat, Coping Efficacy, Self-Blame, Triangulation, and Stability. It uses a multiple-choice format with three possible responses: true, sort of true, and false. Items are scored from 1 to 3, with 3 reflecting more negative conflict and its appraisal (i.e., I never see my parents arguing or disagreeing ; My parents get really mad when they argue ).

22 16 Norms for the CPIC were initially established using a sample of 44 fourth and fifth-graders; however, Bickham and Fiese (1997) adapted the CPIC scale for a late adolescent sample. They found good internal consistency, with Chronbach alphas of.95 for the Conflict Properties scale,.85 for the Self-Blame scale, and.88 for the Threat scale. The factors also demonstrated good test-retest reliability: Conflict Properties, r =.95; Self-Blame, r =.81, and Threat, r =.86. In the current study, Cronbach s alphas ranged from.81 to.91, with the exception of the following: Intensity, α =.51; Coping Efficacy, α =.67; and Self-Blame, α =.67. Adolescent s romantic relationship expectations. A measure was developed which allowed participants to respond to different relationship vignettes (See Appendix D). The vignettes will portray different social relationships (i.e., marital, peer, sibling, and romantic) in ambiguous situations, all involving disappointment or misunderstanding that could result in a conflict. Participants will then respond to a series of questions pertaining to relationship satisfaction, happiness, and expectations (i.e., How happy do you think the individuals in this relationship are? ; What are your expectations of this relationship? )(See Appendix E). A pilot study was conducted using a sample of 12 Clinical and General Psychology graduate students from the University of Dayton to determine appropriate variability in the responses. Although there was less variability in responses for the vignettes illustrating the married, sibling, and friend scenarios, the vignette illustrating a romantic couple elicited a wider range of responses, including the most negative overall expectations of the relationship (See Appendix F). The

23 17 open responses resulted in some interesting interpretations of how the scenario might end, including some emotionally charged negative outcomes ( Partner who bought tickets takes a friend, the relationship ends in a break-up as it was already on the rocks. ) (See Appendix G). Open responses were coded into one of the following: positive resolution (e.g., Call each other and agree to meet at one of the locations, laugh about it and enjoy their night together), negative resolved (e.g., Call each other and gently argue and decide who will meet where or they meet at another place altogether), negative unresolved (e.g., Partner who bought tickets takes friend, relationship ends in a break-up, it was already on the rocks), or undecided (e.g., Participant provides an either/or response that is unable to be coded into a previous category because it provides both a resolved and unresolved scenario). Due to inadequate inter-rater agreement regarding the coding of items, however, the open response items were dropped from final analyses. The participant response sheet, which at the time of the initial analysis used a 5-point Likert scale, was changed to a 7-point scale to even out the variability between scenarios. Sibling relationship expectations were significantly correlated with several items of the SRQ, including positive correlations with Prosocial, Affection, Companionship, Admiration of and Admiration by Sibling. Additionally, significant negative correlations between sibling relationship expectations and the Dominance by Sibling and Quarreling SRQ scales were observed. Therefore, because all different relationship expectations items in the measure are modeled off of each other, this gives further validity to the other vignettes as well.

24 18 Procedure Data collection was completed in minute sessions using small groups of undergraduate students volunteering to fulfill their research requirement. Participants were first administered informed consent. After signing informed consent, participants were administered a packet of questionnaires, first completing demographic information created for the study (see Appendix H). After completion of the demographic questionnaire, the following three instruments were administered in a rotating block (SRQ, CPIC, BACI), ending with completion of the Relationship Expectations Measure. Participants were told that the purpose of the study is to better understand the importance of sibling relationships on romantic relationship expectations. Following completion and collection of the questionnaire packets, participants were debriefed about the study.

25 19 Results Descriptive statistics and correlations among the measures were computed. Appendix I lists the means and standard deviations for all variables. Due to the number of correlations generated, the Bonferonni correction procedure was used, requiring a p-value <.003 required for significance. Significant correlations were observed among several sibling relationship expectations items and SRQ scales (see Table 1). Expectations were positively correlated with Sibling Affection (r =.35, p =.001), Admiration of Sibling (r =.35, p =.001), and Admiration by Sibling (r =.35, p =.001). In addition, expectations were observed to have a positive trend with Prosocial sibling behaviors (r =.24, p =.025) and Companionship (r =.21, p =.045). As more desirable sibling relationship qualities were indicated, expectations for a successful sibling relationship increased. A significant negative trend was observed between expectations of the sibling relationship and both Dominance by Sibling (r = -.23, p =.032) and Quarreling (r = -.27, p =.010), indicating that as less desirable sibling relationship qualities increased, expectations for a successful sibling relationship decreased. Because all of the relationship expectations items were modeled off of each other, this supports the validity of the other vignettes as well, regarding comparability and ambiguity of the scenarios. In the current study, the romantic relationship expectation items were the primary focus.

26 20 Sibling Relationships and Relationship Expectation It was hypothesized that sibling relationships would be positively correlated with romantic relationship expectations. To test this hypothesis, Pearson r correlations were computed between scales of the Sibling Relationship Questionnaire and Relationship Expectations Measure items (See Table 1 for coefficients). As a consequence of the number of correlations tested, the Bonferonni correction procedure was used. The p-value used to determine significance is Contrary to prediction, overall romantic relationship expectations did not positively correlate with SRQ scales. However, there were two negative correlations approaching significance. These were found between Expectations and both the Dominance By Sibling (r = -.30, p =.005) and Quarreling scales (r = -.25, p =.017). In other words, as these less desirable qualities of the sibling relationship increased, romantic expectations decreased. Sibling Relationships and Beliefs about Conflict in Romantic Relationships It was hypothesized that constructive sibling relationships would be positively correlated with beliefs about conflict in romantic relationships. To test this hypothesis, Pearson r correlations were derived between SRQ scales and BACI factors (see Table 2 for coefficients). Due to the number of correlations examined, the Bonferonni correction procedure was used, resulting in a p-value of <0.003 required for significance. Although there were no significant relationships, the relation between Nurturance by Sibling and Constructive conflict beliefs (r =.22, p =.041) demonstrated a positive trend. It appears that a sibling relationship characterized by higher levels of nurturance yields higher constructive beliefs about

27 21 Table 1. Correlations between SRQ Scales and Relationship Expectations. Relationship Expectations SRQ Sibling Romantic Couple Prosocial Maternal Partiality Nurturance of Sibling Nurturance by Sibling Dominance of Sibling Dominance by Sibling -.229* -.297** Paternal Partiality Affection.351**.155 Companionship.214*.143 Antagonism Similarity Intimacy Competition Admiration of Sib..351**.145 Admiration by Sib..349**.171 Note. * p <.05 ** p <.01

28 22 Table 2. Correlations between SRQ Scales and BACI Scales. BACI Scales SRQ Constructive Destructive Normalcy of Conflict Prosocial Maternal Partiality Nurturance Of Sib Nurturance By Sib..220* Dominance Of Sib * Dominance By Sib Paternal Partiality Affection Companionship Antagonism Similarity Intimacy Competition Admiration Of Sib Admiration By Sib Quarreling Note. * p <.05 Sib. = Sibling

29 23 conflict. Additionally, a negative trend was found between Dominance of Sibling and Constructive conflict beliefs (r = -.22, p =.037), or higher levels of dominance by one s sibling results in decreased constructive beliefs about conflict. Interparental Conflict and Romantic Relationship Expectations It was hypothesized that interparental conflict would be negatively correlated with romantic relationship expectations. To test this hypothesis, Pearson r correlations were computed between CPIC scales and Relationship Expectations Measure items (see Table 3 for coefficients). This hypothesis was not supported, as there were no significant correlations between romantic relationship expectations and CPIC scales. Cross-gender Sibling Relationships and Romantic Relationship Expectations It was hypothesized that cross-gender sibling relationships would more strongly positively correlate with romantic relationship expectations than same-sex sibling relationships. To test this hypothesis, the data set was split into two groups, those participants who were reporting on a cross-gender sibling and those reporting on a same-sex sibling. Pearson r correlations were generated between romantic relationship expectation items and SRQ scales for each group (see Table 4 for coefficients). As a consequence of the number of correlations being examined, the Bonferonni correction procedure was used and a more stringent p-value was adopted at

30 24 Table 3. Correlations between CPIC Scales and Relationship Expectations. Relationship Expectations CPIC Sibling Romantic Couple Frequency Intensity Resolution Content Perceived Threat Coping Efficacy Self-Blame Triangulation Stability

31 25 Table 4. Correlations between SRQ Scales and Relationship Expectations for Cross- and Samegender Sibling Groups Relationship Expectations Romantic Sibling SRQ Cross Same Cross Same Prosocial Maternal Partiality Nurturance Of Sib Nurturance By Sib Dominance Of Sib * Dominance By Sib ** Paternal Partiality Affection *.253 Companionship.324* * Antagonism ** Similarity Intimacy Competition Admiration Of Sib **.117 Admiration By Sib..335* **.149 Quarreling * -.334* Note. CG = Cross-gender relationship; Sib = Sibling * p <.05 ** p <.01

32 26 Cross-gender sibships. Although no correlations were found in support of the hypothesis, cross-gender sibship participant reports of romantic relationship expectations showed a positive trend with sibling relationships characterized by higher levels of Companionship and Admiration by the Sibling (Companionship, r =.32, p =.036; Admiration By Sibling, r =.34, p =.030). In contrast to the hypothesis, no significant relationships were found between romantic relationship expectations and other positive aspects of the sibling relationship. It should be noted that many SRQ scales shared a significant positive correlation with sibling relationship expectations. Same-gender sibships. Same-gender sibship participant reports of romantic relationship expectations were negatively correlated with less desirable aspects of the sibling relationship from the SRQ scales (Dominance By Sibling, r = -.50, p =.001; Antagonism, r = -.42, p =.003), indicating that as a greater number of undesirable sibling relationship qualities were reported, romantic relationship expectations diminished. Dominance Of Sibling (r = -.35, p =.018) and Quarreling (r = -.33, p =.026) revealed similar negative trends with romantic relationship expectations but failed to obtain significance due to the more stringent p-value adopted. Difference in correlations between cross-gender and same-gender sibships. Correlations between SRQ scales and romantic relationship expectations were compared for cross-gender and same-gender sibships using a test based on the Fisher s Z transformation (see Table 5). A significant difference between crossgender and same-gender sibships was found for the correlations between

33 27 Table 5. Statistically Different Correlations for SRQ and REM for Cross- and Same-Gender Sibships. Cross Same z-score p-value Companionship.324* * Admiration By Sib.335* Dominance of Sib * * Dominance by Sib ** Antagonism ** * Quarreling * Note. Sib = Sibling * p <.05 ** p <.001

34 28 Companionship and Romantic Relationship Expectations (z = 1.96, p = 0.05). However, no significant difference was found for the correlations between Admiration by Sibling and Romantic Relationship Expectations (z = 1.88, p = 0.06). A significant difference between cross-gender and same-gender was found for the correlations between both Antagonism and Romantic Relationship Expectations, and Dominance of Sibling and Romantic Relationship Expectations (Dominance of Sibling, z = 1.97, p = 0.05; Antagonism, z = 2.64, p = 0.008). The correlations between cross- and same-gender sibships did not significantly differ for the following SRQ scales: Admiration by Sibling, Dominance by Sibling, and Quarreling. Sibling relationship expectations in cross-gender sibship. Although hypotheses were not generated with specific regard to expectations in the sibling relationship, several significant findings were yielded. Sibling relationship expectations were positively correlated with a couple of SRQ scales (Admiration Of Sibling, r =.46, p =.002; and Admiration By Sibling, r =.46, p =.002) and demonstrated positive trends with other scales (Affection, r =.37, p =.015; Companionship, r =.36, p =.019). Thus, the presence of more desirable sibling relationship qualities indicated higher expectations for a successful sibling relationship. There was a negative trend between Sibling Relationship Expectations and Quarreling (r = -.33, p =.030), indicating that higher levels of quarreling within a sibship leads to diminished expectations about the sibling relationship. Differences in correlations involving conflict beliefs by groups. Although not hypothesized, examination of the correlations by cross-gender or same-gender groups revealed that, for same-gender sibships, the Dominance Of

35 29 Sibling and Antagonism SRQ scales shared a significant negative correlation with the Constructive values scale of the BACI (Dominance Of Sibling, r = -.47, p =.001; Antagonism, r = -.37, p =.013). Thus, as less desirable aspects of the sibling relationship are increased, constructive conflict beliefs are decreased. No other significant correlations were noted. Moderating Effects of Cross-gender Sibling Relationships It was hypothesized that cross-gender sibling relationships would moderate the relationship between interparental conflict and romantic relationship expectations. Correlations between CPIC and REM items were not significant for either cross-gender or same-gender, therefore, no further analyses were conducted.

36 30 Overview Discussion The current study was conducted in order to examine the relation between sibling relationships and romantic relationship expectations, particularly as it may relate to parental conflict in the home. The relation between sibling relationships and conflict beliefs was examined as well. More specifically, the potentially moderating effects of a positive sibling relationship on the relation between high interparental conflict and romantic relationship expectations were explored. In addition, differences between cross-gender and same-gender sibling relationships and their relation with romantic relationship expectations were examined. Sibling Relationships and Romantic Relationship Expectations It was hypothesized that the quality of sibling relationships would be related to romantic expectations. Lockwood, Kitzmann, and Cohen (2001) described that the sibling relationship may predict similar behaviors in peer relationship quality. Romantic relationships are a particular type of peer relationship, so one might expect behaviors from the sibling relationship to carryover to romantic relationships as well, and shape the way the individual perceives other interpersonal relationships (Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Simon & Marcussen, 1999). In contrast to the hypothesis, sibling relationships were not positively related to romantic relationship expectations. Results did reveal, however, that there was a significant negative correlation between Romantic Relationship Expectations and

37 31 both Quarreling and Dominance by Sibling, which are more undesirable aspects of the sibling relationship. The relation between negative aspects of the sibling relationship and romantic relationship expectations may be explained by the ease in which more negative problem-solving behaviors are applied. Reese-Weber and Bartle-Haring (1998) suggested that, because certain negative resolution behaviors such as avoidance require less effort, the influence of these behaviors within the sibling relationship may be more pronounced in a romantic relationship. Thus, the relationship between negative aspects of a sibling relationship and romantic relationship expectations may be explained by certain negative sibling behaviors being more automatic. Positive sibling behaviors, on the other hand, require increased time and effort and may be less readily applied. Sibling Relationships and Beliefs about Conflict in Romantic Relationships It was hypothesized that sibling relationships would be positively correlated to constructive conflict beliefs. Previous research suggested that sibling relationships act as a model by which children can learn positive conflict resolution skills (Parke et al., 2001). This framework or model was thought to influence the conflict resolution behaviors in other social relationships. Consistent with the hypothesis, a positive trend was observed between Nurturance by a Sibling and Constructive conflict beliefs. Additionally, Dominance of a Sibling demonstrated a negative trend with Constructive conflict beliefs. Despite the lack of a significant relation between a positive sibship and Constructive conflict beliefs, there does seem to be evidence that suggests sibships

38 32 with elevated levels of antagonism and dominance over another shape the way conflict is viewed in romantic relationships. A recent study indicated that conflict beliefs might shape conflict behavior in romantic relationships (Simon, Kobielski, & Martin, 2008). Thus, the importance of learning constructive beliefs about conflict within the sibling relationship is imperative. The reasoning for negative aspects of the sibling relationship sharing a relation with constructive conflict beliefs may also be explained by the idea of negative behaviors requiring less effort, thus yielding more significant negative relationships with conflict beliefs. Getting angry and screaming at one s partner, for example, takes less effort than creating a compromise and working through a particular situation. Perhaps another argument could be that the negative aspects of the sibling relationship are more reminiscent of conflict. Consequently, they may be more closely related because of the similarity of the underlying issues. Another reason for the lack of relation may be due to the limited reliability of the subscales of the BACI. The Constructive Values scale of the BACI demonstrated an adequate Cronbach s alpha, but both the Destructive and Normalcy of Conflict scales were below the suggested α =.70. This may explain the lack of relations between other SRQ scales and these BACI scales. Interparental Conflict and Romantic Relationship Expectations In contrast to the hypothesis, high levels of interparental conflict was not related to romantic relationship expectations. Not surprisingly, results did reveal that Intensity of conflict was negatively related to married relationship expectations. It should be noted, however, that the Intensity scale demonstrated an

39 33 inadequate Cronbach s alpha, with α <.70. Both the Self-Blame and Coping Efficacy scales alphas fell below this value as well. Thus, the reliability of the scales did not reach previously reported levels and may explain why more significant relations were not found. The lack of a relation between interparental conflict and romantic relationship expectations was surprising. Kinsfogel and Grych (2004) suggested that, due to parallels shared between a married couple and an adolescent romantic couple, high levels of conflict may hinder the development of healthy romantic relationships. Further, Steinberg, Davila, and Fincham (2006) found that females who possessed higher perceptions of interparental conflict had negative beliefs about their own future marital relationships. Clearly, research has demonstrated a link between interparental conflict and future romantic relationships. However, as a result of the negative findings in this study, investigation of the potential moderating role of the sibship was unable to be performed. A reason for the lack of a relationship may be a limitation of the participant sample used. Previous studies, such as the previously mentioned study conducted by Kinsfogel and Grych (2004), used a more diverse sample with regard to ethnicity and socioeconomic status. As the current sample was drawn from a private Catholic university, it may be the case that participants come from a higher socioeconomic status; this information was not collected and thus this limitation cannot be confirmed. The vast majority of the sample came from intact families, and as Reese- Weber and Kahn (2005) demonstrated, adolescents from divorced families reported more negative conflict resolution behaviors in the home than intact families. It may