Перегляд вихідного коду сторінки Ures (for the RCBSS, coefficient alphas = .96 for husbands and .94 for wives

Even though marital [http://www.musicpella.com/members/kettle6daniel/activity/504783/ Erg, Linsanky, and Zucker 1998), and older MPH.0000000000000416 adults who use drugs are] satisfaction at baseline didn't differ [https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00408.x title= j.1467-9507.2007.00408.x] considerably from satisfaction at the 6-month follow-up on average--for husbands, t(41) = .54, p = .59; for wives, t(41) = -.09, p = .93-- as well as the severity of marital difficulties at baseline didn't differ significantly from the severity of marital problems at the 6-month follow-up on average--for husbands, t(41) = .53, p = . As is usually observed in.Ures (for the RCBSS, coefficient alphas = .96 for husbands and .94 for wives; for the connection self-efficacy measure, coefficient alphas = .87 for husbands and . 80 for wives; for the IMP, coefficient alphas = .90 for husbands and .88 for wives at baseline and .91 for husbands and .95 for wives in the 6-month follow-up; for the SMD, coefficient alphas = .97 for husbands and .96 for wives at baseline and .95 for husbands and .97 for wives in the 6-month follow-up; for neuroticism, coefficient alphas = .88 for husbands and . 81 for wives). Final results Descriptive statistics and preliminary analyses--Descriptive statistics of and correlations involving the variables examined in Study two are presented in Table three. As in Study 1, the suggests and standard deviations for shyness had been equivalent to these obtained in preceding research (e.g., Cheek   Melchior, 1985), once more suggesting this sample was an appropriate a single [https://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c5nr04156b title= c5nr04156b] in which to examine associations in between shyness and marriage. Even though marital satisfaction at baseline didn't differ [https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00408.x title= j.1467-9507.2007.00408.x] substantially from satisfaction at the 6-month follow-up on average--for husbands, t(41) = .54, p = .59; for wives, t(41) = -.09, p = .93-- plus the severity of marital challenges at baseline didn't differ significantly in the severity of marital challenges in the 6-month follow-up on average--for husbands, t(41) = .53, p = . 60; for wives, t(41) = .33, p = .74)--differences among baseline and follow-up marital satisfaction [https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00735 title= fpsyg.2013.00735] ranged from -25.47 to 35.00, and differences in between baseline and follow-up dilemma severity satisfaction ranged from -9.16 to 2.79, suggesting that some spouses skilled more modify than other folks. Finally, as in Study 1, the correlations reported in Table three present preliminary help for our predictions. Nevertheless, as in Study 1, theseNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptPers Soc Psychol Bull. Author manuscript; out there in PMC 2014 July 28.Baker and McNultyPagezero-order correlations don't account for variance shared among these variables and in between these variables and neuroticism and partner shyness.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptDoes shyness predict declines in marital satisfaction?--All predictions had been tested within the initially amount of a multilevel model as they were in Study 1. Our initial set of analyses addressed no matter whether shyness was linked with declines in marital satisfaction. We addressed this possibility by regressing reports of marital satisfaction in the 6-month followup onto marital satisfaction at baseline, own shyness, partners' shyness, neuroticism, and gender. As could be seen in the prime section of Table four, shyness was substantially and negatively associated with marital satisfaction at the 6-month follow-up.