Not exact matches
Child emotional and behavioural
adjustment,
as measured by, for example, the Behaviour Screening Questionnaire (BSQ; Richman 1971); the Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach 1991); the Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (ECBI; Eyberg 1999); the Child Behaviour Questionnaire (CBQ; Rothbart 2001); the
Dyadic Parent - Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS; Eyberg 1994), etc..
The construction of safety within the therapeutic context appeared
as an essential condition in the treatment process, especially for the case with a lower level of
dyadic adjustment.
Dyadic adjustment was measured using the Abbreviated
Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Sharpley & Rogers, 1984; German translation, Köppe, 2001), and specifically quantified here
as an individual's rating of agreement with partner on the amount of time spent together on a 6 - point scale (0 = always disagree to 5 = always agree; M = 3.99, SD = 0.79).
Using grid - sequence analysis, we found that clusters with different intradyad dynamics also differ on both men's and women's
dyadic adjustment (
as indicated by perceptions of agreement on amount of time spent with partner) and on men's subjective health.
Specifically, we illustrate the potential value of this new approach by identifying a taxonomy of dyad - level subtypes that differ in how their emotions (i.e., multiple within - day ratings of happiness — chosen here
as an exemplar variable with variance properties useful for methods development) vary through normal daily life, and examine how that taxonomy is related to a set of theoretically meaningful variables — subjective health,
dyadic adjustment (agreement on amount of time spent with partner), and relationship satisfaction, all of which constitute important characteristics of older couples» well - being (Hoppmann & Gerstorf, 2016).