A Dyadic Analysis of the Between‐ and Within‐System Alliances on Distress

To read this article's abstract in both Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, please visit the article's full‐text page on Wiley InterScience ( http://interscience.wiley.com/journal/famp ). This study examines the relationship between the therapeutic alliance and distress using the couple rather than the individual as the unit of analysis. One hundred and seventy‐three couples receiving treatment for relational distress at two university clinics participated in this study. The actor–partner interdependence model was used to analyze the relationship of each partner's between‐ and within‐system alliance scores and distress at session four. Results provide support for actor effects on relational distress for both male and female partners and for actor effects on psychological distress for female partners. Limited support was found for partner effects on distress. Furthermore, results indicate that the alliance between partners is a stronger predictor of improvement in early sessions in comparison with the alliance between the individual and the therapist.     

The Relationship Between Diverse Components of Intelligence and Creativity

Intelligence and creativity are accounted for in terms of two different mental operations referred to as ‘convergent thinking’ and ‘divergent thinking’, respectively. Nevertheless, psychometric evidence on the relationship between intelligence and creativity has been controversial. To clarify their relationship, we characterized the relationship between diverse components of intelligence and creativity through the administration of psychometric tests on a large sample (WAIS, RPM, and TTCT‐figural: n = 215; TTCT‐verbal: n = 137). The general intelligence factor (g) score showed significant correlations with both TTCT‐figural and TTCT‐verbal scores. However, sub‐dimensional analysis demonstrated that their association was attributable to the specific components of both TTCTs (TTCT‐figural: Abstractness of Titles, Elaboration, and Resistance to Premature Closure; TTCT‐verbal: Flexibility) rather than to their common components (Fluency and Originality). Among the intelligence sub‐dimensions, crystallized intelligence (gC) played a pivotal role in the association between g and the specific components of both TTCTs. When the total sample was divided into two IQ groups, these phenomena were more evident in the average IQ group than in the high IQ group. These results suggest that the mental operation of creativity may be different from that of intelligence, but gC may be used as a resource for the mental operation of creativity.