Taking stock of the longitudinal study of romantic couple relationships: The last 20 years

Longitudinal dyadic research provides significant benefits for our understanding of romantic couple relationships. In this systematic review, we begin by providing a broad overview of topical trends and approaches in longitudinal couple relationships research from 2002 through 2021. Then, we narrow our review to dyadic relationship quality articles, highlighting key themes as well as noting important gaps in the research. Using an intersectional perspective that acknowledges multiple ways that disadvantage, power, and oppression may be seen in both research and in couples' lived experience, we note prominent paradigms used in examining couple relationships, what types of questions have been most valued, and what groups and approaches are underrepresented in the literature. Most longitudinal couple relationships research is quantitative, relies on self-report approaches from American couples in the early-to-middle years of their relationships, concentrates more on negative aspects of relationships than positives, and takes a communication-satisfaction paradigm in studying couples. We see a clear need to increase the use of methodologies beyond self-report measures, conduct more studies with within-group minority, older adult, culturally-diverse, and context-specific samples to explore the diversity of relationships, and fully consider both strengths and positive processes in relationships as well as the challenges couples experience.     

Accreditation Standards for University and College Counseling Centers

The accreditation standards outlined in the article are used by the International Association of Counseling Services, Inc., as the basis for the formal accreditation of college and university counseling programs throughout the United States and Canada. They reflect the program elements and practice standards that are deemed essential in a counseling center that provides high-quality services to students.     

Conceptualizing and Measuring a Power/Interaction Model of Interpersonal Influence1

In response to new theoretical conceptualizations (Raven, 1992, 1993), an instrument was developed to measure 11 bases of power, the original 6 French and Raven (1959; Raven, 1965) bases of power, with 3 of these further differentiated: reward (personal, impersonal), coercion (personal. impersonal), legitimate (position, reciprocity, equity, dependence), expert, referent, and information. In Study 1, 317 American student respondents rated the likelihood that each of these power bases contributed to a supervisor successfully influencing a subordinate in a series of hypothetical situations. The internal consistency of the items which made up the 11 power bases proved adequate. Factor analysis found 7 factors and 2 categories of bases: harsh and soft. In Study 2, which used 101 Israeli health workers, the earlier findings were generally supported. In addition, job satisfaction was found to be positively related to the attribution of soft bases to the supervisor.     

Explaining essences

Philosophical Studies - This paper explores the prospects of combining two views. The first view is metaphysical rationalism (the principle of sufficient reason): all things have an explanation....     

Attesting the Aristotelian Future

Aristotelian relativism about the future (as recently defended by MacFarlane (2003)) claims that a prediction made on Monday, such as ‘It will rain’, can be indeterminate on Monday but determinate on Tuesday. A serious objection to this intuitively appealing view is that it cannot coherently be attested: for if it is attested on Monday, then our blindness to what the future holds precludes attesting that the prediction is determinate on Tuesday, and if it is attested on Tuesday (when, suppose, it rains), then the fact that it rains precludes attesting that the prediction is indeterminate on Monday. In this paper, I focus on Moruzzi and Wright (2009)’s recent development of this objection and argue that it fails. This result removes a major obstacle to defending the Aristotelian view.     

The transgender parent: Experiences and constructions of pregnancy and parenthood for transgender men in Australia

Background: Transgender (trans) men are commonly born with the reproductive anatomy that allows them to become pregnant and give birth and many wish to do so. However, little is known about Australian trans men's experiences of desiring parenthood and gestational pregnancy.

Aims: The present study aims to address this gap in the literature through addressing the following research questions: how do Australian trans men construct and experience their desire for parenthood? And, how do Australian trans men construct and experience gestational pregnancy?

Methods: This study aimed to explore these experiences, through a mixed-methods research design using online survey data and one-on-one interviews, with 25 trans men, aged 25–46 years old, who had experienced a gestational pregnancy. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: For our participants, parenthood was initially described as alienating and complex, however transitioning enabled participants to negotiate and construct their own parenting identity. Pregnancy was positioned as a problematic but “functional sacrifice,” however formal assisted fertility experiences were rife with exclusion. At the same time dysphoria associated with withdrawing from testosterone and the growing fecund body were significantly troubling. Changes to the chest were of particular concern for participants. Exclusion, isolation, and loneliness were the predominant features of trans men's experiences of gestational pregnancies. Healthcare systems are not generally supportive of trans bodies and identities and trans men encounter significant issues when interacting with healthcare providers. As such, the results reinforce the importance of inclusive and specialized health services to support trans men through pregnancy.