آمار

تعداد نشریات27
تعداد شماره‌ها350
تعداد مقالات3,007
تعداد مشاهده مقاله4,465,758
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله3,046,389
Jahani Dolatabad, Esmaeil, Heydari, Hossein. (1401). Explaining the Gender Differences in Iranian Marital Paradigms. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 3(8), 13-23. doi: 10.22098/jhrs.2022.9628.1022
Esmaeil Jahani Dolatabad; Hossein Heydari. "Explaining the Gender Differences in Iranian Marital Paradigms". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 3, 8, 1401, 13-23. doi: 10.22098/jhrs.2022.9628.1022
Jahani Dolatabad, Esmaeil, Heydari, Hossein. (1401). 'Explaining the Gender Differences in Iranian Marital Paradigms', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 3(8), pp. 13-23. doi: 10.22098/jhrs.2022.9628.1022
Jahani Dolatabad, Esmaeil, Heydari, Hossein. Explaining the Gender Differences in Iranian Marital Paradigms. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1401; 3(8): 13-23. doi: 10.22098/jhrs.2022.9628.1022

Explaining the Gender Differences in Iranian Marital Paradigms

Journal of Family Relations Studies
مقاله 2، دوره 3، شماره 8، فروردین 2023، صفحه 13-23    اصل مقاله (1.13 M)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22098/jhrs.2022.9628.1022
نویسندگان
Esmaeil Jahani Dolatabad* 1؛ Hossein Heydari2
1Associate Professor PhD, Department of History and Sociology, Faculty of Social Science, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
2Assistant Professor, Insitute for Humanities and Social Studies. ACECR. Tehran. Iran
چکیده
Objective: Given that cultural perceptions regarding marriage are shifting and the pathways to marriage are more complex, scholars interested in marital rela­tionships have recently focused their attention on understanding the individual’s attitudes, values, and beliefs regarding marital transitions and relationships, and how those beliefs may alter individual and relational behaviors. In this article we have tried to rely on various theoretical approaches to explain marital meaning - particularly the theory of symbolic interactionism and concept of "Marital Paradigm" as the central concept of the study - to create an appropriate model that provides a different explanation for differences in individual’s marital paradigms.
Methods: The model explains the marital paradigm using four groups of factors. Our basic idea was marital paradigm which was a production of encountering four groups of factors including personal, structural, cultural and commutative factors. The model was tested by a secondary analysis - based on dataset from a survey conducted in 2016 in Tehran - and has been confirmed by results of this study.
Results: The results showed that variables such as religiosity, age, income, marriage duration and gender directly affect the marital paradigms of Iranian people.
Conclusion:  Given that paradigm differences may be the root of many marital problems, the present study introduces a new form of homogamy called "paradigmatic homogamy” as a solution. This concept considers the paradigmatic coordination of couples as an important factor in marital strength, and suggests that individuals learn about the partner's paradigmatic characteristics before entering into marriage. These characteristics can be traced to the six dimensions of the marital paradigm that we discussed in this study.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Marital Paradigm؛ Marital Role؛ Marital Rubric؛ Marital Context؛ Marital Permanence
مراجع

Boxer, C. F., Mary C. Noonan and Christine B. Whelan. (2013). “Measuring Mate Preferences: A Replication and Extension.” Journal of Family Issues 36(2): 163–187. Doi:10.1177/0192513X13490404

Campbell, L & Wilbur C. J. ( 2009). “Are the Traits we Prefer in Potential Mates the Traits they Value in Themselves? An Analysis of Sex Differences in the Self-concept.” Self and Identity 8: 418-446. Doi:10.1080/15298860802505434

Carroll J. S., Brian Willoughby, S., Badger, L., Nelson J., & Carolyn M. B. (2007). “So Close, Yet So Far away: The Impact of Varying Marital Horizons on Emerging Adulthood.”  Journal of Adolescent Research 22(3):  219-247. Doi:10.1177/0743558407299697

Hall, S. (2006). “Marital Meaning: Exploring Young Adults’ Belief Systems about Marriage.” Journal of Family Issues 27(10): 1437-1458. Doi:10.1177/0192513X06290036

Jahani Dolatabad E. (2014). Sociological Study of Marital Conflict; Causes and Contexts, Associate Research Center: University of Tehran.

Lauer, S. R. & Carrie Y. (2010). “The deinstitutionalization of marriage reconsidered: New institutional approach to changes in marriage.”  Journal of Family Theory and Review 2(1): 58-72. Doi:10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00039.x

Shackelford, K., Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2005). “Universal Dimensions of Human Mate Preferences.” Personality and Individual Differences 39: 447-458. Doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.023

Sprecher, S., Quintin S. & Hatfield. E. (1994). “Mate Selection Preferences: Gender Differences Examined in a National Sample.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66(6): 1074-1080. Doi:10.1037//0022-3514.66.6.1074

South, S. J. (1991). “Sociodemographic Differences in Mate Selection Preferences.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53: 928-940. doi:10.2307/352998

Thornton, A. & L. Young-DeMarco (2001).  “Four Decades of Trends in Attitudes Toward Family Issues in the United States: The 1960s Through the 1990s.”  Journal of Marriage and the Family 63(4): 1009-1037. Doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01009.x

Turner, J. H. (1999). “Toward A General Sociological Theory of Emotions.” Journal for the Social Behaviour 29(2): 133-62. Doi:10.1111/1468-5914.00095

Whitehead, B. and Popenoe, D. ( 2001). Who Wants to Marry a Soul Mate? New survey Finding on Young Adults’ Attitudes about Love and Marriage.  NJ: National Marriage Project: New Brunswick.

Wilcox, B. W. & Marquardt. E. (2011). The State of Our Unions. VA: National Marriage Project: Charlottesville.

Wilcox, B. W. & Dew, J. (2010). “Is Love a Flimsy Foundation? Soulmate Versus Institutional Models of Marriage.” Social Science Research  39(5):  687-699. Doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.05.006

Willoughby B. J., Hall S. & Luczak H. P. (2013).  “Marital Paradigms: A Conceptual Framework for Marital Attitudes, Values, and Beliefs.”  Journal of Family Issues 36(2): 188-211. Doi:10.1177/0192513X13487677

Willoughby, B. J. (2010). “Marital attitude trajectories across adolescence.”  Journal of Youth and Adolescence 39(11): 1305-1317. Doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9477-x

آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 234
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 298


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب