Forgiveness regarding mental/affectionate behaviours

The results for the third regression (predicting DIQ-R emotional/affectionate scores) indicated that the ECRS scores did not account for a significant amount of the variance in emotional/affectionate scores, R 2 = .01, F(2, 303) = 1.37, p = .26. However, the inclusion of the experimental manipulation resulted in a significant R 2 change, R 2 change = .04, F change(1, 302) = , p = .001, with the experimental manipulation (sr 2 = .04, ? = 0.20 http://datingranking.net/local-hookup/wichita, p = .001) uniquely accounting for a significant amount of the variance. The inclusion of the interaction terms on block 3 was also significant, R 2 change = 0.05, F change(2, 300) = 8.14, p < .001. Attachment anxiety (sr 2 = .03, ? = 0.30, p = .001), the experimental manipulation (sr 2 = .04, ? = 0.20, p < .001), and the interaction between attachment anxiety and the experimental condition (sr 2 = .03, ? = ?0.34, p < .001) uniquely accounted for a significant amount of the variance.

A straightforward slopes investigation revealed that the connection between accessory nervousness and you can psychological/caring forgiveness was a significant self-confident relationships for these throughout the fate status (? = 0.twenty-eight, 95% CI [0.eleven, 0.45], p = .002) yet not for those regarding development standing (? = -0.17, 95% CI [-0.32, -0.02], p = .02). Get a hold of Shape eight.

Fig. 7. Graph portraying the partnership anywhere between connection nervousness and you can forgiveness off emotional/caring cheating for those in the fate and also the growth condition.

Forgiveness of single behaviours

The results for the fourth regression (predicting DIQ-R solitary scores) revealed that the ECRS scores were significant, R 2 = .07, F(2, 303) = , p < .001. (more…)