Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Preface
- Organization of This Handbook
- How to Work with This Handbook
- Part I Background and Theory
- Part II Application Areas of Interaction Analysis
- Part III Methodology and Procedures of Interaction Analysis
- Part IV Data Analysis and Data Presentation
- Part V Coding Schemes for Interaction Research
- General Group Process Systems
- Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
- Coordination and Coherence
- Cognition and Metacognition
- Personality and Team Behavior
- Roles and Relationships
- 42 BRRICS
- 43 (Family) Relational Communication Control Coding System
- 44 Verbal Response Modes Taxonomy
- Appendix
- Index
- References
42 - BRRICS
Brief Romantic Relationship Interaction Coding Scheme
from Roles and Relationships
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2018
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Preface
- Organization of This Handbook
- How to Work with This Handbook
- Part I Background and Theory
- Part II Application Areas of Interaction Analysis
- Part III Methodology and Procedures of Interaction Analysis
- Part IV Data Analysis and Data Presentation
- Part V Coding Schemes for Interaction Research
- General Group Process Systems
- Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
- Coordination and Coherence
- Cognition and Metacognition
- Personality and Team Behavior
- Roles and Relationships
- 42 BRRICS
- 43 (Family) Relational Communication Control Coding System
- 44 Verbal Response Modes Taxonomy
- Appendix
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis , pp. 613 - 621Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Primary Sources
Humbad, M. N., Donnellan, M. B., Klump, K. L., & Burt, S. A. (2011). Development of the Brief Romantic Relationship Interaction Coding Scheme (BRRICS). Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 759–769. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025216CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Secondary Sources
Burt, S. A., Wildey, M. N., & Klump, K. L. (2015). The quality of the interparental relationship does not moderate the etiology of child conduct problems. Psychological Medicine, 45, 319–332. doi:10.1017/S003329171400138XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., Huston, T. L., & Houts, R. M. (2000). How does personality matter in marriage? An examination of trait anxiety, interpersonal negativity, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 326–336. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.326CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chow, C. M., & Ruhl, H. (2018). Congruity of observed social support behaviors and couple relationship quality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 62–71. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, A., Eldridge, K., Catta-Preta, A. B., Lim, V. R., Santagata, R. (2006). Cross-cultural consistency of the demand/withdraw interaction pattern in couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 1029–1044. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00311.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand/withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 73–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.1.73CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2006). Relationship satisfaction. In Vangelisti, A. L. & Perlman, D. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships (pp. 579–594). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grych, J. H., Seid, M., & Fincham, F. D. (1992). Assessing marital conflict from the child’s perspective: The Children’s Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale. Child Development, 63, 558–572. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb01646.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyman, R. E. (2004). Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System (RMICS). In Kerig, P. K. & Baucom, D. H. (Eds.), Couple observational coding systems (pp. 67–93). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Julien, D., Markman, H. J., & Lindahl, K. M. (1989). A comparison of global and microanalytic coding systems: Implications for future trends in studying interactions. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 81–100. doi:10.1007/BF00962701Google Scholar
Labreton, J. M., Burgess, J. R. D., Kaiser, R. B., Atchley, E. K., & James, L. R. (2003). Variance hypothesis and interrater reliability and agreement: Are ratings from multiple sources really dissimilar? Organizational Research Methods, 6, 80–128. doi:10.1177/1094428102239427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28. doi:10.2307/350547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, R. L., & Tolman, A. O. (1990). The Marital Interaction Coding System – Global (MICS-G): A global companion to the MICS. Behavioral Assessment, 12, 271–294.Google Scholar
Wildey, M. N., Donnellan, M. B., Klump, K. L., & Burt, S. A. (submitted). Using multiple methods to evaluate associations between externalizing psychopathology, personality, and relationship quality: A replication and extension. Journal of Personality Disorders.Google Scholar