| Literature DB >> 27933023 |
Jessica Ruppen1, Patricia Waldvogel2, Ulrike Ehlert1.
Abstract
Research shows that implicit motives influence social relationships. However, little is known about their role in fatherhood and, particularly, how men experience their paternal role. Therefore, this study examined the association of implicit motives and fathers' perceived constraint due to fatherhood. Furthermore, we explored their relation to fathers' life satisfaction. Participants were fathers with biological children (N = 276). They were asked to write picture stories, which were then coded for implicit affiliation and power motives. Perceived constraint and life satisfaction were assessed on a visual analog scale. A higher implicit need for affiliation was significantly associated with lower perceived constraint, whereas the implicit need for power had the opposite effect. Perceived constraint had a negative influence on life satisfaction. Structural equation modeling revealed significant indirect effects of implicit affiliation and power motives on life satisfaction mediated by perceived constraint. Our findings indicate that men with a higher implicit need for affiliation experience less constraint due to fatherhood, resulting in higher life satisfaction. The implicit need for power, however, results in more perceived constraint and is related to decreased life satisfaction.Entities:
Keywords: affiliation; fatherhood; implicit motivation; life satisfaction; perceived constraint; power
Year: 2016 PMID: 27933023 PMCID: PMC5120097 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01856
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations among the relevant variables.
| Mean | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) Life satisfaction | 80.83 | 13.61 | 1 | |||
| (2) Perceived constraint | 41.15 | 27.34 | -0.24∗∗ | 1 | ||
| (3) Affiliation ( | 7.33 | 3.23 | 0.06 | -0.14∗ | 1 | |
| (4) Power ( | 3.81 | 2.14 | 0.01 | 0.13∗ | -0.07 | 1 |
Direct and indirect effects and 95% confidence intervals for the overall structural equation model.
| 95% CI | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | ||||
| AFF → PC | -0.131 | 0.051 | -0.232 | -0.034 | 0.008 |
| POW → PC | 0.115 | 0.057 | -0.002 | -0.225 | 0.047 |
| PC → LS | -0.232 | 0.063 | -0.349 | -0.105 | 0.000 |
| AFF → PC → LS | 0.030 | 0.015 | -0.007 | -0.067 | 0.006 |
| POW → PC → LS | -0.027 | 0.015 | -0.065 | -0.003 | 0.030 |