{"id":11994,"date":"2014-08-21T19:18:29","date_gmt":"2014-08-22T02:18:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/oslc.nineplanetsllc.com\/blog\/publication\/marital-interaction-coding-system-revision-and-empirical-evaluation\/"},"modified":"2014-08-21T19:18:29","modified_gmt":"2014-08-22T02:18:29","slug":"marital-interaction-coding-system-revision-and-empirical-evaluation","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/blog\/publication\/marital-interaction-coding-system-revision-and-empirical-evaluation\/","title":{"rendered":"Marital Interaction Coding System: Revision and empirical evaluation."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Compared the Marital Interaction Coding System&#8211;III (MICS&#8211;III) with the revised MICS&#8211;IV. An archival data set was used of 994 couples&#8217; videotaped conflict negotiations coded with the MICS.  The MICS&#8211;IV, relative to the MICS&#8211;III, had the advantage of capturing more nonverbal affect expressed during marital interactions, which resulted in stronger interactional contingencies. That is, MICS&#8211;IV&#8217;s hierarchy rules for creating sequences resulted in more strong negative (i.e., blame) and more subtle positive (i.e., facilitation) codes. MICS&#8211;IV rules also resulted in less behavior-laden negative (i.e., invalidation), positive (i.e., validation and propose change), and neutral (i.e., problem description and irrelevant) codes.  Furthermore, MICS&#8211;IV rules generated significantly lower levels of autodependence than MICS&#8211;III.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}}},"publication_keyword":[448,962,1106,377,83,84,1107],"research_type":[],"class_list":["post-11994","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry","publication_keyword-adulthood","publication_keyword-conflict","publication_keyword-inventories","publication_keyword-marriage","publication_keyword-measurement","publication_keyword-observation","publication_keyword-personality-scales"],"acf":{"citation":"Heyman, R. E., Weiss, R. L., & Eddy, J. M. (1995). Marital Interaction Coding System: Revision and empirical evaluation. <i>Behavioral Research and Therapy, 33 (6)<\/i>, 737-746.","publication_year":"1995","scientists":[11011]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/11994","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"acf:post":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/scientist\/11011"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11994"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication_keyword?post=11994"},{"taxonomy":"research_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oslc.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/research_type?post=11994"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}