Women’s avoidant attachment, conflict solving, and relationship satisfaction through individualism and masculinity

Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Cu en Psychology
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12144-023-04988-1
Women’s a oidan a achmen , con lic sol ing, and ela ionship
sa is ac ion h oughindi idualism andmasculini y
IoneB e aña1 · I zia Alonso‑A biol1 · Shi iLa y2 · FangZhang3
Accep ed: 11 July 2023
© The Au ho (s) 2023
Abs ac
The u iliza ion o speci ic s a egies o manage couple con lic has a di e en ial impac on women’s ela ionship sa is ac ion.
Howe e , conside ing ha women’s ole wi hin couple ela ionship is shaped by socie al no ms, such associa ion should be
examined by emb acing a c oss-cul u al pe spec i e. Thus, he objec i e o his s udy is o analyze he e ec o indi idualism/
collec i ism and masculini y/ eminini y cul u al alues on a oidan a achmen , pe cei ed con lic sol ing, and ela ionship
sa is ac ion. The sample consis ed o 334 women om Is ael, USA, Tü kiye, and Spain. An uncons ained gene al model
elucida es he connec ions among ela ionship sa is ac ion, a oidan a achmen , and con lic sol ing s a egies ac oss all
coun ies; ye , he s eng h o ce ain associa ions a ies based on he dimensions o masculini y and indi idualism. In indi-
idualis ic coun ies, a oidan a achmen p edic s lowe ela ionship sa is ac ion in women. The p edic ion o own wi hd awal
by a oidan a achmen emains simila among women, ega dless o he indi idualism dimension. Ne e heless, in eminine
(i.e., ole egali a ian) coun ies, he link be ween emale’s a oidan a achmen and hei pa ne ’s use o posi i e con lic
sol ing s a egies is s onge . Addi ionally, he wi hd awal s a egy p edic s pa ne demand o a g ea e ex en in women
om eminine coun ies. These indings will assis p o essionals om di e en coun ies in de eloping cul u ally sensi i e
and ailo ed p e en ion and in e en ion ools.
Keywo ds A oidan a achmen · Con lic esolu ion· Cul u al masculini y· Gende oles· Indi idualism· Rela ionship
sa is ac ion
How pa ne s manage con lic has signi ican e ec s on
ela ionship sa is ac ion, which in u n, impac s pa ne s’
men al and physical well-being (Mo al de la Rubia e al.,
2011). The s a egies used o cope wi h con lic appea o
be in luenced by cul u al no ms, alues, and belie s (e.g.,
Gomez & Taylo , 2018). Ce ain cul u al dimensions, as
iden i ied by Ho s ede e al. (2010), play a signi ican ole
in shaping in e - ela ional codes and ela ionship no ms.
Speci ically, esea che s like B e aña e al. (2019) ha e
obse ed associa ions be ween indi idualism-collec i ism
(IDV) and masculini y- eminini y (MAS) dimensions,
which se es as a p oxy o socie ies wi h a ying deg ees
o pa ia chal cul u e dominance) and he di e se con lic
esolu ion s a egies employed by women. In e ms o IDV,
coun ies wi h high sco es a e cha ac e ized by p omo ing
indi iduals’ independency and au onomy, while coun ies
wi h lowe sco es (leaning owa ds he collec i ism pole)
emphasize ha mony, al uism, and in e dependency among
indi iduals. As o masculini y (MAS), his coun y-le el
dimension e lec s cul u al expec a ions o gende oles and
has been ound o in luence ela ional dynamics and how
women in e ac wi h hei pa ne s du ing ma i al con lic
(e.g., Kluwe & Mikula, 2002). High MAS sco es indica e
B oade impac s a emen Unlike mos s udies ha ocus on a
pa e n cha ac e ized by men wi hd awing om con lic s and
women demanding hem, ou in es iga ion akes an in e se
app oach. We analyze he e ec o women wi hd awing
om con lic s and hei male pa ne s being demanding,
con ibu ing o he unde s and o ela ional dynamics in
women’s ic imiza ion. Addi ionally, a he han assuming a
uni e sal app oach, his s udy emphasizes he cul u al a iabili y
unde lying women’s s a egies o esol ing couple con lic s
wi hin couples. Fu he mo e, i explo es how his dis inc i eness
in luences hei le el o sa is ac ion wi hin he ela ionship.
* Ione B e aña
[email p o ec ed]
1 Facul y o Psychology, Uni e si y o  heBasque Coun y
UPV/EHU, A . Tolosa, 70, 20018SanSebas ian, Spain
2 Uni e si y o Hai a, Hai a, Is ael
3 Assump ion College, Wo ces e , MA, USA
Cu en Psychology
1 3
g ea e di e ences in social oles be ween gende s, whe eas
he eminini y end o he con inuum e e s o hose socie ies
whe e social oles o bo h gende s o e lap (Ho s ede, 2001).
Cul u al no ms ega ding con lic managemen and com-
munica ion codes may ha e a mo e p ominen impac on
women. Fo ins ance, Fe nandez e al. (2014) ound ha
di e ences in masculini y alues (i.e., socie y’s gende
ole di e ence) explained a ia ions in women’s emo ion
egula ion, wi h women om mo e masculine coun ies
mo e equen ly employing ange as an emo ion egula ion
mechanism. Howe e , esea ch on con lic esolu ion s a e-
gies and ela ionship sa is ac ion has gene ally o e looked
po en ial di e ences among women om a ious coun ies.
This aspec dese es a mo e comp ehensi e analysis due
o he an icipa ed cul u al a ia ions in how women handle
ela ionship con lic s (B e aña e al., 2019). Neglec ing such
cul u al di e ences may esul in esea che s inco ec ly
gene alizing indings and amily he apis s and p ac i ion-
e s employing inadequa e in e en ion s a egies o women
om di e se cul u al backg ounds.
Fu he mo e, esea ch sugges s ha ela ionship sa is ac-
ion, e lec ing indi iduals’ gene al e alua ion abou hei
ela ionship (Li & Fung, 2011), may also be a ec ed by
cul u al ac o s (So okowski e al., 2017). Al hough mos
s udies analyze he associa ion be ween indi idual a iables
(e.g., a achmen dimensions) and ela ionship sa is ac ion
(e.g., B assa d e al., 2009; Mole o e al., 2017), i has also
been con i med ha such e alua ion is subjec o cul u al
alues, no ms, and expec a ions (Lalonde e al., 2004; Mye s
e al., 2005). Speci ically, he le el o sa is ac ion in a close
ela ionship will be in luenced by he ex en o which he
ela ionship mee s cul u ally p esc ibed obliga ions and
expec a ions (e.g., Mye s e al., 2005). As So okowski e al.
(2017) ound in hei me a-analysis, ela ionship sa is ac-
ion is in luenced bo h by indi idual a iables and cul u al
alues. This simul aneous double-pe spec i e o analysis has
no been ca ied ou o women’s ela ionship sa is ac ion;
ye , his issue is pa icula ly ele an because a me a-analysis
by Jackson e al. (2014) showed ha women’s ela ionship
sa is ac ion sco es we e lowe han men’s in Asia ic cul u es,
al hough di e ences in ela ionship sa is ac ion be ween
women and men om Uni ed S a es had no been ound.
In he emaining o he In oduc ion, we will i s ly
o e a b ie o e iew o he heo e ical amewo k o
adul a achmen heo y. Speci ically, we will e iew he
s a e-o - he-a indings on he associa ions among a oid-
an a achmen , ela ionship sa is ac ion, and con lic sol -
ing s a egies, examining hem h ough he lens o IDV
as a cul u al dimension. Secondly, we will analyze how
MAS helps in unde s anding indi iduals’ pe cep ion o
hei own and hei pa ne ’s con lic esolu ion s a egies.
Finally, we will p opose an explana o y model o women’s
ela ionship sa is ac ion le els ha akes in o conside a ion
a oidan a achmen dimension, con lic esolu ion s a e-
gies, as well as he cul u al dimensions o IDV and MAS.
A oidan a achmen and ela ionship
sa is ac ion
A achmen has been widely used in esea ch s udies o
explain beha io al di e ences in ela ional con ex s. In
he con ex o in ima e ela ionships, a achmen e e s o
he analysis o ac i a ion pa e ns and displayed beha -
io s (e.g., p oximi y, con ac , and suppo ) wi h a ach-
men igu es in h ea ening si ua ions (Mikulince &
Sha e , 2016). Fou nie e al. (2011) p oposed a model
ha cha ac e izes insecu e a achmen conside ing wo
dimensions: anxie y (abou close ela ionships) and a oid-
ance (o in imacy). Anxie y pe ains o an indi idual’s
excessi e wo y and cons an moni o ing o he ela ion-
ship wi h his/he pa ne , o en accompanied by a ea o
abandonmen . A oidance, on he o he hand, emphasizes
independence and main aining emo ional dis ance om
he pa ne .
A achmen is a key a iable ha explains ela ionship
sa is ac ion; howe e , me a-analy ics s udies (e.g., Can-
del & Tu liuc, 2019; Li & Chan, 2012) ha e obse ed
ha he dimension o a oidance exe s a s onge de i-
men al impac on ela ionship sa is ac ion. Candel and
Tu liuc (2019) analyzed gende di e ences in he link
be ween a oidan a achmen and ela ionship sa is ac-
ion bu ocused only on a mode a ion e ec , inding ha
he link o such a achmen o ien a ion wi h ela ionship
sa is ac ion was weake in Asian indi iduals compa ed o
coun e pa s om No h Ame ica and Eu ope. Ye , he
cul u al dimensions ha explain such an associa ion we e
unknown in hei s udy. Fu he mo e, using con inen s as
analysis uni s may no accu a ely cap u e cul u al di e -
ences since hey include coun ies ha di e in one o
mo e cul u al dimensions known o be associa ed o he
ealm o ela ionships (e.g., B e aña e al., 2019; Ho s -
ede e al., 2010). Thus, u he examina ion is necessi a ed
o analyze he ela ionship be ween a oidan a achmen
and ela ionship sa is ac ion h ough a mo e ine-g ained
analysis: a) conside ing cul u al alues —as IDV and
MAS cul u al dimensions— p esumed o be associa ed
wi h ela ional ques ions, and b) selec ing coun ies ha
di e in a leas wo cul u al dimensions, as ecommended
o c oss-cul u al s udies —and employing a leas h ee
coun ies— (Fo bes, 2010; Van de Vij e & Leung, 2000).
The cu en s udy is in ended o ill his gap by answe ing
i e esea ch ques ions —and by es ing i e co esponding
hypo heses— ha include he cul u e il e , which will be
posed in he subsequen subsec ions.
Cu en Psychology
1 3
A oidan a achmen , ela ionship sa is ac ion,
andindi idualism
Expec a ions, belie s, and alues ega ding ela ionships can
be explained by cul u al dimensions iden i ied by Ho s ede
(2001): IDV and MAS. Cul u al dimensions ep esen pa -
e ns ha a y ac oss coun ies. B e aña e al. (2019) ound
ha emales om collec i is ic cul u es sco ed highe in
a oidance han women om indi idualis ic coun ies. Ne -
e heless, hey did no analyze he link be ween a oidan
a achmen and ela ionship sa is ac ion, which migh be
subjec o cul u al a ia ion (Alonso-A biol e al., 2007).
In collec i is ic cul u es, ma i al/couple ela ionships
may se e a mo e p agma ic unc ion, wi h lo e playing a
less impo an ole, and he ela ionship wi h he pa ne
ha ing a p ima y unc ional (economically) ole compa ed
o ela ionships in indi idualis ic cul u es (Ubillos & Ba -
ien os, 2001). While collec i is cul u es highly alue
ela ionships wi h o he s, in imacy and a ec i e issues a e
mo e o en sha ed wi hin he ex ended amily ne wo k a he
han being limi ed o he couple ela ionship (Dion & Dion,
1993). Fulle e al. (2004) speci ically sugges ed ha in col-
lec i is ic cul u es, women’s ela ional bonds wi h hei pa -
ne s a e suppo ed by o he membe ships, such as amilism.
Con e sely, oman ic lo e holds g ea e impo ance in indi-
idualis ic cul u es, as close ela ionships con ibu e o pe -
sonal ul illmen o each indi idual (Lalonde e al., 2004),
po en ially due o he lesse ole o o he amily ela ions in
ul illing a ec i e ole. Building o his line o linking, i
is expec ed ha he a oidan a achmen dimension would
ha e a mo e nega i e impac in women om indi idualis-
ic cul u es compa ed o women om collec i is coun ies
(Hypo heses 1).
In any case, he e ec o a achmen o ien a ion on ela-
ional dynamics ex ends beyond women’s ela ionship sa -
is ac ion in a ious cul u es. Resea ch demons a es ha
a achmen dimensions also in luence how indi iduals
esol e ma i al con lic s and pe cei e hem (B e aña e al.,
2020).
A oidan a achmen andcon lic sol ing s a egies
In(adequa e) con lic esolu ion and i s impac on ela ion-
ship sa is ac ion and couples’ well-being has become a c u-
cial a ea o in e es o ela ionship esea che s and he a-
pis s (McNully & Russell, 2010). Posi i e p oblem-sol ing
implies an adequa e app oach in which pa ne s communi-
ca e hei needs and wishes, wo king oge he o ind posi i e
solu ions o p oblems (Hahlweg e al., 1984). On he o he
hand, demand and wi hd awal a e equen ly adop ed mala-
dap i e esolu ion s a egies in p oblema ic couple dynamics
(Bonache e al., 2019), and hey a e commonly associa ed
wi h lowe le els o pe sonal well-being o bo h onesel and
one’s pa ne (Si e & Schwa z, 2010). Demand con lic
esolu ion s a egy is cha ac e ized by eques s o he pa ne
o discuss he p oblem wi h he use o c i icism and com-
plain (Eld idge e al., 2007). Wi hd awal s a egies in ol e
beha io s such as e asion, dis ancing, and escape om he
con lic scena io (Eld idge e al., 2007).
Resea che s ha e ocused on unde s anding how indi idu-
als wi h high le els o a oidan a achmen pe cei e cou-
ple con lic s and beha io s displayed du ing hose con lic s
(e.g., Bonache e al., 2019; Mikulince & Sha e , 2016).
Those indi iduals who exhibi highe a oidan a achmen
a e likely o pe cei e con lic si ua ions and he beha io s
o o he s mo e nega i ely (C owley, 2008). These pe cep-
ions a e o en associa ed wi h g ea e endency o engage
in e asi e communica ion (Fowle & Dillow, 2011) and o
use wi hd awal and dis ancing s a egies o esol e con lic s
(C owley, 2008).
Rega ding pe cei ed pa ne ’s beha io , F ías e al.
(2014) ound ha highly a oidan indi iduals pe cei e hei
pa ne s as unsuppo i e leading hem o belie e ha hei
pa ne s a e no employing posi i e con lic esolu ion s a e-
gies ha in ol e ag eemen and nego ia ion o esol e con-
lic s (Ku dek, 1998). In ac , ecen esea ch by B e aña
e al. (2020) in a Spanish sample including emale and male
indi iduals demons a ed a link be ween he a oidan ly
a ached indi iduals pe cei ing he pa ne as using ewe
posi i e p oblem-sol ing s a egies.
Ne e heless, he e is sca ci y o esea ch ha ha e exam-
ined how a oidan a achmen is linked o he pe cep ion o
pa ne posi i ely sol ing p oblems ac oss coun ies wi h
di e en cul u al alues, such as a ia ions in indi idual-
ism (IDV) and masculini y- eminini y (MAS) ankings. In
ou s udy, we aimed o answe his li e a u e gap associa ed
wi h cul u al di e ences ocusing on women. This choice
is d i en by he ci cums ance ha women, in luenced by
gende socializa ion, o en place a highe p io i y on p e-
se ing ela ionships compa ed o men (C oss e al., 2000).
Mo eo e , women o en display a heigh ened mo i a ion o
ac i ely ackle issues o uphold he well-being o hei ela-
ionships (Bake & McNul y, 2019) and a e mo e a en i e
o and e lec i e o ela ional ma e s (e.g., Williams e al.,
2009). Addi ionally, women end o u ilize con lic esolu-
ion s a egies o a g ea e ex en compa ed o men (Tam es
e al., 2002). This highligh s he signi icance o hei pe cep-
ion o hei pa ne s’ beha io and i s po en ial in luence on
hei assessmen o ela ionship quali y. The a ionale o
hese cul u al di e en ial aspec s is explained below.
A oidan a achmen , pe cei ed con lic esolu ion
s a egies, andindi idualism
Cul u e plays a signi ican ole in shaping indi iduals’ emo-
ion egula ion and con lic managemen s a egies (Heppne ,
Cu en Psychology
1 3
2008). One key cul u al dimension, indi idualism/collec-
i ism, in luences how indi iduals handle con lic s in close
ela ionships, in e ac ing wi h hei a achmen o ien a ions.
While wi hd awal and dis ancing con lic esolu ion s a e-
gies a e mo e commonly associa ed wi h collec i is ic coun-
ies as a means o p omo e g oup ha mony (F iedman e al.,
2010), he use o wi hd awal s a egy wi hin couple ela ion-
ships may a y ac oss cul u es when conside ing he impac
o a oidan a achmen on con lic beha io s. Wi hd awal
i sel is a s a egy employed by highly a oidan indi idu-
als o manage dis ess (Co co an & Mallinck od , 2000),
highligh ing hei need o au onomy and independence ( o
a e iew, see Mikulince & Sha e , 2007). This need o
au onomy is mo e p e alen in indi idualis ic coun ies han
in collec i is ic ones (Ho s ede, 2001; Schmi e al., 2003).
The e o e, he associa ions be ween he cogni i e-a ec i e
inclina ion o seeking in imacy a oidance (i.e., a oidan
a achmen dimension) and he adop ion o a beha io al
wi hd awal s a egy migh be s onge in indi idualis ic
coun ies.
Cul u e may also help explain di e ences in how highly
a oidan indi iduals pe cei e hei pa ne s’ beha io s du -
ing con lic s. While he e a e limi ed s udies on his speci ic
opic, a hand ul o s udies has examined a p oxy a iable:
pe cei ed social suppo om he pa ne . Speci ically, Ho
e al. (2010) no iced ha he a oidan o ien a ion o a ach-
men was linked wi h lowe pe cei ed pa ne suppo in a
uni e si y sample om Hong-Kong (a collec i is ic coun-
y) o a highe ex en compa ed o an Ame ican sample (an
indi idualis ic coun y). A simila esul was obse ed by
F iedman e al. (2010), who showed ha he ela ionships
be ween a oidan a achmen and dec eased pe cei ed pa -
ne ’s suppo was s onge in collec i is ic coun ies (i.e.,
Hong-Kong and Mexico) han in an indi idualis ic cul u e
(i.e., USA). Al hough social suppo emains in he a ec i e
sphe e ( a he han he cogni i e na u e o pe cep ion), due
o i s links wi h he use o p oblem-sol ing s a egy (Kau ,
2017), i is easonable o expec ha he end o s onge
e ec in indi idualis ic coun ies would also apply o how
pa ne s a e pe cei ed o employ p oblem-sol ing s a egies.
A close look a he gende pe spec i e shows esea ch
e idence poin ing o women’s highe endency han men
o use posi i e p oblem-sol ing s a egies —ac i e coping,
planning, and p oblem- ocused coping— (e.g., Tam es e al.,
2002). These esul s migh be in e p e ed, in u n, as pe -
cei ing ha hei male pa ne s use posi i e p oblem-sol ing
s a egy less equen ly by opposi ion and acco ding o hei
expec a ion s anda ds. Tam es e al.’s (2002) esea ch, how-
e e , was conduc ed in English-speaking and highly indi-
idualis ic coun ies acco ding o Ho s ede’s (2010) ank-
ing: Uni ed S a es, Canada, England, Aus alia, I eland, and
New-Zealand. Con e sely, socie ally ein o ced ela ional
expec a ions (Williams e al., 2009) may be ampli ied in
women om collec i is ic coun ies, whe e he emphasis
on in e dependence and ela ionship wi h o he s is s onge
(Ho s ede, 2001). Consequen ly, women in collec i is ic
coun ies may expe ience highe no ma i e p essu e o
main ain ela ionships h ough p oblem-sol ing and mu ual
communica ion (Tam es e al., 2002). In sum, we expec ha
women sco ing highe in a oidan a achmen will show he
ollowing pa e ns: a) hey will exhibi highe le els o wi h-
d awal con lic s a egy in indi idualis coun ies compa ed
o women om collec i is ic coun ies (Hypo heses 2), and
b) hey will pe cei e hei male pa ne s as using posi i e
p oblem-sol ing s a egies o a lesse ex en in collec i is ic
coun ies compa ed o women om indi idualis ic coun ies
(Hypo heses 3).
Con lic sol ing, ela ionship sa is ac ion,
andcoun y‑le el masculini y‑ eminini y
In addi ion o indi idualism, masculini y is ano he ele an
cul u al dimension ha in luences indi iduals’ egula ion
o hemsel es in couple con lic s and how hese s a egies
impac hei ela ionship sa is ac ion. Masculini y e lec s
socie al expec a ions o gende oles and can ha e an e ec
on how women esol e con lic s wi h hei male pa ne s in
couple ela ionships (e.g., Kluwe & Mikula, 2002).
Rehman and Hol zwo h-Mun oe (2006) analyzed he
associa ion o wi hd awal and demand wi h cul u e, wi h-
ou examining he in e ac ion be ween hese wo s a egies.
They ound ha demand was mo e equen in women in
egali a ian ela ionships, while women in less egali a ian
ela ionships used demand and wi hd awal o a lesse ex en .
Ne e heless, hese esul s we e analyzed a an indi idual-
le el, ocusing on gende - ole le els be ween he wo pa -
ne s, a he han a he cul u al-le el, which conside s a i-
a ions in gende - ole no ms ac oss cul u es. To unde s and
how indi idual a iabili y in dealing wi h con lic wi h male
pa ne s may be in luenced by cul u al alues and no ms, i
is essen ial o examine his phenomenon a a mo e mac o
le el, conside ing cul u al di e ences in gende - ole no ma-
i e di e en ia ion (e.g., Ho s ede, 2001; Schwa z, 2006).
When i comes o pe cep ion and how demand and
wi hd awal a e pe cei ed o be deployed by he pa ne ,
gende ole-based di e ences ha e been epo ed. Kluwe
and Mikula (2002) ound ha in egali a ian ma iages,
which a e mo e no ma i e in eminine coun ies, asym-
me ic con lic esolu ion s a egies (demand-wi hd awal)
we e mo e salien compa ed o adi ional ma iages
wi h s onge oles di e ences be ween women and men.
Women om mo e adi ional ma iages (a p oxy o mas-
culini y socie ies a he cul u al le el) end o no ice less
con lic and a e mo e p one o use nego ia ion o each
consensus on gende oles, no ms, and ela ionships ules
(VanYpe en & Buunk, 1991). In con as , ela ionship
Cu en Psychology
1 3
oles and ules a e less de e mined in egali a ian ma -
iages (Kluwe & Mikula, 2002), allowing bo h pa ne s
o discuss ma e s mo e openly wi hou no ma i e obli-
ga ions o comply wi h male pa ne s’ decisions (P a o
& Walke , 2004). Thus, women in egali a ian ma iages
(a p oxy o eminine socie ies a he coun y le el) a e
mo e likely o s and up o hei posi ion and well-being
in he close ela ionship and pe cei e g ea e con lic wi h
hei pa ne (Buunk e al., 2000). This scena io sugges s
a highe use o asymme ic (i.e., wi h di e en aim/ unc-
ion) ela ional con lic dynamics whe e demand and
wi hd awal a e mo e p e alen . Ne e heless, he esul s
obse ed by Kluwe and Mikula (2002) a e based on a
single coun y ( he Ne he lands), whe e ela ional no ms
do no di e o he examined sample. In summa y, we
may expec ha he associa ion be ween own wi hd awal
pe cep ion and pe cei ed pa ne demand o be s onge
among women om eminine coun ies han among
women om masculine ones (Hypo hesis 4).
Finally, we es B e aña e al.’s (2020) ela ional model
c oss-cul u ally (see Fig.1). Ou p oposal in ol es exam-
ining he links be ween he a oidan o ien a ion o a ach-
men and bo h own pe cei ed and pa ne (pe cei ed)
con lic esolu ion s a egies, as well as he media ional
e ec o he con lic sol ing in he associa ion be ween
a oidan a achmen and ela ionship sa is ac ion, h ough
cul u al dimensions. The in e ac i e con lic pe cep ion
pa e n in ou s udy is based on he wi hd awal-demand
model in oduced by Bonache e al. (2019), and i has
been comp ehensi ely desc ibed in p e ious esea ch
by B e aña e al. (2020). This implies a hypo hesis o
an o e all model ha may be applicable o all cul u es
(Hypo hesis 5).
Aim andhypo heses
Ou s udy was de eloped o look in o he e ec s o indi idu-
alism and masculini y cul u al alues on a oidan a ach-
men , (pe cei ed) con lic sol ing s a egies, and ela ion-
ship sa is ac ion. Fo he sake o cla i y, we summa ize he e
all he hypo heses. The i s hypo heses (H1 o H4) deal wi h
cul u al di e ences in he associa ion o some a iables (i.e.,
speci ic pa hs) o he model. The las hypo hesis (H5) aims
a es ing a model on in e ela ed a iables ha explain
women’s ela ionship sa is ac ion om he men ioned a i-
ables. (i.e., he con igu al in a iance).
Hypo hesis 1: The expec ed associa ion be ween he
a oidan o ien a ion o a achmen and dec eased ela-
ionship sa is ac ion will be s onge among women om
indi idualis ic coun ies compa ed o women om col-
lec i is coun ies.
Hypo hesis 2: Women sco ing highe in a oidan a ach-
men will exhibi highe le els o wi hd awal con lic
s a egy in indi idualis coun ies compa ed o women
om collec i is ic coun ies.
Hypo hesis 3: Women epo ing highe a oidan a ach-
men will eel hei pa ne s as using posi i e p oblem-
sol ing s a egies o a lesse ex en in collec i is ic coun-
ies compa ed o women om indi idualis ic coun ies.
Hypo hesis 4: The associa ion be ween wo asymme i-
cal con lic sol ing s a egies —speci ically, own wi h-
d awal pe cep ion and pa ne demand pe cep ion — will
be s onge among women om eminine coun ies han
among women om masculine coun ies.
Hypo hesis 5: A con igu al c oss-cul u al model is p o-
posed o explain women’s ela ionship sa is ac ion.
-
-
-
A oidance
A achmen
Own
Wi hd awal
Pe cei ed
Pa ne Demand
Rela ionship
Sa is ac ion
Pe cei ed
Pa ne Posi i e
+
+
-
Fig. 1 Pa h model o women’s couple sa is ac ion

Cu en Psychology
1 3
Women epo ing highe a oidan a achmen will show
a highe pe cep ion o hei own con lic esolu ion s a -
egy (wi hd awal) and hei pa ne ’s con lic esolu ion
s a egies (demand and posi i e p oblem-sol ing), which,
in u n, will be associa ed wi h lowe le els o ela ion-
ship sa is ac ion.
The cu en s udy
Fou coun ies ha a e ep esen a i e o he IDV and MAS
cul u al dimensions we e analyzed (see Fig.2). Tü kiye was
conside ed a collec i is ic and eminine coun y, aluing
consensus and p omo ing equali y and iendliness (Ho s -
ede, 2001). Spain was ca ego ized as an indi idualis ic (Páez
& Zubie a, 2004) and eminine coun y (Ho s ede, 2001).
The USA was classi ied as an indi idualis ic coun y wi h a
leaning owa ds masculini y (Ho s ede, 2001). Las ly, Is ael
was iden i ied as a collec i is socie y wi h a s ong sense o
egional pa io ism (Sagy e al., 1999; T iandis, 1995); and
ega ding MAS, Is ael has gene ally been conside ed in an
in e media e posi ion be ween masculini y and eminini y
bu was selec ed and classi ied as masculine o he s udy
because i is posi ioned as mo e masculine in compa ison
o Spain and Tü kiye.
Me hods
Pa icipan s
We es ima ed he size o he sample wi h GPowe .3.1
(Faul e al., 2009). We u ilized esul s om Candel and
Tu liuc’s (2019) me a-analysis, in which au ho s ound a
medium associa ion be ween hese wo a iables o women
( = −.45). In ou s udy, wi h an alpha o .05 and powe o
.95, a sample o N = 45 was equi ed. Since wo mul ig oup
models we e p oposed o each model, he hypo he ic sam-
ple size would be 90 indi iduals. Ou sample was made o
332 women (48.1% om Spain, 25.5% om Is ael, 14.5%
om USA, and 11.8% om Tü kiye). Thei mean age was
35.2 (SD = 11.57), mean o ela ionship leng h was 11.75
(SD = 11.62), and 67.2% we e ma ied, 32.1% cohabi ing,
and 0.7% we e only da ing. The majo i y women had a sin-
gle child (54.8%). Rega ding educa ion, 2.7% had p ima y
educa ion, 19.2% had comple ed seconda y educa ion, 8.4%
had college-le el educa ion, and 60.8% had comple ed uni-
e si y s udies. As o eligion, in Is ael, 53.3% we e Jewish
and 39% Ch is ians; in USA, 40.8% we e Ca holics Ch is-
ians, 22.4% we e P o es an Ch is ians, and 28.6% iden i ied
as ollowe s o a di e en eligion; in Tü kiye, 91.3% we e
Sunni Muslims, and 4.3% we e Shia Muslims; and in Spain,
62.1% we e Ca holic Ch is ians and 34.6% we e a heis .
Ins umen s
Sociodemog aphic in o ma ion Indi iduals comple ed a
sociodemog aphic shee . These ollowing a iables we e
collec ed: gende , age, coun y, ela ionship leng h, gen-
de , educa ion, child en, ela ionship s a us, and e o ic
o ien a ion.1
Expe iences in close ela ionships (ECR; B ennan e al.,
1998; in i s Spanish e sion by Alonso-A biol e al., 2007;
Heb ew and Tu kish e sions by B e aña e al., 2019).
The ECR is a commonly employed ins umen composed
o 36 sel - epo ed i ems a ed on a Like -7 scale ( om
1 = S ongly Disag ee o 7 = S ongly Ag ee) and apping wo
subscales, which assesses a achmen o ien a ions: anxie y
and a oidance. In his s udy only a oidance was used; i
measu es indi iduals’ com o wi h emo ional closeness o
o he s (e.g., I y o a oid ge ing oo close o my pa ne ).
Highe sco es a e indica i e o highe a oidance. C onbach
alphas we e as ollows: .86 (Is ael), .87 (USA), .81 (Tü -
kiye), and .85 (Spain).
Re ised con lic in en o y (CI-R; Ridley e al., 2001; Span-
ish, Heb ew, and Tu kish e sions by B e aña e al., 2019).
The CI-R assesses con lic esolu ion s a egies in couples
using 13 i ems h ough h ee dimensions: posi i e p oblem-
sol ing, wi hd awal, and demand. The in en o y assesses
USASpain
Masculini y
Is aelTü kiye
Collec i ism
Feminini y
Indi idualism
Fig. 2 Coun y display based on indi idualism-collec i ism (IDV)
and masculini y- eminini y (MAS). No e. The e ical line ep esen s
he dimension o indi idualism (IDV), while he ho izon al line ep-
esen s he dimension o Masculini y (MAS)
1 Since he ini ial numbe o women sel -desc ibing hemsel es as
homosexual o bisexual was e y low (n < 10) and all o hem we e
loca ed in Spain, a decision was made o no include hem in his
s udy o a oid ep esen a i eness bias. The p o ided sample size is
he one used e en ually o he analysis.
Cu en Psychology
1 3
posi i e con lic esolu ion s a egies ha acili a e nego ia-
ion and comp omise o ma ion du ing con lic s (e.g., com-
ing up wi h ideas). Wi hd awal inco po a es i ems ela ed
o a oiding he con lic (e.g., s opping he discussion ea ly).
Demand is a s a egy ha includes i ems in ol ing high
le els o c i icism, a ack o losing con ol (e.g., blaming
he pa ne ). Pa icipan s a ed he equency o s a egy —
h ee subscales— o hemsel es (CI-Sel ) and hei pa ne s
(CI-Pa ne ) on a 7-Like scale (1 = ne e ; o 7 = always).
Highe sco es ep esen a highe endency o use (o o pe -
cei e he use by he pa ne ) each con lic esolu ion s a -
egy. C onbach alphas we e be ween accep able and good
o he subscale o wi hd awal in CI-Sel : α = .42 o Is ael,2
α = .60 o USA, α = .81 o Tü kiye, and α = .70 o Spain.
C onbach alphas o CI-Pa ne in demand subscale we e
good: α = .76 o Is ael, α = .76 o USA, α = .92 o Tü -
kiye, and α = .66 o Spain. Fo posi i e p oblem sol ing
pe cei ed in he pa ne (CI-Pa ne ), C onbach alphas al-
ues we e also good: .75 (Is ael), .72 (USA), .68 (Tü kiye),
and.80 (Spain).
Rela ionship assessmen scale (RAS; o iginal by Hend ick,
1988; in Spanish: Mole o e al., 2016; and in Heb ew and
Tu kish: B e aña e al., 2019). Indi iduals esponded abou
hei sa is ac ion wi h hei ela ionship wi h se en i ems
(e.g., o wha ex en a e you sa is ied wi h you cu en ela-
ionship?), on a se en-poin Like scale (1 = no a all sa is-
ied; 7 = e y sa is ied). C onbach alphas we e .78 (Is ael),
.81 (USA), .81 (Tü kiye), and .83 (Spain).
Da a a coun y‑le el The sco es o Indi idualism-Collec-
i ism (IDV) and Masculini y-Feminini y (MAS) we e col-
lec ed om Ho s ede’s (2001) s udy. Fo he model es ing
analyses, wo composi es we e made o cul u al alues.
P ocedu e
A e ins i u ional consen was ob ained om he main
au ho , collabo a o s om he coun ies collec ed da a,
which ook place in 2010. Following he app oach aken by
o he c oss-cul u al esea che s in compa a i e s udies (e.g.,
Alonso-A biol e al., 2011; Obioma e al., 2022), women we e
ec ui ed using a snowball sampling p ocedu e, which is a
cos -e ec i e, use ul, and p ac ical sampling s a egy highly
employed ( o ins ance, see me a-analyses: Be y e al., 2012;
Connelly & Ones, 2010). By s a ing wi h a common poin
o e e ence (uni e si y s uden s’ con ac s), i is likely ha
he subsamples ac oss coun ies would ha e a simila com-
posi ion in e ms o sociodemog aphic a iables. Pa icipan s
we e indi idually con ac ed, and upon ecei ing ins uc ions
o comple ing he su ey, hey illed hem ou and e u ned
hem back in sealed en elopes o gua an ee anonymi y. Pa -
icipa ion was olun a y, and no compensa ion was p o ided.
Da a analysis
S uc u al equi alence ac oss coun ies o all ins umen s
had been p e iously es ed in B e aña e al. (2019). We used
pa h analysis o examine ou expec a ions conce ning pa h-
ways be ween a oidan a achmen and ela ionship sa is-
ac ion h ough con lic esolu ion s a egies. The model
es ima ion employed he maximum likelihood me hod;
AMOS .23 was used o ha pu pose. We es ed he model
h ough mul i-g oup analyses o de ec di e ences ac oss
coun ies based on he wo cul u al dimensions. To es ou
hypo heses, we used χ2 di e ences’ es (Bou & Sa o a,
2007). This analysis compa es he size o β alues o he
eg ession models ac oss coun ies. Finally, o examine he
media ion ole o speci ic a iables, boo s apping me hod
was employed o e alua e indi ec e ec s.
Resul s
Table1 displays he desc ip i e (M and SD) alues o
he a ge a iables, ca ego ized acco ding o he coun-
y alues used in he s udy. Table2 p o ides he co -
ela ions among he a ge a iables o coun ies classi-
ied as indi idualis ic e sus collec i is ic. Co ela ions
be ween a oidan a achmen dimension and own con lic
wi hd awal we e posi i e bu small in women om bo h
indi idualis ic coun ies ( = .24, p = .00) and collec i is ic
coun ies ( = .38, p = .00); he magni ude o hese co -
ela ions we e simila (z = −1.53, p = .08). Howe e , he
co ela ions be ween a oidan a achmen and (pe cei ed)
pa ne wi hd awal we e o di e en magni ude (z = 2.10,
p = .03) o indi idualis ic and collec i is ic coun ies.
The co ela ions o indi idualis ic coun ies we e s a is-
ically signi ican bu small ( = .29, p = .00), whe eas no
co ela ions appea ed in collec i is ic coun ies ( = .06,
p = .52). Finally, he e we e cul u al dissimila i ies in he
magni ude o he co ela ions be ween a oidan a ach-
men dimension and ela ionship sa is ac ion (z = −4.52,
p = .00); he co ela ion was o medium size ( = −.56,
p = .00) o women om indi idualis ic coun ies, whe eas
i was o small size ( = −.12, p = .18) o women om
collec i is ic coun ies.
Table3 displays he co ela ions be ween a ge a i-
ables in masculine and in eminine coun ies. In gene al,
2 The low sco e in alpha alue in CI-Wi hd awal in Is ael (α = .45)
may be explained by he exis ence o i em #10 (‘ hink o lea ing he
ma iage’), which is awkwa d in ha cul u e. Al hough di o ce a es
a e inc easing, ma iage dissolu ion is no common ye (Kulik &
Heine-Cohen, 2011).
Cu en Psychology
1 3
he co ela ions be ween bo h own and pe cei ed p oblem-
sol ing s a egies and ela ionship sa is ac ion we e highe in
women om masculine coun ies han om eminine coun-
ies. Speci ically, he e a e di e ences in he magni ude o
he co ela ion be ween ela ionship sa is ac ion and own
posi i e (z = 2.68, p = .00), be ween ela ionship sa is ac ion
and own demand (z = −2.21, p = .02), be ween ela ion-
ship sa is ac ion and pa ne posi i e (z = 2.60, p = .00),
and be ween ela ionship sa is ac ion and pa ne demand
(z = 3.97, p = .00).
We had p oposed a con lic esolu ion model applicable
o women om di e en coun ies (see Fig.2). Wi h he
Table 1 Desc ip i e da a o s udy a iables b oken by o coun y alues
Indi idualism
(n = 200)
Collec i ism (n = 132) Masculini y (n = 135) Feminini y (n = 197)
M (SD)M (SD)M (SD)M (SD)
A oidan A achmen 2.13 (0.76) 3.17 (1.25) 2.66 (0.97) 2.47 (1.19)
Con lic Sol ing - Own
Posi i e 4.83 (0.91) 4.46 (1.11) 4.57 (1.02) 4.76 (0.99)
Demand 1.43 (0.54) 1.79 (1.01) 1.63 (0.64) 1.54 (0.86)
Wi hd awal 2.78 (0.90) 2.86 (1.05) 2.77 (0.81) 2.89 (1.05)
Con lic Sol ing - Pa ne
Posi i e 4.24 (1.20) 4.16 (1.34) 4.23 (1.22) 4.19 (1.29)
Demand 1.29 (0.53) 1.69 (1.15) 1.45 (0.67) 1.43 (0.96)
Wi hd awal 2.60 (0.91) 2.62 (1.13) 2.55 (0.97) 2.64 (1.03)
Rela ionship Sa is ac ion 6.15 (0.67) 6.04 (1.37) 6.00 (0.78) 6.18 (1.14)
Table 2 In e -co ela ions
be ween a ge a iables in
indi idualis ic s. collec i is ic
coun ies
The co ela ions o indi idualis ic coun ies a e p esen ed in he uppe po ion o he diagonal; he co ela-
ions o collec i is ic coun ies a e p esen ed in he lowe po ion o he diagonal
* p < .05; **p < .01
Va iables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. A oidance A achmen – −.20** .19** .24** −.24** .18** .29** −.56**
2. Own Posi i e −.30** – −.13 −.29** .63** −.20** −.12 .37**
3. Own Demand .21*.01 – .39** −.18** .53** .26** −.27**
4. Own Wi hd awal .38** .07 .62** – −.26** .17*.27** −.35**
5. Pa ne Posi i e −.20*.45** .09 .01 – −.35** −.43** .54**
6. Pa ne Demand .12 .06 .65** .52** .00 – .26** −.39**
7. Pa ne Wi hd awal .06 .09 .44** .44** .01 .59** – −.34**
8. Rela ionship Sa is ac ion −.12 .11 −.18*−.16 .20*−.30** −.13 –
Table 3 In e -Co ela ions
be ween a ge a iables
in masculine s. eminine
coun ies
The co ela ions o masculine coun ies a e p esen ed in he uppe po ion o he diagonal; he co ela ions
o eminine coun ies a e p esen ed in he lowe po ion o he diagonal
* p < .05; **p < .01
Va iables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. A oidance A achmen – −.31** .22*.23** .00 .13 .00 −.25**
2. Own Posi i e −.30** – −.30** −.21** .48** −.17*.01 .40**
3. Own Demand .30** .17*– .27** −.12 .57** .21** −.38**
4. Own Wi hd awal .33** −.09 .58** – −.17*.23** .33** −.34**
5. Pa ne Posi i e −.32** .59** .00 −.13 – −.32** −.32** .50**
6. Pa ne Demand .27** −.03 .66** .42** −.05 – .27** −.60**
7. Pa ne Wi hd awal .20** −.04 .43** .36** −.17 .53** – −.29**
8. Rela ionship Sa is ac ion −.25** .12 −.15*−.19** .25** −.24** −.17*–
Cu en Psychology
1 3
aim o examining cul u al di e ences in he model due o
IDV, we ca ied ou a mul i-g oup analysis. Coun ies we e
clus e ed acco ding o IDV le els: high (indi idualis ic)
s. low (collec i is ic). Table4 shows ha he model i
was good ac oss women om indi idualis ic and collec i -
is ic coun ies (χ2/d = 2.19, p = .11, AGFI = .92, TLI = .91,
CFI = .99, RMSEA = .06, LO90 = .00 y HI90 = .14). The
second mul i-g oup analysis was ca ied ou wi h mas-
culine (high MAS le els) and eminine (low MAS le -
els) coun ies. Table5 shows ha he model i was good
ac oss women om masculine and eminine coun ies
(χ2/d = 2.47, p = .08, AGFI = .91, TLI = .87, CFI = .99,
RMSEA = .06, LO90 = .00 y HI90 = .14). The uncon-
s ained model was he mos pa simonious in bo h cases;
i implies ha he da a o he wo g oups i he model
sepa a ely, and ha no u he equali y cons ain s we e
imposed, o he han he obse ed a iables in he model.
Hypo hesis 1
To de e mine whe he women wi h high sco es on he
a oidan a achmen dimension om indi idualis ic coun-
ies had lowe ela ionship sa is ac ion sco es compa ed
o hei coun e pa s om collec i is ic coun ies (Hypo h-
esis 1), we conduc ed χ2 es o di e ences analysis. As
shown in Fig.3, he (nega i e) alue o indi idualis ic
coun ies (β = −.43, p = .00) was la ge han he alue o
collec i is ic coun ies (β = −.05, p = .58). In he compa i-
son model, we ound ha wi h a 5% con idence le el, we
did no ejec he al e na i e hypo hesis. This sugges s ha
he e we e signi ican di e ences in he a iances be ween
he wo g oups ( he i o he uncons ained model was
χ2 = 2.95, d = 2, p = 0.05; while he χ2 di e ence es i
was χ2 = 4.70, d = 3, p = .00). The e o e, Hypo hesis 1 was
suppo ed.
Table 4 Fi Indexes o he
model o p edic couple
sa is ac ion h ough
indi idualism coun y
dimension
The mos es ic i e model ha demons a ed a good i is indica ed by i alic on . In i alics he mos pa si-
monious model
Model X2d X2/d p AGFI TLI CFI RMSEA LO90 HI90
1Uncons ained 4.37 2 2.19 .11 .92 .91 .99 .06 .00 .14
2 S uc u al weigh s 42.08 10 4.20 .00 .86 .75 .85 .10 .07 .13
3 S uc u al co a iances 68.02 11 6.18 .00 .78 .59 .71 .12 .10 .15
4 S uc u al esidual 312.07 16 19.50 .00 .52 −.4 .00 .24 .22 .26
Table 5 Fi indexes o he
model o p edic couple
sa is ac ion h ough masculini y
coun ies
The mos es ic i e model ha demons a ed a good i is indica ed by i alic on . In i alics he mos pa si-
monious model
Model X2d X2/d p AGFI TLI CFI RMSEA LO90 HI90
1Uncons ained 4.93 2 2.47 .08 .91 .87 .99 .06 .00 .15
2 S uc u al weigh s 33.57 10 3.36 .00 .88 .78 .89 .08 .05 .11
3 S uc u al co a iances 39.95 11 3.63 .00 .87 .76 .87 .09 .06 .12
4 S uc u al esidual 127.58 16 7.97 .00 .81 .38 .50 .14 .12 .17
Fig. 3 Pa h model o women’s
couple sa is ac ion h ough indi-
idualism/collec i ism. No e.
Values in i alics a e o women
om indi idualis ic cul u es and
alues in bold a e o women
om collec i is ic cul u es. The
be a coe icien s a e s and-
a dized. *p < .05; **p < .01;
***p < .001
.24***.38***
.17** .52***
-.15** -.23**
-.18***-.31**
-.43***-.05
.34***.19*
-.14** .03
-.22** .08
A oidance
A achmen
Own
Wi hd awal
Pe cei ed
Pa ne Demand
Rela ionship
Sa is ac ion
Pe cei ed
Pa ne Posi i e