The Prevalence of Self-Destructive Behavior and its Relationship to Attachment Styles among Young Palestinian Adults in the Governorates of Bethlehem and Hebron
Date
2021-12-20
Authors
Amanda Mohammad Mousa Manasra
أماندا محمد موسى مناصرة
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Al-Quds University
Abstract
.
هدفت هذه الدراسة إلى التعرف إلى مدى انتشار السلوك المدمر للذات وعلاقته بأنماط التعلق (الآمن، الرافض، المتناقض، وغير المنظم) لدى الشباب الفلسطينيين في محافظتي بيت لحم والخليل، والتحقق من الإختلافات في مستوى السلوك المدمر للذات تبعاً لمتغيرات الدراسة )العمر، الجنس، مستوى التعليم، حالة العمل، الوضع الزواجي، منطقة السكن، مكان السكن، الوضع الزواجي للأهل، التعرض المؤخر للعنف أو حدث صادم، الدين، التدين. إستخدمت الدراسة مزيجا من طريقة العينة المتاحة وكرة الثلج لإختيار (412) مشارك ومشاركة عبر الإنترنت، وتم جمع البيانات من خلال تطبيق مقياس أنماط التعلق (ASQ) ومقياس على شكل لائحة معيارية تم تطويره من قبل الباحثة لقياس السلوك المدمر للذات بعد التأكد من صدقهما وثباتهما، وذلك ضمن المنهجية الوصفية الترابطية. أظهرت نتائج الدراسة أن مستوى السلوك المدمر للذات جاء بدرجة متوسطة (44.9%)، وأن أكثر محاور السلوك المدمر للذات إنتشارا كان "الفشل في الرعاية الذاتية الروتينية أو الأولية" (M=1.74)، ثم "إشكاليات التنظيم الذاتي" (M=1.53)، ثم "السلوكيات الجنسية والعاطفية الإجتماعية" (M=1.21)، ثم "السلوكيات الخطيرة، المثيرة، المتحدية، والجنائية" (M=1.09)، ثم "إستخدام المواد وسلوكيات ذات علاقة بالإدمان" (M=0.85)، ونهاية "إيذاء الذات المباشر والسلوك الإنتحاري" (M=0.77). وفيما يتعلق بمتغيرات الدراسة، وجدت النتائج أن هناك فروق ذات دلالة في مستوى السلوك المدمر للذات تبعا للجنس، ومستوى التعليم، والوضع الزواجي للأهل، والتعرض المؤخر للعنف أو حدث صادم، والدين، والتدين فقط. كما وأن النتائج أشارت إلى أن الفروق في متغير الجنس بين "أنثى" و"ذكر" كانت لصالح "ذكر"، وفي متغير مستوى التعليم بين "الدبلوم" و"البكالورويس" لصالح "الدبلوم"، وفي متغير الوضع الزواجي للأهل بين "أحد الوالدين متوفيين / كلا الوالدين متوفيين" و"متزوجين" لصالح "أحد الوالدين متوفيين / كلا الوالدين متوفيين"، وفي متغير "التعرض المؤخر للعنف أو حدث صادم" بين "نعم" و"لا" لصالح "نعم"، وفي متغير الدين بين "مسيحي" و"مسلم" لصالح "مسيحي" وبين "غير ذلك" و"مسلم" لصالح "غير ذلك"، ونهاية في متغير التدين بين "غير متدين" و"متدين جدا" لصالح "غير متدين". وأما حول أنماط التعلق، أشارت النتائج لكون أكثر الأنماط شيوعيا نمط التعلق الرافض ، ثم النمط غير المنظم، ثم النمط الآمن، ونهاية النمط المتناقض. ولم تجد النتائج علاقة ذات دلالة بين السلوك المدمر للذات ونمط التعلق الآمن، بينما وجدت علاقة طردية ذات دلالة بين السلوك المدمر للذات وكل من نمط التعلق الرافض، والنمط غير المنظم، والنمط المتناقض. وأشار التحليل الإضافي للنتائج أن هناك علاقة ذات دلالة بين نمط التعلق الآمن مع محاور السلوك المدمر للذات "الفشل في الرعاية الذاتية الروتينية أو الأولية" و"إشكاليات التنظيم الذاتي"، وبين نمط التعلق غير المنظم ومحاور السلوك المدمر للذات "الفشل في الرعاية الذاتية الروتينية أو الأولية" و"السلوكيات الجنسية والعاطفية الإجتماعية" و"السلوكيات الخطيرة، المثيرة، المتحدية، والجنائية"، وبين كلا النمطين الرافض والمتناقض وكافة محاور السلوك المدمر للذات.
This study aimed at identifying the prevalence of self-destructive behavior and its relationship to attachment styles (secure, dismissive, ambivalent, and disorganized) among young Palestinian adults in the governorates of Bethlehem and Hebron, in addition to identifying the differences in the prevalence of self-destructive behaviour, which are related to the study variables (age, sex, level of education, employment status, marital status, area of residence, location of residence, marital status of parents, recent exposure to violence or traumatic event, religion, and religiosity). A combination of convenient and snowball sampling recruited (412) male and female participants through an online survey. Data was collected with the Attachment Styles Questionnaire (ASQ) and a checklist-style questionnaire developed for purpose of study to assess self-destructive behaviour, after verifying questionnaires’ validity and reliability, and following a descriptive correlational methodology. Statistical analysis revealed that most sample members have a moderate level of self-destructive behaviour (44.9%). Additionally, they were most likely to engage in the self-destructive behaviour subtype “Failure in Routine or Primary Self-Care” (M=1.74), then “Issues of Self-Management” (M=1.53), “Socioemotional and Sexual Behaviors” (M=1.21), “Risky, Thrilling, Defiant, and Criminal Behaviors” (M=1.09), “Substance-Use and Addiction-Related Behaviors” (M=0.85), and finally “Direct Self-Harm and Suicidal Behavior” (M=0.77). As it relates to the study variables, results indicated that only the sex, level of education, marital status of parents, recent exposure to traumatic event or violence, religion, and religiosity variables were related to significant differences in self-destructive behaviour. The differences related to sex were between “Male” and “Female” and in favour of the “Male” category, in the level of education variable between “Diploma” and “Bachelor’s Degree” and in favour of the “Diploma” category, in the marital status of parents variable between “Widowed Parent / Deceased Parents” and “Married” and in favour of the “Widowed Parent / Deceased Parents” category, in the recent exposure to violence or traumatic event variable between “Yes” and “No” and in favor of confirmed having experienced violence or a traumatic, in the religion variable between “Christian” and “Muslim” in favour of “Christian” and between “Other Religious Status” and “Muslim” in favour of “Other Religious Status”, and finally in the religiosity variable, differences were between the “Not Religious” and “Very Religious” categories and in favour of the “Not Religious” category. In relation to attachment styles, results indicated that “Dismissive Attachment” was the most prevalent, followed by “Disorganized Attachment”, “Secure Attachment”, and finally “Ambivalent Attachment”. Moreover, results indicated that there was no significant relationship between secure attachment and self-destructive behaviour, but found a significant positive relationship between self-destructive behaviour and dismissive attachment, ambivalent attachment, and disorganized attachment respectively. Further analysis revealed that secure attachment showed a significant relationship with the self-destructive behaviour subtypes “Failure in Routine or Primary Self-Care” and “Issues of Self-Management”, and a significant relationship between fearful attachment and self-destructive behaviour subtypes “Risky, Thrilling, Defiant, and Criminal Behaviors”, “Failure in Routine or Primary Self-Care”, and “Socioemotional and Sexual Behaviors”. Finally, results indicated that both dismissive and ambivalent attachment styles were correlated to all self-destructive behaviour subtypes. Keywords: Self-Destructive Behavior, Attachment Styles, Young Adults, Hebron, Bethlehem
This study aimed at identifying the prevalence of self-destructive behavior and its relationship to attachment styles (secure, dismissive, ambivalent, and disorganized) among young Palestinian adults in the governorates of Bethlehem and Hebron, in addition to identifying the differences in the prevalence of self-destructive behaviour, which are related to the study variables (age, sex, level of education, employment status, marital status, area of residence, location of residence, marital status of parents, recent exposure to violence or traumatic event, religion, and religiosity). A combination of convenient and snowball sampling recruited (412) male and female participants through an online survey. Data was collected with the Attachment Styles Questionnaire (ASQ) and a checklist-style questionnaire developed for purpose of study to assess self-destructive behaviour, after verifying questionnaires’ validity and reliability, and following a descriptive correlational methodology. Statistical analysis revealed that most sample members have a moderate level of self-destructive behaviour (44.9%). Additionally, they were most likely to engage in the self-destructive behaviour subtype “Failure in Routine or Primary Self-Care” (M=1.74), then “Issues of Self-Management” (M=1.53), “Socioemotional and Sexual Behaviors” (M=1.21), “Risky, Thrilling, Defiant, and Criminal Behaviors” (M=1.09), “Substance-Use and Addiction-Related Behaviors” (M=0.85), and finally “Direct Self-Harm and Suicidal Behavior” (M=0.77). As it relates to the study variables, results indicated that only the sex, level of education, marital status of parents, recent exposure to traumatic event or violence, religion, and religiosity variables were related to significant differences in self-destructive behaviour. The differences related to sex were between “Male” and “Female” and in favour of the “Male” category, in the level of education variable between “Diploma” and “Bachelor’s Degree” and in favour of the “Diploma” category, in the marital status of parents variable between “Widowed Parent / Deceased Parents” and “Married” and in favour of the “Widowed Parent / Deceased Parents” category, in the recent exposure to violence or traumatic event variable between “Yes” and “No” and in favor of confirmed having experienced violence or a traumatic, in the religion variable between “Christian” and “Muslim” in favour of “Christian” and between “Other Religious Status” and “Muslim” in favour of “Other Religious Status”, and finally in the religiosity variable, differences were between the “Not Religious” and “Very Religious” categories and in favour of the “Not Religious” category. In relation to attachment styles, results indicated that “Dismissive Attachment” was the most prevalent, followed by “Disorganized Attachment”, “Secure Attachment”, and finally “Ambivalent Attachment”. Moreover, results indicated that there was no significant relationship between secure attachment and self-destructive behaviour, but found a significant positive relationship between self-destructive behaviour and dismissive attachment, ambivalent attachment, and disorganized attachment respectively. Further analysis revealed that secure attachment showed a significant relationship with the self-destructive behaviour subtypes “Failure in Routine or Primary Self-Care” and “Issues of Self-Management”, and a significant relationship between fearful attachment and self-destructive behaviour subtypes “Risky, Thrilling, Defiant, and Criminal Behaviors”, “Failure in Routine or Primary Self-Care”, and “Socioemotional and Sexual Behaviors”. Finally, results indicated that both dismissive and ambivalent attachment styles were correlated to all self-destructive behaviour subtypes. Keywords: Self-Destructive Behavior, Attachment Styles, Young Adults, Hebron, Bethlehem