Volume 12 - Articles-1401                   MEJDS (2022) 12: 123 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mehdipour F, Tajeri B. The Relationship Between Thinking Styles and Problem Solving Styles With Codependency in Spouses of Patients With Drug Abuse. MEJDS 2022; 12 :123-123
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1832-en.html
The Relationship Between Thinking Styles and Problem Solving Styles With Codependency in Spouses of Patients With Drug Abuse
Fatemeh Mehdipour1 , Boyouk Tajeri *2
1- Islamic Azad University Bouin Zahra
2- Department of Psychology, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University
Abstract:   (1469 Views)

Background & Objectives: Addiction is the most widespread and recognized health concern and risk in Iran. As a chronic and recurrent disorder, in addition to profound social, psychological, physical, and economic impacts on the consumer, addiction imposes significant psychological pressure on family members and society. The drug dependency of the family head is very harmful and destructive and has many adverse effects on all the family members and, most notably, the addicted wife. In such cases, some codependency in the woman causes them to exhibit a pattern of exaggerated and excessive behavior strongly influenced by the addicted spouse. This dependence continues until the individual loses his or her identity. Problem–solving styles and thinking styles can be effective in measuring facts and benefiting from capabilities, and dealing with negative emotions. So, this research aimed to investigate the relationship between thinking styles and problem–solving styles with the codependency of spouses of patients with addiction.
Methods: The method of this study was descriptive correlational. The statistical population was all spouses of substance abusers referred to addiction treatment centers in Tehran City, Iran, in 2018. Of them, 42 people were selected by convenience sampling. The inclusion criteria were as follows: living in Tehran, aged 18 to 35 years, and consent to participate in research. The exclusion criterion was the incomplete filling of the questionnaires. The study data were gathered via the Thinking Styles Scale (Sternberg & Wagner, 1992), Problem–Solving Styles Scale (Heppner & Petersen, 1982), and Codependency Scale (Spann & Fischer, 1990). After collecting the data, SPSS version 21 software was used to analyze them. At the level of descriptive statistics, mean and standard deviation, and at the level of inferential statistics, stepwise regression analysis was used. The significance level of the tests was considered 0.05.
Results: The results showed that the components of thinking styles, including libertarianism, conservatism, anarchism, collectivism, holistic, executive, judicial, detail–oriented, internal, legislation, monocracy, and hierarchy, had multiple correlations with codependency (p<0.001) and these 12 components together explained 49.6% of the codependency variance. Also, the components of problem–solving styles, including confidence in solving problems, tendency–avoidance style, and personal control, had multiple correlations with codependency (p<0.001), and these 3 components together explained 63% of the variance of codependency.
Conclusion: Based on the research findings, thinking and problem–solving styles can significantly reduce the attitude of codependent people about drugs and act as a shield and provide the right solution by thinking and making the right decision when faced with stressful factors and irrational requests of others.

 
Keywords: Thinking styles, Problem–solving styles, Codependency
Full-Text [PDF 548 kb]   (352 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Psychology
References
1. Degenhardt L, Hall W. Extent of illicit drug use and dependence, and their contribution to the global burden of disease. Lancet. 2012;379(9810):55–70. [DOI]
2. Muyanja Ssenyonga S. Domestic violence, codependency and drug abuse among adolescents [Ph.D Thesis]. [Kampala, Uganda]: Makerere University; 2020.
3. Sarkar S, Mattoo SK, Basu D, Gupta J. Codependence in spouses of alcohol and opioid dependent men. International Journal of Culture and Mental Health. 2015;8(1):13–21. [DOI]
4. Nordgren J, Richert T, Svensson B, Johnson B. Say no and close the door? codependency troubles among parents of adult children with drug problems in Sweden. Journal of Family Issues. 2020;41(5):567–88. [DOI]
5. Rahgozar F, Akrami N, Mehrabi H. Comparison of expressed emotion and coping styles with stress in 3 groups of patient with obsessive compulsive disorder and drug abuse disorder and relative and control group. Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences. 2016;5(2):87–100. [Persian] [Article]
6. Atintaş MC, Tutarel–Kışlak S. Comparison of the psychological symptoms and variables related to marriage in the wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics and factors predicting marital adjustment. Turkish Journal on Addictions. 2019;6(3):745–75.
7. Alipour Z, Ahadi H, Hatami HR, Malihi-Alzakerini S. Structural equations of emotional self-regulation, behavioral activation/inhibition systems by mediating thinking styles in addicted patients’ psychological well-being. Scientific Quarterly Research on Addiction. 2018;12(47):245–68. [Persian] [Article]
8. Pradika ID, Amin SM, Khabibah S. Relational thinking in problem solving mathematics based on adversity quotient and visual learning style. International Journal of Trends in Mathematics Education Research. 2019;2(4):161–4.
9. Zinali S, Khosrojavid M. Emotional intelligence and problem solving styles in drug addicts. Developmental Psychology. 2010;6(24):361–9. [Persian] [Article]
10. Sharifi M, Javanmard GH. A comparative study of problem solving styles and mental health in male substance abusers and normal men. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences. 2017;6(3):36. [DOI]
11. da Silva MP, Netto de Oliveira AM, da Silva PA, Algeri S, Flores Soares MC. Family orientation group as a strategy for care in chemical codependency. Invest Educ Enferm. 2019;37(3):e08. [DOI]
12. Matinnejad SA, Mosavi SAM, Shams Esfandabad H. A Comparative study of problem solving styles and thinking styles among substance and non- substance abusers. Scientific Quarterly Research on Addiction. 2009;3(11):11–24. [Persian] [Article]
13. Best D, Day E, Campbell A, Flynn PM, Simpson DD. Relationship between drug treatment engagement and criminal thinking style among drug-using offenders. Eur Addict Res. 2009;15(2):71–7. [DOI]
14. Wahl K, Ertle A, Bohne A, Zurowski B, Kordon A. Relations between a ruminative thinking style and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in non-clinical samples. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2011;24(2):217–25. [DOI]
15. Mehran Q, Kalantar Hormozi A, Farahbakhsh K. Comparing cognitive theory-based and solution-focused training methods on reducing the codependency of addicts’ wives. Journal of Applied Psychological Research. 2016;6(4):241–213. [Article]
16. Walker KL, Kaniuka A, Sirois FM, Chang EC, Hirsch JK. Improving health-related quality of life and reducing suicide in primary care: can social problem–solving abilities help? Int J Ment Health Addiction. 2019;17(2):295–309. [DOI]
17. Achtert E, Bohm C, Kriegel H-P, Kroger P, Zimek A. On exploring complex relationships of correlation clusters. In: 19th International Conference on Scientific and Statistical Database Management. Bamff, AB, Canada: IEEE; 2007. [DOI]
18. Sternberg RJ, Wagner RK. Thinking Styles Inventory. Unpublished manual, Yale University; 1992.
19. Heppner PP, Petersen CH. The development and implications of a Personal Problem-Solving Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1982;29(1):66–75. [DOI]
20. Ghaltash A, Salehi M, Khodadadi M. Barrasi rabete maharat hal masala ba mizan sazegari danesh amoozan paye aval omoumi motevasete mantaghe be shagerd dar sal tahsili 1386–87 [The relationship between problem solving skills and the level of adaptation of first grade high school students in bashashard area in the school in year 2008–2009]. In: National Conference on Psychology and its Application in Society. Marvdasht, Iran: Islamic Azad University; 2008. [Persian]
21. Spann L, Fischer JL. Identifying codependency. The Counselor. 1990;8(27):27-31.
22. Fischer JL, Spann L. Measuring codependency. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly. 1991;8(1):87–100. [DOI]
23. Khosravi N, Panaghi L, Ahmad Abadi Z, Sadeghi M. Relationship between inefficiency of origin family and the interdependence of women: interfering role of university education. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2013;7(1):85–100. [Persian] [Article]
24. Pazani F, Borjali PD, Ahadi PD, Kraskian Mujembari PD. A structural modeling analysis of the relationships among psychological factors influencing adolescents’ vulnerability to substance use with mediating role of codependency. Quarterly Journal of Family and Research. 2018;14(4):69–90. [Persian] [Article]
25. Jessup CM. Applying psychological type and “gifts differing” to organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 2002;15(5):502–11. [DOI]
26. Moriarty H, Stubbe M, Bradford S, Tapper S, Lim BT. Exploring resilience in families living with addiction. J Prim Health Care. 2011;3(3):210–7.
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2025 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb