cognitive-behavioral couple therapy

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Gottman couple therapy and cognitive-behavioral couple therapy in improving marital satisfaction among married students at Islamic Azad University, Hamedan Branch. Methods: The study utilized a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design with a control group. A total of 45 married students were selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned into three groups: Gottman couple therapy (n = 15), cognitive-behavioral couple therapy (n = 15), and a control group (n = 15). The intervention groups received 10 sessions of Gottman couple therapy or 8 sessions of cognitive-behavioral couple therapy, while the control group received no intervention. The ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Questionnaire (47-item short form) was used to assess marital satisfaction before and after the interventions. Data were analyzed using SPSS-24 software, employing multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the effects of the interventions. Findings: The results indicated that both Gottman couple therapy and cognitive-behavioral couple therapy significantly improved marital satisfaction compared to the control group (p < 0.05). The effect size analysis revealed that Gottman couple therapy had a greater impact (η² = 0.789) compared to cognitive-behavioral couple therapy (η² = 0.721), particularly in areas related to emotional communication, conflict management, and decision-making. However, the ANOVA results showed no statistically significant difference between the two intervention groups (p > 0.05), indicating that both approaches were similarly effective in enhancing marital satisfaction. Conclusion: Both Gottman couple therapy and cognitive-behavioral couple therapy were effective in increasing marital satisfaction among married students, with Gottman couple therapy demonstrating a slightly greater impact. Given the shared principles of these approaches, future research should explore the potential benefits of integrating them to create a more comprehensive intervention for couples.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Schema Therapy and Cognitive-Behavioral Couple Therapy (CBCT) in improving communication patterns among couples affected by domestic violence. Methods and Materials: The study employed a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design with a control group. The statistical population consisted of couples affected by domestic violence who referred to counseling centers in Tehran. A total of 45 participants were selected using simple random sampling and assigned to two experimental groups (Schema Therapy and CBCT) and one control group, each containing 15 participants. Data were collected using the Communication Patterns Questionnaire (Christensen & Salavy, 1984) and analyzed using multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) and Tukey’s post hoc test with SPSS version 26. Each intervention included 10 weekly sessions tailored to the specific therapeutic model. Findings: The MANCOVA results indicated statistically significant differences between groups in all three communication pattern dimensions: mutual constructive communication (F = 8.043, p < .01), mutual avoidant communication (F = 2.222, p < .05), and demand/withdraw communication (F = 1.068, p < .05). Tukey’s post hoc test revealed that Schema Therapy was significantly more effective than CBCT in improving mutual constructive communication (mean difference = 2.40, p = .006), reducing mutual avoidance (mean difference = 0.13, p = .000), and decreasing demand/withdraw patterns (mean difference = -1.00, p = .000). Conclusion: These findings suggest that Schema Therapy may offer deeper and more sustainable improvements in relational functioning by targeting underlying maladaptive schemas contributing to dysfunctional communication.