TPC-Journal-V5-Issue3

The Professional Counselor /Volume 5, Issue 3 373 Next, we examined differences between individuals’ responses (i.e., yes/no) regarding perceptions of their partners’ use of technology in the relationships (UTR) and outcome variables (i.e., IJS, ACV and PSS scores). Table 4 presents the frequency of responses for each of the five items on the UTR. A MANOVA indicated that the only significant differences between responses on all five UTR questions and outcomes existed for question four (“Has your partner ever used technology to monitor you?”), F (1, 112) = 4.08, p = .04, = .04, and question five (“Has your partner ever used technology to argue with you?”), F (1, 112) = 5.12, p = .03, = .04. Simple effects revealed that respondents who indicated “yes” to UTR question four had significantly higher IJS scores ( M = 33.38, SD = 11.09) than those who indicated “no” ( M = 24.71, SD = 9.81); F (1, 129) = 19.81, p < .001, = .13. Participants who indicated “yes” to UTR question five had significantly higher IJS scores ( M = 30.79, SD = 11.13) than those who indicated “no” ( M = 24.14, SD = 9.78); F (1, 129) = 13.24, p < .001, = .09. Therefore, use of technology to argue with a partner and monitor a partner’s location appear associated with increases in relationship inequality, and place the young couples in our sample at a higher risk of experiencing partner violence. Table 4 Frequency of Responses to Questions Regarding Use of Technology Question (Has partner used technology to . . .) % “Yes” % “No” 1. Embarrass you? 6.5 89.1 2. Make you feel bad? 15.2 15.9 3. Control you? 5.1 94.7 4. Monitor you? 28.3 67.4 5. Argue with you? 44.9 50.7 Discussion The purpose of this study was to understand the influence of young adults’ use of technology in intimate relationships and examine relationships among stress, attitudes toward violence and overall risk for IPV. First, we examined the relationships among the variables, then we used a regression analysis to understand the contribution of each variable to risk for partner violence. Finally, we explored differences between responses regarding partners’ perceptions of technology use and other outcomes. Results indicate positive correlations between participants’ stress scores and intimate justice scores, suggesting that as stress increases, so too does risk for partner violence. This finding is similar to the conclusions of Mason and Smithey (2012), who utilized Merton’s Classical Strain Theory as the foundation for testing the influence of life strain on IPV among college students. Their results indicated that some forms of strain increased dating violence among college students. However, the results of our study do not suggest the existence of any relationship between technology use and stress. A potential explanation is that increases in IPV-related behaviors associated with increases in stress may present during face-to-face interactions.