PERSONALITY TYPE AND EMOTIONAL WELL BEING AS FACTORS INFLUENCING RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION AMONG HEALTH WORKERS

Abstract

This study was a survey that utilized a 2×2 factorial design to investigate personality type and emotional wellbeing as factors influencing relationship satisfaction among health workers in Akwa Ibom State. A total of two hundred and seventy eight (278) married health workers – 122 males (43.9%) and 156 females (56.1%) participated in the study comprising 107 B.Sc holders (38.5%), 85 M.Sc holders (30.6%), 39 Ph.D holders (14.0%) and 47 participants held other qualifications (B.NSc, HND and OND) (16.9%). The participants were randomly selected from five hospitals in Akwa Ibom State which includes University of Uyo Teaching Hospital, Uyo; General Hospital, Ukpom, Abak; General Hospital, Ikot Ekpene; Methodist General Hospital, Ituk Mbang, Uruan and General hospital, Akpenebom-Nsit, Nsit Ibom. The participants were aged between 24 years and 58 years with a mean age of 37.89. In this study, personality type was operationalized as entrepreneurial personality and skeptical personality measured using NEO Five Factor Inventory 3 developed by McCrae and Costa (2007). Emotional wellbeing was operationalized as enhanced emotional wellbeing and decreased emotional wellbeing measured using Emotional Wellbeing Scale developed by Portia and Shemila (2015). Relationship satisfaction was operationalized as high marital satisfaction and low marital satisfaction measured using Couples Satisfaction Index developed by Funk and Rogge (2007). Two hypotheses were generated and tested using 2 – way ANOVA. The result of the study revealed that personality type had influence on relationship satisfaction [F (1,277) = 3.80; P < .05]. Results also revealed that emotional wellbeing had a influence on relationship satisfaction [F (1,277) = 40.20; P < .05)]. Furthermore, the study revealed that personality type and emotional wellbeing did not jointly influence relationship satisfaction among health workers [F (1, 277) = 1.38; P > .05]. The findings were discussed in relation to the reviewed literature. It was recommended that health workers should be examined and evaluated in terms of their personality type and their emotional wellbeing in order to provide them with coping techniques that would foster satisfaction in their marital relationship.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1   BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

            People tend to have an ‘inherent’ desire to belong and be an important part of something greater than themselves signifying a relationship that is greater than simple acquaintance or familiarity (Pavlov & Diener, 2010). All humans need a minimum quality of regular, satisfying social interaction with family, friends, co-workers or anyone else. Dissatisfaction in these relationships may result in loneliness, mental distress, emotional distress, psychological distress, and a strong desire to form a new relationship. The issue of forming new relationships may then be challenging especially in varying relationship patterns; an example is marital relationship which cannot easily be dissolved (Myers, 2000).

Marital relationship is viewed as a multi-dimensional construct that measures objective characteristics of marriage such as levels of companionship, communication, affection, trust and conflict, along with the subjective aspects like marital satisfaction or happiness (Glenn, 1990).  Population studies have found that married people tend to live longer and suffer fewer long term illnesses than single people (Taylor, 2010); however it is the quality of a relationship that determines satisfaction (Argyle, 2001). While decreased number of married people often engage in less risky behaviour (such as smoking and drinking) and tend to have the benefit of a spouse who encourages them to look after their health, just being married doesn’t automatically increase the chance of a long and healthy life (Argyle, 2001). A poor relationship can actually be affected by decreased physical and emotional wellbeing as recent researches suggest that even when allowing for social and biological factors, people who have experienced negative aspects of a close relationship are at greater risk of psychological problems than those who haven’t (Tay, Tan, Diener, & Gonzalez, 2013; Taylor, 2010).

A relationship or tie is a flow of resources that can be material or non-material (Wasserman & Faust, 1999). These resources include social support, emotional support, companionship, time, information, expertise, money and shared activity. According to Baumeister and Leary (1995), humans have a fundamental need to feel that they belong to a group, thus, fulfilling these needs would be attained when satisfaction in inter-personal relationship, especially in marital relationships, is greatest. An interpersonal relationship is a strong, deep, or close association or acquaintance between two or more people that may range in duration from brief to enduring (Cherlin 2014). This association may be based on inference, love, solidarity, regular business interactions, or some other type of social commitment.

Relationship satisfaction refers to a subjective evaluation of the relationship, involving feelings towards a partner and overall attraction to the relationship (Rusbult & Buunk, 1993). Rusbult and Buunk viewed relationship satisfaction as an inter-personal interaction of the positivity of feelings for one’s partner and attraction to the relationship. Satisfaction in relationship is described as a “subjective attitude (satisfaction) and affective experience (happiness) in the valuation of one’s relationship” (Braithwaite, Selby & Fincham, 2011). The subjective perception of satisfaction is an important indicator of relationship quality and has consequences for the longevity of the relationship as less satisfied relationships are more likely to end (Argyle, 2001).

Partners who feel secured in a relationship are more likely to experience lower levels of relationship-related anxiety and avoidance, something that would enhance relationship satisfaction. Those who experience more relationship-related anxiety avoidance are more likely to pay less attention to emotional cues provided by the partner, thereby missing opportunities to connect and respond to emotional needs within the relationship (Braithwaite, Selby & Fincham, 2011). Partners who experience more relationship-related anxiety are also more likely to seek excessive reassurance. This may be experienced as neediness from the sought after partner, which can be a killer for desire and intimacy. According to Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Schutte, Bhullar & Rooke (2010), relationship satisfaction thus corresponds to an individual’s judgement about the positivity of his/her relationship.

Satisfaction in marital relationship is then associated with a range of important relationship outcomes including dissolution (Gottman & Levenson, 1992) and displays considerable individual variation. For example low neuroticism, high agreeableness, high conscientiousness, and high extraversion; each predict greater relationship satisfaction (Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Schutte, Bhullar, & Rooke, 2010).

Another variable of interest in this study is personality type. Personality is a concept that encompasses all the traits, characteristics, and quirks that sets a person apart from everyone else (Boyce, Wood & Powdthavee, 2013). In the world of psychology, the definition of personality can be complex, and the way it is defined can influence how it is understood and measured (John & Srivastava, 1999). According to Revelle (2013), personality is “the coherent pattern of affect, cognition, and desires (goals) that lead to behavior”. In the words of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2017), personality refers to “individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving”. However, it is clear that personality has a big impact on life. In fact, personality has been found to correlate strongly with life satisfaction (Boyce, Wood, & Powdthavee, 2013).

Several researchers explored the concept which resulted in personality dimensions most of which include hierarchy of traits by Gordon Allport, Sixteen (16) “fundamental factors” of personality by Raymond Cattell, PEN model by Hans Eysenck, the Big Five or the five factor model of Personality by McCrae & Costa, the Type A and Type B model of Personality, among others (Nevid, 2003).  Most important in this study is the five factor model of personality. A popular acronym for the Big Five is “OCEAN” representing Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism respectively (McCrae & Costa, 1997). 

Openness to experience has been described as the depth and complexity of an individual’s mental life and experiences (John & Srivastava, 1999). It is also sometimes called intellect or imagination. Openness to experience is concerned with an individual’s willingness to try new things, to be vulnerable, and the ability to think outside the box. Conscientiousness is a trait that can be described as the tendency to control impulses and act in socially acceptable ways, thus, facilitating goal-directed behaviour (John & Srivastava, 1999). Conscientious people excel in their ability to delay gratification, work within the rules, plan and organize effectively.

Extraversion is another factor encompassing two familiar ends of the spectrum: extraversion and introversion. It concerns where an individual draws their energy and how they interact with others. In general, extroverts draw energy or “recharge” from interacting with others, while introverts get tired from interacting with others and replenish their energy from solitude.

Agreeableness is another factor concerned with how well people get along with others. While extraversion concerns sources of energy and the pursuit of interactions with others, agreeableness concerns ones orientation to others. It is a construct that rests on how people generally interact with others.

Neuroticism is one of the Big Five factor in which a high score indicates more negative traits. Neuroticism is not a factor of meanness or incompetence, but one of confidence and being comfortable in one’s own skin (Caspi, Roberts & Shiner, 2005). It encompasses one’s emotional stability and general temper.

The research results on personality and marital relationship suggests that two of the five factors in the Five Factor Model (FFM), openness to experience and agreeableness, are less strong whilst the three remaining personality factors, neuroticism, extroversion, and conscientiousness, appear to be the most important in determining how couples experience and adjust to situations and conditions in marital relationships.

Combining these three personality factors, Torgersen (1995, in Vollrath & Torgersen, 2000) developed a unique personality typology. In constructing the typology, Torgersen (1995, in Vollrath & Torgersen, 2002) aimed at representing every possible combination of these three basic personality factors. To this end, he combined high and low scores of each of these factors, which resulted in the eight unique types. They include:

The spectating type (low E, low N, low C) with characteristics like being  slightly responsive to other people or to social cues, has low vulnerability to stress, is emotionally flat, is not very interested in social norms, has low ambition in his or her work, and is passive in coping.

 The insecure type ( low E, high N, low C) with characteristics like being shy and self-conscious, is highly vulnerable to stress, depends on other people’s opinions, is overly sensitive to his or her own mental and physical experience, resorts to avoidance, is poorly organized, and is ineffective in coping.

The skeptical type (low E, low N, high C) with characteristics like being relatively closed in their relations to others, self-secure, emotionally stable, and effective in managing their lives, but are sometimes somewhat rigid.

The brooding type (low E, high N, high C) with characteristics like being shy and withdrawn, ambivalent, vulnerable to stress, prone to negative emotions, insecure, and scrupulous, brooding over every decision and tending to give up easily when meeting difficulty.

The hedonistic type (high E, low N, low C) with characteristics like being socially skilled, pleasure-oriented, emotionally and physically robust, and stress resistant.

The impulsive type (high E, high N, low C) with characteristics like being attention-seeking and pleasure-oriented, is very vulnerable to stress, is emotionally unstable, being in need of social confirmation, is passive in coping, and appears to be chaotic and changing.

The entrepreneurial type (high E, low N, high C) with characteristics like being socially secure, thinks independently, is cool-headed, is domineering, shows talent for leadership, is goal-oriented, is stress resistant, and is effective in coping.

The complicated type (high E, high N, high C) with characteristics like being outgoing and socially dependent, emotionally intense with occasional emotional outbursts and subsequent guilt-feelings, sensitive, dependent on others, conscientious and orderly, and somewhat vulnerable to stress, but also flexible and effective in coping (Lau, Hem, Berg, Ekeberg, & Torgersen, 2006; Vollrath & Torgersen, 2000; Vollrath & Torgersen, 2002).

Emotional wellbeing is another identified variable in this study. Wellbeing is a positive outcome that is meaningful for people and for many sectors of society, because it tells that people perceive that their lives are going well. Good living conditions (e.g., housing, employment) are fundamental to wellbeing. However, many indicators that measure living conditions strive to measure what people think and feel about their lives, such as the quality of their relationships, their positive emotions and resilience, the realization of their potential, or their overall satisfaction with life, that is,  their “wellbeing” (Portia & Shemila, 2015). Wellbeing generally includes global judgments of life satisfaction and feelings ranging from depression to joy (Layard, 2005; Vernon, 2008).

Emotional wellbeing is a term that has been used increasingly in recent decades. The implications of decreased emotional wellbeing are related to mental health concerns such as stress, depression, and anxiety. These in turn can contribute to physical ill-health such as digestive disorders, sleep disturbances, and general lack of energy. On the positive side, enhanced emotional wellbeing is seen to contribute to upward spirals in increasing coping ability, self-esteem, performance and productivity at work, and even longevity. The connection between the mind and the body is so strong that mental and physical states impact on each other in either a positive or a negative way (Vernon, 2008).

Emotional wellbeing is a term that has been used to refer to a positive sense of wellbeing which enables an individual to function effectively in the society and meet the demands of everyday life (Vernon, 2008). According to Portia and Shermila (2015), emotional wellbeing has four dimensions which include mental health, emotional resilience, emotional health and emotional happiness.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) (2004), mental health is defined as a state of wellbeing in which an individual realizes his/her own potential, can cope with his/her normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to his/her community”. Mental health affects how a person thinks, feels, and acts. It also helps determine how people handle stress, relate to others, and make choices. Mental health includes “subjective wellbeing, perceived self-efficacy, autonomy, competence, inter-generational dependence, and self-actualization of one’s intellectual and emotional potential, among others.

There is no escaping stress, but there are ways one can learn to handle stress better when it is present, and to ‘bounce back’ faster from its impact. The collection of skills, characteristics, habits and outlooks that make it possible to remain maximally flexible and fresh in the face of stress is often referred to as “emotional resilience”. Learning to become more emotionally resilient can dramatically improve one’s attitude and health in the face of inevitable stress.

Emotional health is a state of positive psychological functioning. It can be thought of as an extension of mental health; it is the “optimal functioning” end of the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that make up both the inner and outer worlds (Nevid 2003). It includes an overall experience of wellness in what we think, feel, and do through both the highs and lows of life.

Emotional happiness is a mental or emotional state of wellbeing which can be defined by, among others, positive or pleasant emotions ranging from contentment to intense joy. Happy mental states may reflect judgments by a person about their overall wellbeing.

Emotional wellbeing is also one of two aspects of personal wellbeing; the other being life evaluation – the evaluation of one’s life in general against a scale. Emotions and feelings are part of every step a person takes in life. One must learn how to manage them in order to reach his/her maximum potential in all aspects of life.

1.2   Statement of the Problem

It is a well-established fact that close interpersonal relationships are crucial to wellbeing which in turn influences satisfaction and have effect in terms of emotional happiness, mental health, physical health and longevity (Gottman & Levenson, 1992), which implies that difficulties and dissatisfaction in relationships can contribute to increased stress. In line with this, Berscheid and Reis (1998) stated that relationship difficulty is one of the most common present problems of individuals seeking psychotherapy. The link that exists between people have been described as “the very essence of human existence” and “nearly as fundamental to survival as air and water” (Berscheid & Reis, 1998). Sustaining this link in most marital relationships require attention, of which most researchers have tried to develop possible reasons that could offer possible explanations and also making recommendations from their results.

Moreso, difficulties and dissatisfaction in relationships can contribute to increase distress which could be physical, psychological, emotional or otherwise. In line with this, Bersheid and Reis (1998) stated that relationship difficulty is one of the most common present problems of individuals seeking psychotherapy. Sustaining marital relationships are most times determined by the level of satisfaction experienced by members within the sphere.

Most married health workers tend to be vulnerable to the decline in their marital satisfaction with regards to the correlation between their profession and their relationship. Studies have shown that despite gender differences, the traits associated with a personality type often predispose satisfaction but the problem lies on the role played by the health worker to enhance satisfaction. Based on these, this study will investigate the following specific research questions:

1.         Will personality type influence relationship satisfaction?

2.         Will health workers with entrepreneurial personality be more satisfied in relationship than health workers with skeptical personality?

3.         Is relationship satisfaction influenced by emotional wellbeing?

4.         Will the result of this study correlate with the findings of other researches?

1.3   Purpose of the Study

Studies have explored on personality type, emotional wellbeing, marital relationship satisfaction of health workers. In many related personality studies, the five factor model is used while little is known about the combined effects of the five factors. In this study, a typology based approach developed by Togersen (1995) is adopted in this study to explore relevant facts in relation to the health sector. Moreso, health workers seek to ensure positive health outcome (wellbeing) of the public in their respective field of study but about their personal wellbeing researches show the presence of some defects. Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate on the personality type of married health workers and their emotional wellbeing as factors influencing marital relationship satisfaction. The personality types that would be employed in this study include entrepreneurial personality type and skeptical personality type. According to the developer (Togersen, 1995), Entrepreneurial personality type is a combination of low Neuroticism, high Extraversion and high Conscientiousness while Skeptical personality type is a combination of low Neuroticism, low Extraversion and high Conscientiousness.

1.4   Significance of the Study

1.     This study will add to existing literature on variables that affect relationship satisfaction.

2.     It will serve as a reference material for practitioners in the field of relationships especially marital relationship.

3.     This study will also reveal how personality and emotional wellbeing affects marital relationship satisfaction which will provide suggestions on strategic plans.

4.         Furthermore, this study will be of valuable importance to singles, married and organizations especially the health sector due to its exploration on peoples emotional well being.