Ethnicity-Related Partner Selection Experiences Among Young Adults from Christian Armenian Families: A Qualitative Study in Turkey

References

• Alhazmi, A. A., & Kaufmann, A. (2022). Phenomenological qualitative methods applied to the analysis of cross-cultural experience in novel educational social contexts. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balkanlioğlu, M. A. (2013). Alevi-Sünni evliliklerinin aile ilişkileri ile çocuk yetiştirme üzerine etkileri ve sosyal damgalama. Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Velî Araştırma Dergisi, 62, 163–182.
   Google Scholar
• Bisin, A., & Verdier, T. (2000). “Beyond the melting pot”: Cultural transmission, marriage, and the evolution of ethnic and religious traits. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3), 955–988.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boratav, H. B., Doğan, T. N., Söylemez, Y., & Saydam, S. Z. (2021). “More alike than different”: A qualitative exploration of the relational experiences of multicultural couples in Turkey. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornstein, M., & Güngör, D. (2009). Organizing principles and processes from developmental science for culture and caregiving. In S. Bekman & A. Aksu-Koç (Eds.), Perspectives on human development, family, and culture (1st ed., pp. 69–85). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brackett, K. P. (2016). Mate selection. Encyclopedia of Family Studies, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119085621.wbefs314
   Google Scholar
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çatak, B. D. (2015). Mezhep farklılıklarının evli çiftlerin ilişkileri üzerindeki etkileri: Berlin-İstanbul örneği. Mediterranean Journal of Humanities, 5(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.13114/MJH.2015214566
   Google Scholar
• Choi, K. H., & Tienda, M. (2017). Marriage‐market constraints and mate‐selection behavior: Racial, ethnic, and gender differences in intermarriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79(2), 301–317.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, V., Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeGenova, M. K., Stinnett, N., & Stinnet, N. (2011). Intimate relationships, marriages, and families (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Derderian, K. (2005). Common fate, different experience: Gender-specific aspects of the Armenian genocide, 1915-1917. Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 19(1), 1–25.cı. https://doi.org/10.1093/hgs/dci001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92.
   Google Scholar
• Fişek, G. O. (2010). Relationality, intersubjectivity, and culture: Experiences in a therapeutic discourse of virtual kinship. Studies in Gender and Sexuality, 11(2), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/15240651003666292
   Google Scholar
• Fishbein, H. D. (2014). Peer prejudice and discrimination: The origins of prejudice. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fışıloglu, H. (2001). Consanguineous marriage and marital adjustment in Turkey. The Family Journal, 9(2), 215–222.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick, J. (2016). Filter theory. Encyclopedia of Family Studies, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119085621.wbefs068
   Google Scholar
• Gibbon, E. (1994). The history of the decline and fall of the Roman empire (David Womersley, Ed., Penguin edn ed.).
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life: The role of race, religion, and national origins. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Göregenli, M. (1997). Individualist-collectivist tendencies in a Turkish sample. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(6), 787–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022197286009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Göz, İ., Bahçekapili, H. G., & Yilmaz, O. (2018). Testing evolutionary and cultural theories regarding mate selection in Turkey. Personality and Individual Differences, 135, 307–311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grousset, R. (2006). Başlangıçtan 1071’e Ermenilerin Tarihi. Aras Yayınları.
   Google Scholar
• Gündüz-Hoşgör, A. (2002). Intermarriage between Turks and Kurds in contemporary turkey-inter-ethnic relations in an urbanizing environment. European Sociological Review, 18(4), 417–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heino, R. D., Ellison, N. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2010). Relationshopping: Investigating the market metaphor in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 427–447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510361614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Beyond WEIRD: Towards a broad-based behavioural science. The Behavioural & Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hjelmeland, H., & Knizek, B. L. (2010). Why we need qualitative research in suicidology. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 40(1), 74–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hortaçsu, N., & Oral, A. (1994). Comparison of couple- and family-initiated marriages in Turkey. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134(2), 229–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard, J. A., Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1987). Social or evolutionary theories? Some observations on preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 194–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huijnk, W., Verkuyten, M., & Coenders, M. (2013). Family relations and the attitude towards ethnic minorities as close kin by marriage. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(11), 1890–1909.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, S. S., Saenz, R., & Aguirre, B. E. (1995). The SES selectivity of interracially married Asians. International Migration Review, 29(2), 469–491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Javadi, M., & Zarea, K. (2016). Understanding thematic analysis and its pitfall. Demo, 1(1), 33–39.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, B. R., & Jacobson, C. K. (2005). Contact in context: An examination of social settings on whites’ attitudes toward interracial marriage. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(4), 387–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kagitcibasi, C., & Ataca, B. (2005). Value of children and family change: A three‐decade portrait from Turkey. Applied Psychology, 54(3), 317–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalmijn, M. (1998). Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 395–421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keklik, I. (2011). Mate selection preferences of Turkish university students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, Summer 2011(44), 129–148.
   Google Scholar
• Kulu, H., & González-Ferrer, A. (2014). Family dynamics among immigrants and their descendants in Europe: Current research and opportunities. Eurasian Journal of Population, 30, 411–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-014-9322-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marazyan, J. (2016). “Like I always knew it”: The phenomenology of intergenerational transmission of trauma in three generations of Armenian women in Turkey [ Doctoral dissertation]. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.
   Google Scholar
• Muratyan, N. (2011). Türkiyeli Ermenilerde kolektif korku gündelik hayatta korku altında varolma pratikleri (Doctoral dissertation, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi).
   Google Scholar
• Oran, B. (2011). Türkiye’de Ermeni Kimliğinin Yeniden Yapilanmasi ve Agos Gazetesi. Eğitim Bilim Toplum, 4(16), 146–157.
   Google Scholar
• Özdoğan Göksu, G., Üstel, F., Karakaşlı, K., & Kentel, F. (2009). Türkiye’de Ermeniler: cemaat-birey-yurttaş. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
   Google Scholar
• Paat, Y. F. (2013). Working with immigrant children and their families: An application of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23(8), 954–966.
   Google Scholar
• Petronoti, M., & Papagaroufali, E. (2006). Marrying a ‘foe’: Joint scripts and rewritten histories of Greek-Turkish couples. Identities: Global Studies in Culture & Power, 13(4), 557–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoemake, E. G. (2007). Human mate selection theory: An integrated evolutionary and social approach. Journal of Scientific Psychology, 11, 35–41.
   Google Scholar
• Song, M. (2009). Is intermarriage a good indicator of integration? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(2), 331–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Vollebergh, W. A., Iedema, J., & Raaijmakers, Q. A. (2001). Intergenerational transmission and the formation of cultural orientations in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(4), 1185–1198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaylovan, D. (2015). A comparative study of perceptions of Armenians in Turkey and Armenia regarding 1915 Medz Yeghern [ Unpublished master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Yüceer Berker, D. (2020). Çocuk ve ideoloji (1st ed.). Urzeni.
   Google Scholar
• Yücel, H. (2019). Günümüz Türkiye’sinde Ermeni Genci Olmak: İstanbul’daki Ermeni Liseleri Mezunu Gençlerin Kimlik Algilari, Kimlik Kaynaklari ve Kimlik Stratejileri. Alternatif Politika, 11(2), 401–429.
   Google Scholar
• Yumul, A. (1992). Religion, community, and culture: the Turkish Armenians [ Doctoral dissertation]. University of Oxford.
   Google Scholar