Search

Both parental psychological well-being (e.g., depressive symptoms) and parental relationship functioning (e.g., negative communication) are common parental risk factors for dysfunctional parenting. The spillover process from these parental characteristics to dysfunctional parenting is assumed to be amplified by parental stress, which is particularly common among mothers and fathers of young children. However, few studies have examined dyadic spillover processes from parental risk factors and parental stress on parenting in early childhood. In the current study, we first examined direct actor and partner effects of parents' depressive symptoms and negative communication at 10 months postpartum on dysfunctional parenting at 48 months postpartum in 168 primiparous mixed-gender couples. Second, we analyzed indirect effects via one's own and the partner's parental stress at 36 months postpartum using Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Models (APIMeM). We found direct actor effects for mothers' depressive symptoms and negative communication on their dysfunctional parenting. Additionally, indirect actor effects were found for depressive symptoms and negative communication among mothers and fathers. Specifically, mediating effects of depressive symptoms and negative communication on one's dysfunctional parenting through one's parental stress were found. There were no indirect partner effects through parental stress. These findings highlight the important role of parental stress in early childhood as a mediator between both individual and relationship parental risk factors and dysfunctional parenting. These results further underscore the importance of longitudinal dyadic analyses in providing early and tailored interventions for both mothers and fathers of young children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In dyadic interaction, a verbal focus on one individual ("you-talk," "I-talk"), rather than on the couple ("we-talk") has predominantly been linked to dysfunctional relationship processes. However, context differences in these links have not yet been systematically examined. Is it functional to asymmetrically focus on one partner during support interactions but problematic during conflict? Does a high level of couple-focus represent a resource across contexts? In this preregistered study, we investigated dyad-level pronoun use (we-/I-/you-talk) and their link to situational relationship functioning (SRF) across three interaction tasks (one conflict, two dyadic coping tasks) within couples (N = 365). More specifically, we examined associations of couple-means, i.e. pronoun use as a shared resource/vulnerability between partners, and couple-differences, i.e. functional/dysfunctional asymmetric pronoun use with observed interaction positivity and relationship climate. Results revealed both context differences and similarities. Asymmetric partner-focus (i.e. you-talk) was dysfunctional in conflict, whereas asymmetric partner- and self-focus (i.e., you-talk/I-talk; focus on the stressed partner) were functional in dyadic coping. Beyond asymmetry, you-talk (couple-mean) showed consistent negative associations with SRF in all tasks studied. We-talk (couple-mean) was positively linked to SRF, but only in conflict interactions. In conflict, couple-focus thus represented a shared resource that can buffer from dysfunctional conflict interaction characterized by partner-focus. In line with conceptual frameworks, the dyadic coping results emphasize the importance of focusing on the partner in need. The study corroborates the prospect of pronoun use as a context-specific indicator of relationship functioning. Gender differences, implications for future research and possible interventions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Negative and positive conflict communication predicts long-term relationship satisfaction. However, some studies show harmful effects and others show beneficial effects of negative conflict communication on long-term relationship satisfaction. One reason for the heterogeneous results might be that most studies focused on aggregated behaviors across a conflict interaction but neglected the temporal dynamics within such an interaction. This study examined whether individual initial levels and temporal trajectories of negative and positive communications predict long-term relationship satisfaction, and whether self-efficacy beliefs about clarity of other's feelings (CoF) alter initial levels and temporal trajectories of negative and positive communications. Negative and positive communications were measured based on sequentially coded conflict discussions of 365 couples; self-efficacy beliefs about CoF and relationship satisfaction were measured by self-report questionnaires at baseline and at four annual follow-up assessments. Results revealed that women's initial positive communication predicted higher intercepts of both partners' relationship satisfaction, and stronger decreases in women's negative communication predicted a higher intercept of relationship satisfaction in women. Additionally, less steep decreases in women's trajectories of negative communication predicted greater maintenance in women's relationship satisfaction over time. Additionally, men's self-efficacy beliefs about CoF predicted decreases in men's negative communication, increases in women's negative communication, and higher initial levels of women's positive communication. The current study highlights the relevance of dynamic aspects of partners' communication behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In adult couples, stress emerging outside the relationship (extra-dyadic stress) spills over into the relationship evoking conflict between the partners (intra-dyadic stress), which itself has a negative effect on relationship satisfaction over time. This detrimental effect of stress spillover can be buffered by adequate dyadic coping (DC) skills of both partners. The current study aimed at replicating these effects in a sample of 96 Swiss adult couples and 124 Swiss late adolescent (non-cohabitating) couples, who were in a serious relationship for at least 1 year. We examined (a) whether extra-dyadic stress is associated with intra-dyadic stress and relationship satisfaction and (b) whether the potential buffering effect of DC on these associations already exists in this important developmental phase. Contrary to the adult sample, for which indirect actor and partner effects were significant, we found a marginally significantly negative indirect actor effect of extra-dyadic stress on relationship satisfaction via intra-dyadic stress in late adolescents only for participants experiencing high extra-dyadic stress and low support from the partner. DC moderated the spillover between extra-dyadic and intra-dyadic stress for late adolescents. This study highlights the importance of investigating dyadic processes in romantic relationships in late adolescence to gain an insight into these relationships and the associated developmental processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growing evidence implicates stress as a reliable correlate of relationship satisfaction; yet, existing models fail to address why some relationships are more vulnerable than others to this effect. We draw from the literature on individual differences in self-regulation to predict that individuals who are more action oriented when confronted with aversive demands will buffer themselves and their partners against the detrimental effect of external stress. Using actor–partner interdependence modeling on self-report data from 368 couples, we show that the relationship satisfaction of highly stressed but action-oriented individuals and their partners is compromised less by external stress than that of state-oriented individuals and their partners. These results held after controlling for symptoms of depression and were not moderated by gender or by age, despite sampling couples varying widely in relationship duration. Results support the view that individual differences in self-regulation, and action orientation in particular, might benefit relationships confronted by stress, thus clarifying how dyads might be affected by demands outside their relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]