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.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the global public has relied on their political leaders to guide them through the crisis. The current study investigated if and how political leader’s rhetoric would be associated with collective emotional responses. We used text analytical methods to investigate association between political leader speech and daily aggregates of expressed emotions on Twitter. We collected posts concerning Covid-19 and all speeches by the highest executive power from the USA, UK, Germany, and Switzerland. We applied cross-lagged time series analyses. Political leaders whose communication was more analytic and communal corresponded to increased positivity on Twitter. Collective communal focus, in turn, increased after speeches which were more analytic and negative. Processes of socio-affective dynamics between political leaders and the general public are apparent. Our findings demonstrate that political leaders who present public crises competently and with a sense of community are associated with more positive responses on Twitter.

Communication and coordination represent central processes in healthcare action teams. However, we have a limited understanding of how expertise affects these processes and to what extent these effects are shaped by interprofessional differences. The current study addresses these questions by jointly investigating the influence of different aspects of expertise – individual expertise, team familiarity, and expertise asymmetry – on coordination quality and communication openness. We tested our propositions in two hospitals: one in Switzerland (CH, Sample 1) and one in the United Kingdom (UK, Sample 2). Both samples included two-person anesthesia action teams consisting of a physician and a nurse (N/CH = 47 teams, N/UK = 48 teams). We used a correlational design with two measurement points (i.e., pre- and postoperation). To consider potential interprofessional differences, we analyzed our data with actor-partner interdependence models. Moreover, we explored differences in the effects of expertise between both hospitals. Our findings suggest that nurses’ expertise is the most important predictor of coordination quality and communication openness. Overall, differences between the two hospitals were more prevalent than interprofessional differences between physicians and nurses. The current study provides a nuanced picture of the effects of expertise, and thereby extends our understanding of interprofessional teamwork.

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.

The aims of the present study are to analyze the associations of different forms of dyadic coping (i.e., own supportive dyadic coping = OSDC; perceived supportive dyadic coping provided by the partner = PSDC; common dyadic coping = CDC) with relationship satisfaction, and to investigate whether these effects differ depending on the amount of perceived stress. In 240 couples, the different forms of dyadic coping and stress of both partners were assessed annually across 5 measurement points. Data was analyzed by dyadic multilevel models, which allow for disentangling between-person (overall, timely stable) from within-person (yearly, time specific) variations. The results revealed that all different forms of dyadic coping enhanced overall and yearly relationship satisfaction. At the same time, relationship satisfaction depends on the amount of overall and yearly stress. Interestingly, for PSDC, we found that the more a member of the couple was supported by the partner yearly (time-specific PSDC) and the more the member was stressed overall (timely stable), the higher the member scored on relationship satisfaction. For CDC, we found that yearly CDC beyond the overall level of CDC interacted with the timely stable amount of stress. Dealing together with stress and perceiving the partner as helpful were especially beneficial for relationship satisfaction. Findings highlight the importance of addressing specific forms of dyadic coping in intervention and prevention programs for couples.

The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to examine the efficacy of an evidence-based relationship distress prevention program, the Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET), in dual well-earning couples and to investigate whether effects vary by (a) hours of professional contact and (b) mode of delivery (face to face vs. self-learning DVD). N = 159 couples were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 intervention conditions: (1) standard CCET (15 hours face to face), (2) compact CCET (12 hr face to face), (3) short CCET (self-learning DVD + 8 hr face to face), or (4) wait-list control group. Relationship satisfaction and dyadic coping skills were assessed by means of questionnaires completed prior to and 2 weeks after completion of the treatment, at 3-month follow-up, and at 6-month follow-up. Baseline latent change models for 2 factors showed that the CCET enhanced relationship satisfaction and dyadic coping skills in couples relative to the wait-list control group, albeit effects were small. The standard format of the CCET was not more effective than the compact or the short format indicating that reduced amount of professional contact did not decrease the treatment’s efficacy and that the self-learning DVD successfully replaced the psycho-educational part of the program. Since dual earner couples usually face multiple stressors, it is a promising finding that they can strengthen their relationship with a relatively short time investment.

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.

Avoidance goals heighten the salience of negative social experiences, and in intimate relationships such an orientation may contribute to communication difficulties and the perpetuation of avoidance. We therefore hypothesized that individuals with stronger avoidance goals would be particularly prone to engage in escalating levels of negative communication with their intimate partner, and we tested this prediction by conducting sequential analyses on videotaped observational data (28,470 observations) collected from 365 heterosexual couples engaging in a relationship-related conflict. While less avoidance-oriented spouses showed a decline in their likelihood of negative communication over the course of the 8-min conflict discussion, the likelihood that more avoidance-oriented spouses would display negative communication behaviors remained at a high level. The likelihood of negative communication even increased when avoidance-oriented spouses were confronted with negative communication behavior of their partners. The effects of avoidance orientation were independent of relationship satisfaction and neuroticism. These findings demonstrate that avoidance goals underlie individuals' heightened reactivity to the partner's negative behavior, while also clarifying 1 possible reason why some individuals engage in communication behaviors that may prove maladaptive to their relationship. (PsycINFO Database Record

Background: Previous research focused on relationship commitment as the outcome of high satisfaction, poor alternatives, and high investments. We propose that commitment is a prerequisite in highly satisfied couples, fostering relationship maintenance behavior such as positive dyadic coping. Method: Structural equation models identified the relationship between commitment, relationship satisfaction, and dyadic coping with data from 201 heterosexual couples with an average relationship length of 34 years. Results: The common fate model confirmed that relationship satisfaction mediated the effects between commitment and dyadic coping on a latent dyadic level. Additional analyses revealed that women’s satisfaction was mainly responsible for mediating effects between both partners’ commitment and dyadic coping. Conclusions: Findings support the essentiality of commitment for couples’ maintenance strategies and for consistency in long-term relationships.

Objective: There is a growing body of evidence for the effectiveness of trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy (TF-CBT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but few studies to date have investigated the mechanisms by which TF-CBT leads to therapeutic change. Models of PTSD suggest that a core treatment mechanism is the change in dysfunctional appraisals of the trauma and its aftermath. If this is the case, then changes in appraisals should predict a change in symptoms. The present study investigated whether cognitive change precedes symptom change in Cognitive Therapy for PTSD, a version of TF-CBT. Method: The study analyzed weekly cognitive and symptom measures from 268 PTSD patients who received a course of Cognitive Therapy for PTSD, using bivariate latent growth modeling. Results: Results showed that (a) dysfunctional trauma-related appraisals and PTSD symptoms both decreased significantly over the course of treatment, (b) changes in appraisals and symptoms were correlated, and (c) weekly change in appraisals significantly predicted subsequent reduction in symptom scores (both corrected for the general decrease over the course of therapy). Changes in PTSD symptom severity did not predict subsequent changes in appraisals. Conclusions: The study provided preliminary evidence for the temporal precedence of a reduction in negative trauma-related appraisals in symptom reduction during trauma-focused CBT for PTSD. This supports the role of change in appraisals as an active therapeutic mechanism.