Search

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]

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. [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]

In this 10-year longitudinal study, long-term relationship satisfaction and stability were predicted from communication behavior, stress level, physical and psychological well-being, and individual and dyadic coping skills. The predictors were assessed at the beginning of the study. Significant predictors of relationship satisfaction (n= 103 couples) for both men and women were relationship satisfaction in the beginning, and for men additionally their dyadic coping competencies. Significant predictors of relationship stability (N= 162 couples) were relationship length, relationship satisfaction of both men and women, as well as women’s positive communication. The percentage of correct classifications (stable or unstable relationship) over a period of 10 years was 80.3%. Implications for research and prevention as well as the importance of coping skills for relationship outcome are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous empirical studies show that stress occurring outside of the relationship (referred to as external stress) can spill over into couples' relationships, influencing dyads' behaviors and their relationship satisfaction. There is substantial evidence that the association between external stress and relationship satisfaction is explained by 2 mediators: internal stress and dyadic coping. However, the mediation processes of internal stress and dyadic coping have solely been examined in Western couples. Accordingly, the current study aimed to test these processes in a sample of 474 Chinese couples (N = 948) using the actor-partner interdependence mediation model. Results reveal that internal stress and dyadic coping can fully mediate the association between external stress and relationship satisfaction in Chinese couples for men and women in a similar way. These findings underscore the importance of moving beyond examining stress and dyadic coping processes among couples in Eastern cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although evolutionary and social-structural models predict that women will be more supportive than men in relationships, behavioral studies fail to confirm this difference. We predicted instead that gender differences in support will be moderated by stress, and that men will provide lower-quality support primarily when their stress is high. We predicted further that the detrimental effects of stress on men’s support will be more evident when men are responding to women’s emotionally toned expressions of stress than when men are responding to women’s affectively neutral expressions of stress. Stressed and unstressed men and women were observed providing support to a stressed relationship partner. While unstressed, men and women generally provided similar support to the stressed partner. While stressed, men provided lower-quality support than did comparably stressed women, but only in response to emotionally toned expressions of stress. Thus, gender differences in support may arise because women are better able than men to regulate other people’s emotional distress while managing stresses of their own. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]