Spillover Effects When Taking Turns in Dyadic Coping: How Lingering Negative Affect and Perceived Partner Responsiveness Shape Subsequent Support Provision.

When experiencing personal distress, people usually expect their romantic partner to be supportive. However, when put in a situation to provide support, people may at times (still) be struggling with issues of their own. This interdependent nature of dyadic coping interactions as well as potential spillover effects is mirrored in the state-of-the-art research method to behaviorally assess couple's dyadic coping processes. This paradigm typically includes two videotaped 8-min dyadic coping conversations in which partners swap roles as sharer and support provider. Little is known about how such dyadic coping interactions may feed back into one another, impacting the motivation and ability to be a responsive support provider. In three behavioral studies, we examined how sharers' experiences may spill over to affect their own support provision in a subsequent dyadic coping interaction. We hypothesized that the extent to which sharers perceive their partner as responsive to their self-disclosure increases the quality of their own subsequent support provision (Hypothesis 1), whereas sharers' lingering negative affect reduces the quality of their own subsequent support provision (Hypothesis 2). In line with our first hypothesis, perceived partner responsiveness predicted the provision of higher-quality support, though primarily as perceived by the partner. Sharers who perceived their partner to have been more responsive were somewhat more likely to subsequently engage in positive dyadic coping and were rated as more responsive by their partners. Negative dyadic coping behavior was unaffected. Evidence for our second hypothesis was mixed. While lingering negative affect did not affect positive dyadic coping behavior or perceived support, it did increase the chances of negative dyadic coping behavior. However, given the very low occurrences of negative affect and negative dyadic coping, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Taken together, these findings suggest that support interactions may feed back into one another, highlighting the complex and interdependent nature of dyadic coping. The strongest and most consistent findings concerned the spillover effect of perceived partner responsiveness on subsequent perceived support quality, speaking to the key role of believing that one's partner is responsive to one's needs in promoting healthy relationship functioning.

Disability as an Interpersonal Experience: A Systematic Review on Dyadic Challenges and Dyadic Coping When One Partner Has a Chronic Physical or Sensory Impairment.

Chronically disabling health impairments affect an increasing number of people worldwide. In close relationships, disability is an interpersonal experience. Psychological distress is thus common in patients as well as their spouses. Dyadic coping can alleviate stress and promote adjustment in couples who face disabling health impairments. Much research has focused on dyadic coping with cancer. However, other health problems such as physical and sensory impairments are also common and may strongly impact couple relationships. In order to promote couples' optimal adjustment to impaired health, the identification of disability-related relationship challenges is required. Furthermore, ways in which dyadic coping with these challenges may benefit couples could inform researchers and practitioners how to support couples in coping with health impairments. Accordingly, the aims of this study were to systematically review dyadic challenges and dyadic coping when one partner has a chronically disabling physical or sensory impairment. Out of 873 articles identified through database searches, 36 studies met inclusion criteria. The disability-related dyadic challenges identified in the review were changed roles and responsibilities within the couple, altered communication, compromised sexual intimacy, and reduced social participation. These challenges were reported to burden both partners and the couple relationship. Dyadic adjustment benefitted from a we-perspective, i.e., when couples viewed the disability as a shared challenge and engaged in conjoint dyadic coping. The results suggest that patient/care recipient and partner/caregiver roles should be de-emphasized and that disability should be recognized as an interpersonal experience.

Fair enough? Decreased equity of dyadic coping across the transition to parenthood associated with depression of first-time parents.

The transition to parenthood (TTP) is a stressful life event for most couples. Therefore, the way both partners jointly cope with stress (i.e., dyadic coping) is important for the prevention of individual adjustment problems (e.g., depression). For dyadic coping to be effective in reducing depressive symptoms, efforts of both partners should be equal. However, many couples experience a decrease of equity in task division within the domestic sphere across the TTP. The current study investigates the equity of a specific skill within the 'relationship sphere', because similarly to a decreased equity in household and childcare, a decreased equity of dyadic coping is likely to be associated with poorer individual adjustment. We collected longitudinal self-report data on dyadic coping and depressive symptoms from 104 mixed-gender first-time parents (n = 208 individuals) from pregnancy until 40 weeks postpartum. We created an equity score for men and women that measured their perceived difference between received and provided dyadic coping. On average, women reported providing more and receiving less dyadic coping than men. While both genders agreed on this distribution, men did perceive a higher equity of dyadic coping than women. Furthermore, the decrease of equity perceived by women across TTP was not visible in men. In line with our assumptions based on the equity theory, perceived equity of dyadic coping was associated with depressive symptoms in a curvilinear manner: Decreases in women's perceived equity in either direction (over- or underbenefit) were associated with more depressive symptoms in women and their male partners. This association was found above and beyond the beneficial effect of dyadic coping itself. This implies that not only how well partners support each other in times of stress, but also how equal both partners' efforts are, is important for their individual adjustment across TTP.

We are in this together - Aren't we? Congruence of common dyadic coping and psychological distress of couples facing breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Breast cancer (BC) can be understood as a we-disease, which affects a couple as a unit and requires coping as a unit (eg, common dyadic coping, CDC). However, partners can be incongruent in their perceptions of CDC, for example, because of misunderstandings and lack of mutuality or conflict, which may likely be associated with greater distress. Thus, this paper examines the effect of CDC congruence on individual psychological distress in cancer patients and their partners. METHODS: Seventy mixed-sex couples in which the woman had nonmetastatic BC completed self-report questionnaires at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year after cancer surgery. CDC congruence measured the difference between patients' and partners' CDC perceptions while controlling for CDC itself. RESULTS: Multilevel modeling showed negative associations between couples' CDC and psychological distress. Beyond this effect, female patients' psychological distress was associated with CDC congruence with an interaction showing that psychological distress was greater when couples were congruent with low rather than a high CDC. CONCLUSION: Less congruence was associated with greater psychological distress in BC patients but not their male partners - especially if the couple reported low CDC. Health professionals should identify and address diverging perceptions, so that additional distress can be minimized for BC patients.