With a little help from our friends: couple social integration in marriage

Examining minority stress, dyadic coping, and internalizing symptoms among male same-sex couples using actor-partner interdependence models

Minority stress processes have been consistently linked to increased internalizing symptoms among sexual minority individuals. However, very little research has studied the impact of minority stress on the mental health of same-sex couples. The present study examined associations of actor and partner heterosexist microaggressions and internalized heterosexism with internalizing symptoms, moderated by dyadic coping, among male same-sex couples. Participants were 774 men who have sex with men (387 dyads). Results of actor-partner interdependence models showed that actor, but not partner, minority stress was positively associated with internalizing symptoms. Dyadic coping moderated the association of actor heterosexist microaggressions on internalizing symptoms such that for those who engaged in more dyadic coping, the association of heterosexist microaggressions with internalizing symptoms was weaker. Dyadic coping also moderated the association of partner internalized heterosexism on internalizing symptoms. For those who engaged in more dyadic coping, their partner's internalized heterosexism was associated with greater internalizing symptoms. Although dyadic coping may buffer the effects of minority stress on internalizing symptoms, if partners rely too heavily on one another to cope with stress, it may be detrimental to their mental health. Implications for relationship education interventions for same-sex couples are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

"Will you complete this survey too?" Differences between individual versus dyadic samples in relationship research

This study examines the ways in which collecting data from individuals versus couples affects the characteristics of the resulting sample in basic research studies of romantic relationships. From a nationally representative sample of 1,294 individuals in a serious romantic relationship, approximately half of whom were randomly selected to invite their partner to participate in the study, we compare relationship, individual, and demographic characteristics among 3 groups: individuals randomized to invite their partner and whose partner participated in the study, individuals randomized to invite their partner but whose partner did not participate, and individuals who were not randomized to invite their partner. Results indicated that individuals whose partner participated reported the highest levels of relationship and individual well-being relative to comparison groups, as well as individuals who participated alone despite being asked to invite their partner, reported the lowest levels of relationship and individual well-being relative to comparison groups. Effect size magnitudes indicated the strongest group differences with respect to relationship variables, particularly cognitive appraisals of overall relationship stability and satisfaction. Implications for romantic relationship research and study design are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

How Do Couples Disagree? An Analysis of Conflict Resolution Profiles and the Quality of Romantic Relationships

This study aimed to identify conflict resolution profiles and assess relationship quality levels associated with each profile. The participants were 750 heterosexual couples living in southern Brazil. They filled out measures about conflict resolution strategies, relationship quality, and sociodemographic data. A latent profile analysis was conducted in order to classify participants regarding conflict resolution. Variance and association analyses were also conducted in order to examine relationships between the resolution profiles and other study variables. Four profiles were identified: Low Conflict/Withdraw, Validator, Hostile, and Volatile. The Validator profile showed higher relationship quality, followed by Low Conflict/Withdraw and Volatile profiles, which did not differ from each other, and the Hostile, which showed low levels of relationship quality. We conclude that even though validation and negotiation are desirable, emotionally intense strategies may also be beneficial for couples in some contexts.

Is Communication a Mechanism of Relationship Education Effects among Rural African Americans?

Enhancing communication as a means of promoting relationship quality has been increasingly questioned, particularly for couples at elevated sociodemographic risk. In response, the current study investigated communication change as a mechanism accounting for changes in relationship satisfaction and confidence among 344 rural, predominantly low-income African American couples with an early adolescent child who participated in a randomized controlled trial of the Protecting Strong African American Families (ProSAAF) program. Approximately 9 months after baseline assessment, intent-to-treat analyses indicated ProSAAF couples demonstrated improved communication, satisfaction, and confidence compared with couples in the control condition. Improvements in communication mediated ProSAAF effects on relationship satisfaction and confidence; conversely, neither satisfaction nor confidence mediated intervention effects on changes in communication. These results underscore the short-term efficacy of a communication-focused, culturally sensitive prevention program and suggest that communication is a possible mechanism of change in relationship quality among low-income African American couples.