Why are we together? A dyadic longitudinal investigation of relationship motivation, goal progress, and adjustment

Gender Differences in Variability in Intimate Relationship Satisfaction: A Secondary Analysis and Meta-Analysis

There is a long-standing interest in gender differences in satisfaction in intimate relationships. Whereas prior research has focused on gender differences in central tendency (i.e., means), we conducted two studies - a secondary analysis of data from a probability sample of Australian married couples and a meta-analysis - to examine gender differences in variability (i.e., variances). We hypothesized that compared to males, females would demonstrate greater variability in intimate relationship satisfaction (i.e., greater female variability hypothesis), particularly at lower levels of relationship satisfaction. Results from a secondary analysis of data from 2,711 married couples in the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey and from a meta-analysis of 20 years of research (k = 171, N = 84,976), including independent samples from 33 countries, indicated that relative to males, females reported greater variability in relationship satisfaction. Obtained effect sizes (female-to-male variance ratios [VRs] of 1.42 for the HILDA sample and 1.19 for the meta-analysis) were larger than proposed cutoffs for meaningful group differences in variability. Analysis of tail ratios (ratios of the relative proportion of females divided by the relative proportion of males in the distributional tail regions) in the HILDA sample indicated that gender differences in variability were greater at lower (versus higher) levels of satisfaction. Findings support the greater female variability hypothesis and suggest that by focusing only on gender differences in means, the existing literature has underestimated gender differences in intimate relationship satisfaction.

The interpersonal benefits of goal adjustment capacities: the sample case of coping with poor sleep in couples

Introduction

This study examined the role of goal adjustment capacities and coping in the association between spousal sleep efficiency and relationship satisfaction in romantic couples.

Method

A community lifespan sample of 113 heterosexual couples (age range = 21-82 years) was recruited using newspaper advertisements in the Greater Montreal Area from June 2011 to December 2012. Participants completed study measures (i.e., Goal Adjustment Scale, Brief Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Relationship Assessment Scale, and the Brief Cope) at two time points, ~1 year apart.

Results

The results of actor-partner interdependence models with moderation (MIXED procedure in SPSS) reveal that goal disengagement buffered people from worsening relationship satisfaction associated with poor spousal sleep [95% CI B (-1.17, -0.12)], in part via increases in actor active coping [95% CI B (-0.32, -0.02)] and decreases in partner self-blame [95% CI B (-0.28, -0.01)]. Goal reengagement was related to diminished relationship satisfaction in response to poor own sleep [95% CI B (0.59, 1.79)], in part through increases in actor behavioral disengagement [95% CI B (0.05, 0.41)].

Discussion

These findings point to a need for future studies to examine goal adjustment capacities and relationship-specific coping strategies as potential targets of intervention to maintain peoples' relationship satisfaction in the face of sleep problems.

Examining Intra- and Inter-Personal Health Effects of Optimism and Pessimism: The Role of Subjective Well-Being in Romantic Couples

Recent meta-analytic research suggests that the absence of pessimism could be a stronger predictor of physical health than the presence of optimism (Scheier et al., 2021a). The present study examined the role of subjective well-being in the effects of optimism and pessimism on physical health in romantic couples. It was hypothesized that pessimism would be more strongly associated with both well-being and health than optimism, intra- and inter-personally. Subjective well-being was also expected to explain variance in the associations between optimism, pessimism, and health. A baseline sample of 153 opposite-sex couples completed various measures of subjective well-being (e.g., life satisfaction, positive and negative affect, and depressive symptoms) and physical health (e.g., subjective health, sleep efficiency, physical symptoms, cold symptoms, and chronic illness). Results of actor-partner interdependence models showed that the absence of pessimism, but not the presence of optimism, was associated with better physical health at baseline and over time. Pessimism was also a stronger predictor than optimism of baseline levels in some indicators of subjective well-being. These effects were obtained intra- and inter-personally. Finally, subjective well-being explained variance in some of the effects of pessimism on levels of physical health. Implications for theory, research, and practice are discussed.