A daily diary analysis of the associations among stress, closeness, and relationship and sexual satisfaction was conducted with a sample of 40 gay male and 55 lesbian couples. Using interdependence theory as a guide, both actor and partner effects of stress, closeness, and their interaction were investigated. As predicted, it was found that participants' own feelings of closeness toward their partners buffered the negative association between stress and satisfaction but that when participants' partners felt particularly close on a stressful day their closeness exacerbated associations between stress and reduced satisfaction. These contrasting effects of closeness underscore the importance of considering the daily processes of both partners contributing to relationship quality. affects their relationships as well. Interdependence theorists would suggest that because of the interpersonal nature of close relationships, the attitudes and behaviors of one individual will affect the other individual in the relationship and the quality of the relationship as a whole (Kelley et al., 1983). In addition to examining how stress impacts the health of individuals, researchers also need to examine how stress impacts relationships. Although there is literature to suggest that major stressful life events such as

No abstract

Objective We examined whether high levels of internalized homophobia and low levels of openness about one's sexual identity (“outness”) were enduring vulnerabilities for same‐sex couples' relationship functioning. Background The vulnerability–stress–adaptation (VSA) model describes how stress can impact relationship functioning. This model has predominately been applied to the study of heterosexual couples, which leaves a dearth of literature on enduring vulnerabilities specific to same‐sex couples' relationship functioning. Method Dyadic longitudinal data from a convenience sample of 81 same‐sex couples were collected. Internalized homophobia and outness were assessed at baseline followed by 14‐day daily diaries assessing external stress and relationship functioning (i.e., severity of conflict, relationship quality, and commitment). Hypotheses were tested using longitudinal actor–partner interdependence models and multilevel modeling. Results On days that individuals with high (but not low) levels of internalized homophobia reported greater daily stress, they also reported greater severity of conflict and poorer relationship quality. On days that individuals with low (but not high) outness had a partner report greater daily stress, the individual reported lower commitment. Conclusion Hypotheses were partially supported; high levels of internalized homophobia and low outness were shown to be potential enduring vulnerabilities for individuals in a same‐sex relationship. Implications Helping same‐sex couples cope with their own and their partner's daily stress, as well as working to decrease internalized homophobia while increasing openness about their sexuality, may help to promote relational functioning.

No abstract

In this investigation, we use the Conservation of Resources (CoR) theory as a guide to examine how both uplifts and hassles are associated with positive (e.g., satisfaction, commitment) and negative (ambivalence, conflict) relational quality on a daily basis. In previous studies of hassles and uplifts, the focus has been primarily on negative outcomes at the individual level (e.g., affect). Here, we build on this previous research in examining both positive and negative events (i.e., uplifts and hassles) in associations with positive and negative relational qualities. Further, we focus on examining social and nonsocial events that are external to the relationship (i.e., do not involve the romantic partner) and how they are linked with relational qualities. Finally, we examine which patterns are confined to the same day and which carry over to subsequent days (i.e., lagged effects). Contrary to previous literature, we find that both social and nonsocial hassles are largely unrelated to relationship quality after accounting for the effects of social and nonsocial uplifts. In contrast, nonsocial uplifts bolster positive feelings about the relationship on that day. Results also show that hassles and uplifts may work together to explain relational commitment. Finally, we find that nonsocial uplifts experienced on one day are associated with trend-level declines in next day positive feelings about the relationship. Our findings suggest that preserving relationship quality through daily experiences is best achieved by equipping couples to recognize the benefits of uplifts to the relationship, especially uplifts that are nonsocial, in tandem with managing hassles.