No abstract

The present review on dyadic coping (DC) aims at providing a critical integration of both the conceptual and empirical DC literature and overcoming the limitations of past reviews by (a) describing, comparing, and integrating all the DC models, (b) presenting and integrating findings from studies based on DC models, and (c) suggesting directions for further research. The DC models identified and compared include: The congruence model (Revenson, 1994 ), the relationship-focused model (Coyne and Smith, 1991 ; O'Brien and DeLongis, 1996 ), the communal coping model (Lyons et al., 1998 ), the systemic-transactional model (Bodenmann, 1995 , 1997 ), the relational-cultural model (Kayser et al., 2007 ), and the developmental-contextual coping model (Berg and Upchurch, 2007 ). After discussing each DC model, we advance a conceptual integration of all models, which serves as the framework to organize the review of the empirical literature. This integration includes the following DC dimensions: (a) Stress Communication, (b) Positive DC by One Partner (supportive DC, empathic responding, delegated DC, active engagement), (c) Positive Conjoint DC (common, collaborative, communal, mutual responsiveness); (d) Negative DC by One Partner (protective buffering, overprotection, and hostility/ambivalence), and (e) Negative Conjoint DC (common negative DC, disengaged avoidance). Developmental, relational, and contextual variables are included as factors shaping DC. To be included in the empirical review, articles had to be published in or a peer-reviewed journal in English and/or German before 2017 and include an original empirical study guided by one of the DC models. The review included 139 studies and, with the exception of the congruence model whose findings were discussed separately, findings were presented for overall DC and each of the dimensions identified in the conceptual integration. Findings were grouped also according to whether the stressor related or not to a medical or mental health condition. Demographic and cultural factors affecting DC were discussed. Overall, the empirical review suggests that in Western couples, positive individual, and conjoint DC forms, taken together or separately, have individual and relational benefits for couples coping with stress in general and/or mental health or medical stressors. Research on DC can be expanded to include other populations and stressors and use improved designs.

According to the systemic-transactional stress model (STM; G. Bodenmann, European Review of Applied Psychology, 1997; 47: 137), extradyadic stress from daily hassles can have a negative impact on the individual psychological and physical health and the couple's relationship. This study is the first one to test the STM propositions in a model that includes both partners' individual and relational outcomes simultaneously. The model also includes actor and partner effects as well as the interdependence between partners' processes. Cross-sectional, self-report data were collected from 110 community couples in Switzerland. Consistent with STM predictions, results from the path model analysis indicate that for actor effects extradyadic stress from daily hassles relates directly to lower psychological (increase in anxiety symptoms) and physical well-being and only indirectly to lower relationship satisfaction through increased intradyadic stress from relationship problems and also through more depressive symptomatology in men. The female extradyadic stress and intradyadic stress had partner effects on the male intradyadic stress and the male relationship satisfaction, respectively. Limitations as well as research and clinical implications for marriage and family therapists are discussed.

This study tested a dyadic stress model that inter-partner psychological aggression and positive behaviors mediate the negative association between economic strain and couples’ relationship satisfaction. Heterosexual couples at a large community clinic in Argentina (N = 144 couples) completed self-report questionnaires three years after the initiation of a major economic crisis. Path analytic results indicated that gender differences — greater male and female psychological aggression, and lower female positive behaviors — mediated the link between male economic strain and female relationship satisfaction. No significant paths were found from female economic strain to male relationship satisfaction. Implications for research, clinical practice, and the advancement of a dyadic model of economic strain are discussed.

This review identified key theoretical frameworks of dyadic coping used in cancer. Evidence indicates that responses within the couple that inhibit open communication between partner and patient are likely to have an adverse impact on psychosocial outcomes. Models that incorporate the interdependence of emotional responses and coping behaviours within couples have an emerging evidence base in psycho-oncology and may have greatest validity and clinical utility in this setting.