Daily hassles and uplifts: A diary study on understanding relationship quality.

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.

The calm after the storm

“…In previous work (Totenhagen, Serido, Curran, & Butler, 2012), we have included withinperson and between-person correlations of these study variables for men and women in this sample. Although some between-person correlations were strong, particularly among love, satisfaction, commitment, and closeness (e.g., in the .8 range), we found that within-person correlations were not nearly as strong, with the highest correlations being in the .5 to .6 range.…”

“…Next, individuals were asked to log onto the website at approximately the same time each day for seven consecutive days to complete daily questionnaires. We chose 7 days for two reasons: first, because of the increased likelihood that participants would remain in the study rather than becoming fatigued and possibly dropping out if asked to complete a longer period (e.g., Bolger et al, 2003) and second, because 7 days, or 1 week, is relatively common in daily diary studies and includes both weekdays and a weekend (e.g., Almeida, Wethington, & Kessler, 2002;Butler, Young, & Randall, 2010;Ducharme, Doyle, & Markiewicz, 2002;King & DeLongis, 2013;Schumann, 2012;Totenhagen, Curran, Serido, & Butler, 2013;Totenhagen, Serido, Curran, & Butler, 2012;Young, Curran, & Totenhagen, 2013). Participants answered the same questionnaires each day and were asked to report on every item as they had experienced it within the past 24 hr.…”

Good days, bad days

“…We tested lagged models using the prospective change model (Larson & Almeida, 1999), but the model for closeness could not properly converge, and no significant effects were found for satisfaction and commitment. As reported in previous work (Totenhagen, Serido, et al, 2012), some participants may have skipped or missed filling out a particular day(s) in the study. This pattern would have had minimal impact on same-day analyses but may have greatly reduced power to find significant patterns of results in the lagged analyses because any time a day was missing, that day's data were not used to predict the following day.…”

“…The time and date stamps also permitted us to identify daily entries in which partners did not match (i.e., both did not submit an entry on a particular day). Only those couples who completed and matched on at least 3 days were retained in the final sample (Totenhagen, Serido, Curran, & Butler, 2012). Individuals completed an average of 5.9 days of data.…”

Pride and the experience of meaning in daily life

“…Their lower cognitive burden may improve response rates with this very busy population (e.g. Larson & Gillman, 1999;Lavee & Ben-Ari, 2007;Totenhagen, Serido, Curran, & Butler, 2012).…”