Editorial: Dyadic Coping

Bodenmann, Guy; Falconier, Mariana K.; Randall, Ashley K.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01498

Cited by 45 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, individuals who perceive their partner to be responsive to them in the face of stress report better sleep quality, show decreases in cortisol responses, and report better relationship quality (for a review see Stanton et al, 2020). Given the importance of romantic partners’ coping responses for mitigating stress’ deleterious effects on individual and relational well-being (Randall & Bodenmann, 2017), drawing upon the systemic transactional model of dyadic coping (Bodenmann et al, 2016), this study examined how perceptions of partners’ dyadic coping behaviors moderated the association between COVID-19 psychological distress and relationship quality across 27-nations during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic (March–July, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries

Randall

McHugh

Rusu

et al. 2021

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the global outbreak of COVID-19 in March 2020, individuals report psychological distress associated with the “new normal”—social distancing, financial hardships, and increased responsibilities while working from home. Given the interpersonal nature of stress and coping responses between romantic partners, based on the systemic transactional model this study posits that perceived partner dyadic coping may be an important moderator between experiences of COVID-19 psychological distress and relationship quality. To examine these associations, self-report data from 14,020 people across 27 countries were collected during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic (March–July, 2020). It was hypothesized that higher symptoms of psychological distress would be reported post-COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 restrictions (Hypothesis 1), reports of post-COVID-19 psychological distress would be negatively associated with relationship quality (Hypothesis 2), and perceived partner DC would moderate these associations (Hypothesis 3). While hypotheses were generally supported, results also showed interesting between-country variability. Limitations and future directions are presented.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries

Randall

McHugh

Rusu

et al. 2021

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During adolescence, intervention programs can take advantage of siblings’ newly developed cognitive skills. For instance, teaching siblings how to cope together with stressors (similar to dyadic coping among couples; Bodenmann, Falconier, & Randall, ) may help increase intimacy between siblings and promote adolescent well‐being.…”

Section: Affectively Intense Versus Uninvolvedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Love Them and Hate Them: The Developmental Appropriateness of Ambivalence in the Adolescent Sibling Relationship

Campione‐Barr

Killoren

2019

Child Dev Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of sibling relationships has important implications for each sibling's development, and not always in the expected ways, because both conflict and intimacy are associated with both positive and negative developmental outcomes. Additionally, these relationship qualities do not occur in isolation since sibling relationships are known as the quintessential love-hate relationship. The ambivalence (i.e., coexistence of positive and negative feelings) siblings experience toward one another during childhood and adolescence and the prevalence of this feeling make the sibling relationship unique. Ambivalence in the sibling relationship during adolescence is developmentally appropriate and may benefit individuals throughout life. In this article, we argue that adolescence is the tipping point in the sibling relationship that sets the stage for how healthy and engaged, or distant and uninvolved, relationships with siblings become in adulthood. KEYWORDS-siblings; adolescenceUnsurprising to the more than 80% of youth who grow up with a sibling, sibling relationships are often considered the quintessential love-hate relationship. It is this ambivalence, or the coexistence of positive and negative feelings toward one another, that is often considered one of the unique hallmarks of siblinghood. While ambivalence in other close relationships (e.g., parent-child relationships, friendships, romantic liaisons) is considered suboptimal, we argue in this article that the ambivalent nature of the sibling relationship, particularly during adolescence, is both relationally and developmentally appropriate, and can have unique costs and benefits.Research and theory suggest that all close relationships must involve balancing positivity and negativity or conflict and closeness. From a social relational perspective, Collins and Laursen (1992) suggest that how much conflict or negativity a relationship can handle is determined by the type of relationship. Closed-field relationships (e.g., parent-child relationships, sibling relationships) are constrained by genetics, norms, or laws. Alternatively, open-field relationships (e.g., friendships, romantic relationships) are more likely to be voluntary and to form (and dissolve) at much faster rates. Given these distinct traits, closedfield relationships can withstand greater conflict or negativity than open-field relationships.As closed-field relationships, sibling relationships can withstand more conflict and intensity of affect than other egalitarian relationships (e.g., those with friends, romantic partners). Additionally, while parent-child relationships can also withstand more conflict than relationships with peers, siblings are likely able to withstand greater ambivalence than parents and children because of the more imbalanced hierarchy children have with their parents. Over the course of adolescence, the parent-child power imbalance shifts, and at least until autonomy is achieved, youth are at a disadvantage in terms of making decisions within the relationship. Relationships wit...

show abstract

“…Important contributions of the present study are its focus on dyadic coping processes specifically (a) in parent-child relationships, (b) in the context of a chronic illness and (c) that fact that these processes are embedded in different phases of adolescence, from pre-adolescence to late adolescence. In previous studies, dyadic coping was generally investigated in romantic adolescent or adult relationships ( Falconier et al, 2015 ; Breitenstein et al, 2018 ; Bodenmann et al, 2019 ; Van Schoors et al, 2019a ) and has not considered parent-child relationships. Albeit, general dyadic processes, but not dyadic coping , have been studied in parent-child relationships.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parent-Child Dyadic Coping and Quality of Life in Chronically Diseased Children

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different forms of dyadic coping are associated with positive outcomes in partner relationships, yet little is known about dyadic coping in parent-child relationships. The current research explored the association between parent-child dyadic coping and children’s quality of life in 12–18-year old children with a chronic disease (i.e., cystic fibrosis, autoimmune diseases, and children post-cancer treatment). In a sample of 105 parent-child dyads, self-reported forms of dyadic coping (i.e., stress communication, problem-oriented, emotion-oriented, and negative dyadic coping) and children’s quality of life were assessed. Children reported more stress communication and negative dyadic coping than their parents, while parents reported more problem-oriented dyadic coping and emotion-oriented dyadic coping than their children. More stress communication of the child was associated with more emotion-oriented dyadic coping and less negative dyadic coping of the parent. More negative dyadic coping of the child was associated with less stress communication, problem-oriented dyadic coping and emotion-oriented dyadic coping of the parent. Additionally, both children’s and parents’ negative dyadic coping were associated with lower self-reported pediatric quality of life and parents’ emotion-oriented dyadic coping was associated with higher pediatric quality of life. These findings emphasize that children and their parents mutually influence each other and that dyadic coping is associated with children’s quality of life. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Editorial: Dyadic Coping

Cited by 45 publications

References 24 publications

Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries

Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries

Love Them and Hate Them: The Developmental Appropriateness of Ambivalence in the Adolescent Sibling Relationship

Parent-Child Dyadic Coping and Quality of Life in Chronically Diseased Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About