Role of clarity of other's feelings for dyadic coping

Leuchtmann, Lorena; Zemp, Martina; Milek, Anne; Nußbeck, Fridtjof W.; Brandstätter, Veronika; Bodenmann, Guy

doi:10.1111/pere.12226

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…From a STM perspective (Bodenmann, 1995, 2005), dyadic coping involves cognitive (individual and dyadic appraisals of stress and coping resources, individual and dyadic goals), emotional (shared emotions and co-regulation of emotions), physiological (shared arousals, impact of dyadic coping on endocrine processes) and behavioral aspects and processes (e.g., overt stress management activities, active listening to the partner's stress-related self-disclosure, verbal and non-verbal support behaviors like holding each other, hugging, giving a massage, active joint problem-solving). Dyadic coping is usually assessed by self-reports (such as e.g., the Dyadic Coping Inventory; DCI, Bodenmann, 2008), diary studies or behavioral coding (e.g., Kuhn et al, 2018; Leuchtmann et al, 2018; Lau et al).…”

Section: Theoretical Background and Key Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: Dyadic Coping

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Theoretical Background and Key Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: Dyadic Coping

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Data from this multi-wave research project have been published elsewhere Denzinger, Backes, & Brandst€ atter, 2018;Denzinger, Backes, Job, & Brandst€ atter, 2016;Kuhn, Bradbury, Nussbeck, & Bodenmann, in press;Kuster et al, 2015;Kuster et al, 2017;Landis et al, 2014;Leuchtmann et al, 2018;Neysari et al, 2016). Data from this multi-wave research project have been published elsewhere Denzinger, Backes, & Brandst€ atter, 2018;Denzinger, Backes, Job, & Brandst€ atter, 2016;Kuhn, Bradbury, Nussbeck, & Bodenmann, in press;Kuster et al, 2015;Kuster et al, 2017;Landis et al, 2014;Leuchtmann et al, 2018;Neysari et al, 2016).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study was conducted as part of a large-scale research project on the impact of stress on couples' relationship development across the lifespan. Data from this multi-wave research project have been published elsewhere Denzinger, Backes, & Brandst€ atter, 2018;Denzinger, Backes, Job, & Brandst€ atter, 2016;Kuhn, Bradbury, Nussbeck, & Bodenmann, in press;Kuster et al, 2015;Kuster et al, 2017;Landis et al, 2014;Leuchtmann et al, 2018;Neysari et al, 2016). 1…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approach and avoidance relationship goals and couples’ nonverbal communication during conflict

Bernecker

Ghassemi

Brandstätter

2018

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approach relationship goals are pursued in order to achieve desirable outcomes, whereas avoidance relationship goals are pursued to prevent undesirable outcomes in relationships. We investigated how partners’ approach and avoidance relationship goals are related to their nonverbal communication during conflict. A sequential analysis of observational data from 365 couples (28,470 observations) revealed that individuals with more (vs. fewer) approach goals displayed more positive involvement (e.g., head nods, smiles) and less avoidant withdrawal (e.g., shaking head, folded arms). The reverse pattern emerged for avoidance goals. Furthermore, women (but not men) matched their partner's positive involvement to a greater extent the more approach goals and the fewer avoidance goals they pursued. In contrast, approach/avoidance relationship goals were not associated with how much individuals matched their partner's avoidant withdrawal. Results suggest that relationship goals are related to partners’ nonverbal communication and the extent to which women match their partner's positive involvement during conflict.

show abstract

“…Self-efficacy beliefs are measured by self-report and capture an individual's perception of his/her own ability of identifying other people's feelings (Keefer, 2014). Self-efficacy beliefs about emotional competencies have shown to be distinct from the actual abilities (Brackett, Rivers, Shiffman, Lerner, & Salovey, 2006;Keefer, 2014); however, they are at least equally important as actual abilities, since self-efficacy beliefs are predictors of relevant individual and relationship outcomes (Keefer, 2014;Leuchtmann et al, 2018;Lischetzke et al, 2012;Zeidner, Kloda, & Matthews, 2013).…”

Section: Predictors Of Temporal Dynamics Of Couple Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal dynamics of couples’ communication behaviors in conflict discussions: A longitudinal analysis

Leuchtmann

Milek

Bernecker

et al. 2018

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Negative and positive conflict communication predicts long-term relationship satisfaction. However, some studies show harmful effects and others show beneficial effects of negative conflict communication on long-term relationship satisfaction. One reason for the heterogeneous results might be that most studies focused on aggregated behaviors across a conflict interaction but neglected the temporal dynamics within such an interaction. This study examined whether individual initial levels and temporal trajectories of negative and positive communications predict long-term relationship satisfaction, and whether self-efficacy beliefs about clarity of other's feelings (CoF) alter initial levels and temporal trajectories of negative and positive communications. Negative and positive communications were measured based on sequentially coded conflict discussions of 365 couples; self-efficacy beliefs about CoF and relationship satisfaction were measured by self-report questionnaires at baseline and at four annual follow-up assessments. Results revealed that women's initial positive communication predicted higher intercepts of both partners' relationship satisfaction, and stronger decreases in women's negative communication predicted a higher intercept of relationship satisfaction in women. Additionally, less steep decreases in women's trajectories of negative communication predicted greater maintenance in women's relationship satisfaction over time. Additionally, men's self-efficacy beliefs about CoF predicted decreases in men's negative communication, increases in women's negative communication, and higher initial levels of women's positive communication. The current study highlights the relevance of dynamic aspects of partners' communication behaviors. AbstractNegative and positive conflict communication predicts long-term relationship satisfaction. However, some studies show harmful effects and others show beneficial effects of negative conflict communication on long-term relationship satisfaction. One reason for the heterogeneous results might be that most studies focused on aggregated behaviors across a conflict interaction but neglected the temporal dynamics within such an interaction. This study examined whether individual initial levels and temporal trajectories of negative and positive communication predict long-term relationship satisfaction, and whether self-efficacy beliefs about clarity of other's feelings alter initial levels and temporal trajectories of negative and positive communication. Negative and positive communication were measured based on sequentially coded conflict discussions of 365 couples; self-efficacy beliefs about clarity of other's feelings and relationship satisfaction were measured by self-report questionnaires at baseline and at four annual follow-up assessments. Results revealed that women's initial positive communication predicted higher intercepts of both partners' relationship satisfaction and stronger decreases in women's negative communication predicted a higher intercept of relation...

show abstract

Role of clarity of other's feelings for dyadic coping

Cited by 11 publications

References 40 publications

Editorial: Dyadic Coping

Editorial: Dyadic Coping

Approach and avoidance relationship goals and couples’ nonverbal communication during conflict

Temporal dynamics of couples’ communication behaviors in conflict discussions: A longitudinal analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About