The Associations of Dyadic Coping and Relationship Satisfaction Vary between and within Nations: A 35-Nation Study

Abstract

Objective: Theories about how couples help each other to cope with stress, such as the systemic transactional model of dyadic coping, suggest that the cultural context in which couples live influences how their coping behavior affects their relationship satisfaction. In contrast to the theoretical assumptions, a recent meta-analysis provides evidence that neither culture, nor gender, influences the association between dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction, at least based on their samples of couples living in North America and West Europe. Thus, it is an open questions whether the theoretical assumptions of cultural influences are false or whether cultural influences on couple behavior just occur in cultures outside of the Western world.Method: In order to examine the cultural influence, using a sample of married individuals (N = 7973) from 35 nations, we used multilevel modeling to test whether the positive association between dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction varies across nations and whether gender might moderate the association.Results: Results reveal that the association between dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction varies between nations. In addition, results show that in some nations the association is higher for men and in other nations it is higher for women.Conclusions: Cultural and gender differences across the globe influence how couples' coping behavior affects relationship outcomes. This crucial finding indicates that couple relationship education programs and interventions need to be culturally adapted, as skill trainings such as dyadic coping lead to differential effects on relationship satisfaction based on the culture in which couples live.

Dyadic coping in personal projects of romantic partners: assessment and associations with relationship satisfaction

“…Relationship satisfaction is a significant component of life satisfaction in general, is associated with greater relationship stability, and predicts better health outcomes (Balsam et al 2017;Proulx et al 2007;Robles et al 2014). In the last decade, several studies have assessed the interrelation between dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction, and recent findings (e.g., Breitenstein et al 2018;Sim et al 2017) have agreed with the earlier results of meta-analyses and multi-center studies (Falconier et al 2015;Hilpert et al 2016). Results robustly confirm the hypothesis that better dyadic coping is associated with higher relationship satisfaction.…”

“…Second, our results also show that greater use of positive (and less use of negative) dyadic coping in personal projects is related to better relationship satisfaction in both partners. These results are in line with an increasing body of research about general dyadic coping strategies (c.f., Falconier et al 2015;Hilpert et al 2016) and thus validate the procedure. Similarly to our findings, supportive, positive dyadic coping has routinely been found to predict higher relationship satisfaction (e.g., Wunderer and Schneewind 2008), while the use of negative dyadic coping strategies is more strongly associated with relationship dissatisfaction (e.g., Regan et al 2014).…”

“…Results robustly confirm the hypothesis that better dyadic coping is associated with higher relationship satisfaction. The pooled correlation coefficient between the former variables has been estimated to be as high as .50 (Falconier et al 2015), and the average slope of prediction in regression analysis .35 (c.f., Hilpert et al 2016). However, the latter analysis also indicated that cultural variations in the strength of relationship between these variables do exist; for example, the fact that Bthe slopes from Eastern Europe were significantly higher than the average slope^ (Hilpert et al 2016).…”

Self‐concept clarity and relationship satisfaction at the dyadic level

“…Persons with a clear sense of self, being more able to articulate self‐relevant information to others (Lewandowski et al, ), will enable the partner to recognize their stress signals, thus helping the partner enact positive, and refrain from enacting negative, dyadic coping strategies. Furthermore, in line with the literature linking dyadic coping with relationship functioning (Bodenmann & Cina, ; Bodenmann, Pihet, & Kayser, ; Donato & Parise, ; Donato et al, ; Hilpert et al, ), we expect that positive dyadic coping will benefit relationship satisfaction, whereas negative dyadic coping will hinder it. Also, consistent with the literature (Bodenmann et al, ; Donato et al, ; Papp & Witt, ), we expect cross‐partner associations, that is, links between own dyadic coping and partner's relationship satisfaction.…”

Religious Affiliation and Marital Satisfaction: Commonalities Among Christians, Muslims, and Atheists

“…In conclusion, despite a large body of research on marital satisfaction (Bradbury et al, 2000;Twenge et al, 2003;Hilpert et al, 2016), most studies have rarely controlled for participants' religion. Even when they have done so, they have not explored the differences between people of various religious affiliations (Sullivan, 2001;Williams and Lawler, 2003;Olson et al, 2016).…”