Depressive Symptoms, External Stress, and Marital Adjustment: The Buffering Effect of Partner’s Responsive Behavior

Abstract

Guided by theory emphasizing that partner responsiveness underlies well-functioning romantic relationships, we examined whether partners’ responsive behavior buffered the degree to which a personal vulnerability (depressive symptoms) and external stress predicted declines in relationship adjustment. Using an existing data set, we tested whether individuals’ depressive symptoms and stress interacted with observer-coded partner responsive behavior during marital conflict discussions to predict change in marital adjustment at the next time point ( N = 195 couples Time 1 [T1]–Time 2 [T2], 158 couples T2–Time 3 [T3]). Individuals experiencing greater (a) depressive symptoms or (b) stress showed sharper declines in marital adjustment. However, as predicted, the negative effects of both depressive symptoms and stress were attenuated when partners displayed high behavioral responsiveness. These findings underscore the importance of adopting a dyadic perspective to understand how partners’ responsive behavior can overcome the harmful effects of personal and situational vulnerabilities on relationship outcomes.

Implications of social isolation, separation, and loss during the COVID-19 pandemic for couples' relationships

“…Individuals with depression, for example, focus on negative aspects of their situation [ 36 , 37 ], which can exacerbate the effects of pandemic-related stressors (path C). Similarly, the overly negative perceptions, hostility, and defensiveness of individuals experiencing depression can undermine adaptive interactions with their partner [ 38 , 39 , ∗40 ], which, in turn, may amplify the effects of pandemic-related stress (path B). Future work comparing couples before and throughout the pandemic is needed to reveal how depression and other vulnerabilities will impact relationships across this time of crisis.…”

“…These practices involve effective communication, including refraining from hostility, criticism, and aggression even when negativity occurs, directly working to problem-solve as a team, and being motivated to improve the situation and open to compromise [ 46 , 47 , 48 ]. Safeguarding relationships also involves providing responsive support, including being understanding and attending to partners' concerns [ 49 ], which can buffer the adverse effects of stress, or personal vulnerabilities, on relationship well-being [ 40 ]. Traversing the pandemic using effective communication and responsive support may mean that, despite short-term increases in distress, many couples recover quickly and emerge with a stronger defense against future challenges.…”

Depressive Symptoms during Pregnancy: Prevalence and Correlates with Affective Temperaments and Psychosocial Factors

“…Statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in gestational age, having an occupation, having a partner, past (lifetime) medical conditions, lifetime psychiatric disorders, family psychiatric history, stressful life events, and TEMPS-A mean scores. While having a job and a partner and being devoid of medical or psychiatric conditions and past stressful situations may intuitively boost resilience and increase the coping abilities of a person [ 28 , 29 , 30 ], thus reducing the severity of depressive symptoms [ 31 ], the different distribution of PHQ-9 ≤4 and PHQ-9 >4 in the three trimesters is more difficult to explain. It might be that women scoring >4 on the PHQ-9 carried their depressive symptoms over the period preceding pregnancy, or that they were more susceptible than women scoring ≤4 and developed depressive symptoms sooner.…”

Putting responsiveness in context: How a partner's responsiveness baseline shapes perceived responsiveness

“…Outside of particular disclosure contexts, people who perceive their partners as responsive enjoy a host of benefits. These include enhanced autonomy, self‐efficacy, and independent goal pursuit (Feeney, 2007), enhanced well‐being (Collins & Feeney, 2000; Pietromonaco et al, 2021), increased intimacy and closeness (Reis, 2017; Reis et al, 2004; Reis & Shaver, 1988), greater relationship satisfaction and commitment (Gable & Reis, 2010; Reis et al, 2004), and increased relationship stability (Gable et al, 2006; Gable & Reis, 2010). Given the evidence linking perceived partner responsiveness to positive personal and relational outcomes, responsiveness has been heralded as a “bedrock of intimacy” (Gordon & Chen, 2016, p. 240) in relationship science.…”