In Our Lives and Under Our Skin: An Investigation of Specific Psychobiological Mediators Linking Family Relationships and Health Using the Biobehavioral Family Model

Abstract

The objective of this study was to use the Biobehavioral Family Model (BBFM) to delineate which psychophysiological variables link romantic and family relationship satisfaction variables to health outcomes. Data from individuals who reported being partnered from the second wave of the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS II), Project 4 (n = 812) were used to test a structural equation model which explored which psychophysiological variables potentially mediated associations between positive and negative family emotional climate variables and disease activity. This model found that current and past family variables had larger associations with the psychophysiological variables than romantic partner variables; depressive symptoms, anxiety, and inflammation partially mediated associations between family relationships and health; and, contrary to the hypotheses, romantic partner and family support were linked to worse health outcomes. However, the findings should be viewed with regard to the cross-sectional design of the study. Overall, the findings support the use of the BBFM as a model that can guide clinical interventions.

Stressful Life Events and Physical and Psychological Health: Mediating Effects of Differentiation of Self in a Spanish Sample

“…Empirical research has continued to employ and test theoretical models that focus on explaining the family‐health connection, with one such model being the biobehavioral family model (BBFM; Wood, ). BBFM is a biopsychosocial model that explores the bidirectional influences of family social relationships, emotional functioning, and biological processes on health, and in recent years, findings have provided valuable information to inform relational clinical interventions (e.g., Priest, Roberson, & Woods, ). Complementary to the biobehavioral family model, BFST (Bowen, ) is another useful framework to guide family researchers toward a better understanding of the interplay between stress, emotion regulation, family, and health (Skowron, Van Epps, Cipriano‐Essel, & Woehrle, ).…”

Family emotional climate and health: Testing conveyance of effects via psychobiological mediators

“…This systemic model includes three constructs: family emotional climate (the emotional intensity and valence of family relationships), biobehavioral reactivity (individual family members' psychophysiological responses to stress), and disease activity (frequency and intensity of illness). The BBFM is the most explicit and empirically supported biopsychosocial theoretical model (Woods, 2019), and it has been substantiated with lab‐based family interaction studies (Wood et al, 2008) and multiple adult populations (Priest et al, 2015; Priest et al, 2019; Woods & Denton, 2014).…”

“…Family members provide greater emotional support than friends and nonrelatives (Shor & Roelfs, 2015; Shor, Roelfs, & Yogev, 2013). Family members are also greater sources of negative affect and relational strain (Priest, Roberson, & Woods, 2019; Yang, Schorpp, & Harris, 2014). The quality of family relationships is repeatedly demonstrated as the crux of how these persons affect our health.…”

“…Recently, research has found support for negative affect reactivity (i.e., negative affect increase in response to stressor exposure), specifically as a mediator linking change in perceived partner responsiveness over 10 years to later mortality (Stanton, Selcuk, Farrell, Slatcher, & Ong, 2019). Furthermore, allostatic load (i.e., chronic physiological reactivity across multiple systems in response to stress; McEwen, 1998) has been linked to family strain (Priest et al, 2015), although evidence is still needed for this composite measure of biological dysregulation as a mediator linking families and health within a comprehensive, longitudinal model (Priest et al, 2019; Wiley, Bei, Bower, & Stanton, 2017). Finally, although theoretical models posit both psychological and biological pathways, few studies have simultaneously tested these mechanisms of effect.…”

“…Prior research testing the BBFM's pathways for adults has conceptualized family emotional climate (FEC) as the quality of nonintimate family relationships, intimate partner relationship quality, social support received from friends and relatives, and adverse childhood experiences including abuse and neglect (Priest et al, 2019; Roberson, Shorter, Woods, & Priest, 2018; Signs & Woods, 2020; Woods & Denton, 2014; Woods, Priest, & Roush, 2014). As the construct specifies that the emotional climate of a family is marked by its positivity and negativity, as well as the intensity of each (Wood, 1993), it aligns closely with the model of social relationships specified by Uchino et al (2001), thus accounting for positive (supportive) and negative (aversive) relationships, as well as ambivalent and indifferent ones.…”