(PS10-A2) The Role of Emotion Regulation and Partners’ Stress Communication in Dyadic Coping

Partners’ ability to support one another or cope as a unit in the face of stress—commonly known as dyadic coping—can promote relationship well-being. Thus, it is important to understand which factors influence this process. However, the majority of couples literature has focused on the outcomes associated with dyadic coping rather than predictors of coping. Notably, two factors might influence the use of dyadic coping: stress communication and emotion regulation. Preceding dyadic coping, a stressed individual may convey their emotional experience with requests for assistance; a partner then responds based on this communication of need. For this request to be conveyed effectively, the individual also needs to manage negative emotions effectively. In essence, a partner’s effective emotion regulation may play a role in their own stress communication, which in turn, may contribute to the other person’s dyadic coping behavior.

Thus, the current study examined how stress communication mediates the relationship between partners’ (a) emotion regulation and (b) positive and/or negative dyadic coping in a sample of different-gender couples. Data came from the baseline assessment of couples who participated in a relationship and financial education program (N=239). This sample was selected due to the range of stressors couples may have experienced at the time of the program (e.g., financial stress). Emotion regulation was assessed using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Stress communication and dyadic coping were assessed using the Dyadic Coping Inventory. Positive dyadic coping included supportive dyadic coping (i.e., emotion- and problem-focused support from the other person) and common dyadic coping (i.e., working collaboratively to cope together). Negative dyadic coping included hostile and/or insincere responses to the stressed partner. An actor-partner interdependence mediation model tested the direct and indirect effects among the variables of interest for men and women.

Results confirmed the relationship between stress communication and dyadic coping: The more men and women engaged in stress communication, the more their partner offered positive dyadic coping. Additionally, one aspect of women’s emotion regulation emerged as a predictor of men’s stress communication and both partners’ dyadic coping. Specifically, the more women endorsed an ability to persist in goal-oriented tasks when distressed, the less men engaged in stress communication; in turn, both partners reported less positive dyadic coping. The ability to complete tasks in the face of negative emotion is often considered an effective emotion regulation strategy. However, in different-gender relationships, it may have negative consequences. If men perceive that their female partners successfully complete tasks when distressed, men might feel it is less necessary to convey a great deal of distress. Unfortunately, this decreased stress communication may then reduce opportunities for both partners to be responsive to one another’s needs. This finding suggests the importance of expressing concerns even when partnered with someone who handles negative emotions effectively; otherwise, effective dyadic coping might be compromised.