English Validation of the Chronic and Acute Stress Inventory for Use with Individuals in a Romantic Relationship

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals across the U.S. reported experiencing high levels of stress that negatively impacted their overall mental health and well-being;levels that have undoubtedly increased since this time. Despite the interest in understanding how stress can impact individual and relational wellbeing, there are no validated measures that examine chronic and acute stressors experienced by individuals in a romantic relationship. Using self-report data from 327 individuals in the U.S., the present study evaluated and validated the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Chronic and Acute Stress Index (CASI) for use with individuals in a romantic relationship. Results indicated that the English version of the CASI demonstrated good reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity. Implications for relationship researchers and mental health practitioners working with individuals are presented.

YES, WE COPE: Dyadic Coping as a Mediator Between Perceived Relationship Quality and Emotional Representation of COVID-19.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about social changes that have impacted the functioning and dynamics of couples in a romantic relationship, arising from the overwhelming amount of added stress they have endured. Specifically, the divorce rate in Portugal has increased after lockdown, which underscores the adverse consequences of COVID-19 on couples. A lower quality of the couple's relationship may worsen the emotional representation of COVID-19; however, the literature suggests that perceived partner dyadic coping responses have a great influence on adverse events. The aim of the present study was to assess the mediating role of partner coping in the association between relationship quality and emotional representation of COVID-19. We also sought to observe whether the length of the relationship moderates this association. Methods: Participants (N = 528) were adults living in Portugal (84.7% female) currently in a romantic relationship with their current partner for at least 1 year. Online data collection. Results: We found that relationship quality predicted COVID-19 emotional representation, but this association was fully mediated by total dyadic coping. This association was especially significant in couples with a shorter length of time in the relationship. Conclusions: We point out the importance of dyadic coping as a protective factor against emotional distress to cope with the ongoing stressors associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. These data suggest the need for relationship education programs that promote positive coping between partners. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10608-023-10379-4.

Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 39(1) of Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (see record 2022-18336-005). Three new authors (Adnan Adil, Emmanuel Asampong, and Rahmattullah Khan Abdul Wahab Khan) were not initially listed in the Epub ahead of print. Table 1 also contained some errors. The corrections are given in the erratum.] Following the global outbreak of COVID-19 in March 2020, individuals report psychological distress associated with the "new normal"-social distancing, financial hardships, and increased responsibilities while working from home. Given the interpersonal nature of stress and coping responses between romantic partners, based on the systemic transactional model this study posits that perceived partner dyadic coping may be an important moderator between experiences of COVID-19 psychological distress and relationship quality. To examine these associations, self-report data from 14,020 people across 27 countries were collected during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-July, 2020). It was hypothesized that higher symptoms of psychological distress would be reported post-COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 restrictions (Hypothesis 1), reports of post-COVID-19 psychological distress would be negatively associated with relationship quality (Hypothesis 2), and perceived partner DC would moderate these associations (Hypothesis 3). While hypotheses were generally supported, results also showed interesting between-country variability. Limitations and future directions are presented. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Feeling the absence of touch: Distancing, distress, regulation, and relationships in the context of COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing guidelines were implemented to reduce viral spread, altering typical social interactions and reducing the amount of physical contact and affectionate touch many individuals experienced. The pandemic also caused psychological distress, perhaps in part related to reductions in affectionate touch with close others. We theorized that this would be particularly problematic for individuals reliant on affectionate touch to help regulate their emotions. Using online survey data collected nationwide from married or romantically partnered adults (N = 585), we examined how physical distancing (moderated by cohabiting with spouse/partner) and affectionate touch with close others (moderated by individual differences in typical use and efficacy of touch for affect regulation [TAR]) related to individual psychological distress and romantic relationship quality. As hypothesized, more physical distancing was associated with less affectionate touch among non-cohabiters, but surprisingly with more touch among cohabiters. Also as hypothesized, participants higher in TAR and experiencing less affectionate touch reported more psychological distress than those similarly high in TAR and experiencing more affectionate touch, or than those lower in TAR. Unexpectedly, more physical distancing was associated directly with lower psychological distress and better relationship quality. Better relationship quality was linked directly to more affectionate touch and greater endorsement of TAR. Thus, for those cohabiting in satisfying romantic relationships, physical distancing may facilitate relationship-positive behaviors. Further, individual differences in TAR may influence the potency of touch effects on mood and stress. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Factors Associated With Highest Symptoms of Anxiety During COVID-19: Cross-Cultural Study of 23 Countries.

The COVID-19 restrictions have impacted people's lifestyles in all spheres (social, psychological, political, economic, and others). This study explored which factors affected the level of anxiety during the time of the first wave of COVID-19 and subsequent quarantine in a substantial proportion of 23 countries, included in this study. The data was collected from May to August 2020 (5 June 2020). The sample included 15,375 participants from 23 countries: (seven from Europe: Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Russia; 11 from West, South and Southeast Asia: Armenia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Turkey; two African: Nigeria and Tanzania; and three from North, South, and Central America: Brazil, Canada, United States). Level of anxiety was measured by means of the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) and the 20-item first part of The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)-State Anxiety Inventory (SAI). Respondents were also asked about their personal experiences with COVID-19, attitudes toward measures introduced by governments, changes in attitudes toward migrants during a pandemic, family income, isolation conditions, etc. The factor analysis revealed that four factors explained 45.08% of variance in increase of anxiety, and these components were interpreted as follows: (1) personal awareness of the threat of COVID-19, (2) personal reaction toward officially undertaken measures and attitudes to foreigners, (3) personal trust in official sources, (4) personal experience with COVID-19. Three out of four factors demonstrated strong associations with both scales of anxiety: high level of anxiety was significantly correlated with high level of personal awareness of the threat of COVID-19, low level of personal reaction toward officially undertaken measures and attitudes to foreigners, and high level of presence of personal experience with COVID-19. Our study revealed significant main effects of sex, country, and all four factors on the level of anxiety. It was demonstrated that countries with higher levels of anxiety assessed the real danger of a pandemic as higher, and had more personal experience with COVID-19. Respondents who trusted the government demonstrated lower levels of anxiety. Finally, foreigners were perceived as the cause of epidemic spread.

English validation of the chronic and acute stress inventory for use with individuals in a romantic relationship

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals across the U.S. reported experiencing high levels of stress that negatively impacted their overall mental health and well-being;levels that have undoubtedly increased since this time. Despite the interest in understanding how stress can impact individual and relational wellbeing, there are no validated measures that examine chronic and acute stressors experienced by individuals in a romantic relationship. Using self-report data from 327 individuals in the U.S., the present study evaluated and validated the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Chronic and Acute Stress Index (CASI) for use with individuals in a romantic relationship. Results indicated that the English version of the CASI demonstrated good reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity. Implications for relationship researchers and mental health practitioners working with individuals are presented. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Intimate Relationships in Times of COVID-19: A Descriptive Study of Belgian Partners and their Perceived Well-Being.

How did couples in Belgium cope during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic? In this study, grounded in relationship science, we investigated in a descriptive manner several factors that could affect how couples perceived individual and relational wellbeing during this time. Specifically, we examined the associations between gender, sexual orientation, parental status, and relationship duration on participants' self-reported individual and relational well-being after the first lockdown (more generally and more specific in response to COVID-19). Additionally, we investigated if relational well-being predicted perceived change in individual well-being from pre- to post-COVID-19 regulations. To test these hypotheses, self-report data was collected during the Summer of 2020 in both the Dutch and French speaking part of Belgium. Data from 679 participants suggested that individual and relational well-being only differed based on parental status (and not by gender nor sexual orientation). Importantly, parents reported lower relational well-being than participants without children, while participants without children reported higher perceived increases in depression. People that had been in a relationship for longer also reported lower relational well-being, but this relationship was explained by other confounding factors. Relational well-being buffered increases in individual distress that people perceived to have occurred pre-COVID-19 regulations to after COVID-19 regulations went into effect. These findings might inform practice and policy for individuals in a romantic relationship during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Feeling the Absence of Touch: Distancing, Distress, Regulation, and Relationships in the Context of COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing guidelines were implemented to reduce viral spread, altering typical social interactions and reducing the amount of physical contact and affectionate touch many individuals experienced. The pandemic also caused psychological distress, perhaps in part related to reductions in affectionate touch with close others. We theorized that this would be particularly problematic for individuals reliant on affectionate touch to help regulate their emotions. Using online survey data collected nationwide from married or romantically partnered adults (N = 585), we examined how physical distancing (moderated by cohabiting with spouse/partner) and affectionate touch with close others (moderated by individual differences in typical use and efficacy of touch for affect regulation [TAR]) related to individual psychological distress and romantic relationship quality. As hypothesized, more physical distancing was associated with less affectionate touch among non-cohabiters, but surprisingly with more touch among cohabiters. Also as hypothesized, participants higher in TAR and experiencing less affectionate touch reported more psychological distress than those similarly high in TAR and experiencing more affectionate touch, or than those lower in TAR. Unexpectedly, more physical distancing was associated directly with lower psychological distress and better relationship quality. Better relationship quality was linked directly to more affectionate touch and greater endorsement of TAR. Thus, for those cohabiting in satisfying romantic relationships, physical distancing may facilitate relationship-positive behaviors. Further, individual differences in TAR may influence the potency of touch effects on mood and stress.

Daily dyadic coping during COVID-19 among Israeli couples.

Declared a global pandemic in March 2020, COVID-19 is unequivocally changing individuals' daily lives. Research suggests that for many people, the current pandemic is stressogenic, propelling myriads of disturbing affective experiences resulting in greater symptoms of depression and anxiety. Little is known, however, about how this ecologically grounded stress is experienced and managed within people's romantic relationships. Guided by the systemic transactional model of dyadic coping, the current study tested 4 preregistered hypotheses examining the effects of dyadic coping processes on partners' daily mood and relational outcomes near to the outbreak of COVID-19 (During May 2020). Using daily diary data collected from 72 Israeli couples over 21 days, the results showed COVID-related stress to be associated with lower daily positive, and higher daily negative, mood. Stress communication (i.e., disclosing stress to one's partner) was not associated with mood or relational outcomes; however, perceived positive and negative forms of dyadic coping (perceived partner's constructive and destructive behaviors in response to one's stress) were associated with poorer daily relational outcomes. Negative dyadic coping also exacerbated the effect of stress on one's negative mood. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the effects of daily dyadic coping and COVID-related stress on people's affective and relational outcomes. The findings may shed light on the ways in which partners can help each other to adaptively cope with global health crises. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Connected while apart: Associations between social distancing, computer-mediated communication frequency, and positive affect during the early phases of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally altered life for individuals worldwide. Specifically, at the time of data collection (late April 2020), most forms of face-to-face interactions were limited and, in some cases, prohibited, as close contact with others increases the rate of transmitting the virus. As social beings, engaging in social distancing may have negative consequences on well-being. However, many individuals maintained their social connections by means of computer-mediated communication (CMC), such as hosting FaceTime happy hours or family reunions. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of 985 adults from the United States, this study investigated the association between social distancing adherence and positive affect and the extent to which this association might be mediated by CMC frequency. Results did not indicate a direct effect of social distancing adherence on positive affect. However, an indirect effect between these two variables occurred when mediated by CMC frequency. Specifically, greater social distancing adherence predicted greater frequency of CMC, which predicted greater positive affect. These findings held controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, relationship status, and income. Results suggest that despite social distancing, CMC may be a beneficial way to engage with others during and, perhaps, beyond COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Social & Personal Relationships is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries

Following the global outbreak of COVID-19 in March 2020, individuals report psychological distress associated with the ?new normal??social distancing, financial hardships, and increased responsibilities while working from home. Given the interpersonal nature of stress and coping responses between romantic partners, based on the systemic transactional model this study posits that perceived partner dyadic coping may be an important moderator between experiences of COVID-19 psychological distress and relationship quality. To examine these associations, self-report data from 14,020 people across 27 countries were collected during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic (March?July, 2020). It was hypothesized that higher symptoms of psychological distress would be reported post-COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 restrictions (Hypothesis 1), reports of post-COVID-19 psychological distress would be negatively associated with relationship quality (Hypothesis 2), and perceived partner DC would moderate these associations (Hypothesis 3). While hypotheses were generally supported, results also showed interesting between-country variability. Limitations and future directions are presented.

Cross-Cultural Perspectives on the Role of Empathy during COVID-19’s First Wave

The COVID-19 pandemic has spread throughout the world, and concerns about psychological, social, and economic consequences are growing rapidly. Individuals’ empathy-based reactions towards others may be an important resilience factor in the face of COVID-19. Self-report data from 15,375 participants across 23 countries were collected from May to August 2020 during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, this study examined different facets of empathy—Perspective-Taking, Empathic Concern, and Personal Distress, and their association with cross-cultural ratings on Individualism, Power Distance, The Human Development Index, Social Support Ranking, and the Infectious Disease Vulnerability Index, as well as the currently confirmed number of cases of COVID-19 at the time of data collection. The highest ratings on Perspective-Taking were obtained for USA, Brazil, Italy, Croatia, and Armenia (from maximum to minimum);on Empathetic Concern, for the USA, Brazil, Hungary, Italy, and Indonesia;and on Personal Distress, from Brazil, Turkey, Italy, Armenia, Indonesia. Results also present associations between demographic factors and empathy across countries. Limitations and future directions are presented.

Predictors of Anxiety in the COVID-19 Pandemic from a Global Perspective: Data from 23 Countries

Prior and ongoing COVID-19 pandemic restrictions have resulted in substantial changes to everyday life. The pandemic and measures of its control affect mental health negatively. Self-reported data from 15,375 participants from 23 countries were collected from May to August 2020 during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Two questionnaires measuring anxiety level were used in this study—the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), and the State Anxiety Inventory (SAI). The associations between a set of social indicators on anxiety during COVID-19 (e.g., sex, age, country, live alone) were tested as well. Self-reported anxiety during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic varied across countries, with the maximum levels reported for Brazil, Canada, Italy, Iraq and the USA. Sex differences of anxiety levels during COVID-19 were also examined, and results showed women reported higher levels of anxiety compared to men. Overall, our results demonstrated that the self-reported symptoms of anxiety were higher compared to those reported in general before pandemic. We conclude that such cultural dimensions as individualism/collectivism, power distance and looseness/tightness may function as protective adaptive mechanisms against the development of anxiety disorders in a pandemic situation.

Living Through COVID-19: Social Distancing, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Well-Being in Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adults.

COVID-19 has had far-reaching effects on people's lives, with evidence of a disproportionate impact on marginalized groups. Given existing health disparities and research on minority stress, COVID-19 may have uniquely impacted psychological well-being among sexual minorities. In an online survey of adults in the U.S. (N = 1,007) conducted in April 2020, we examined differences between sexual minority and heterosexual participants in psychological well-being, social distancing, computer-mediated communication, and COVID-19-related worry and experiences. Sexual minorities reported lower thriving and greater psychological distress, social distancing, computer-mediated communication, and COVID-19 worry and experiences than heterosexual participants. Social distancing and distress were positively correlated among sexual minorities and more frequent computer-mediated communication predicted greater thriving across groups. Path analyses showed sexual minorities' poorer psychological well-being was mediated by their greater COVID-19 worry and social distancing, in particular. These findings shed light on the distinct impact of COVID-19 on sexual minorities.