Interaction Quality and Stress in Marriages

Researchers in Germany recently examined how the quality of interactions in couples is related to the stress the couples experience in their marriages. One aspect of stress that they focused on was the level of cortisol, a stress hormone, after marital interactions. Higher levels of cortisol indicate higher levels of stress. Other researchers have found that people tend to show more physiological signs of stress after marital conflicts, but the results associated with cortisol levels have been inconsistent. An explanation that was offered in the present investigation is that whether cortisol levels rise after a marital conflict depends on the quality of interactions between the couples.

Eighty couples were videotaped discussing a marital conflict and subsequently grouped according to their interaction style. In the negative interaction group, both partners exhibited negative behaviors around 40% of the time. In the positive interaction group, both partners exhibited negative behaviors around 20% of the time. In the asymmetric interaction group, one partner was positive and one was negative. Examples of negative verbal behaviors include criticizing, negative solutions, justification, and disagreement. Examples of positive verbal behaviors include self-disclosure, positive solutions, acceptance of others, and agreement. During the sessions, saliva samples were taken to determine cortisol levels. The participants also filled out a variety of questionnaires.

Overall, men had higher cortisol levels in anticipation of the marital conflict and women had higher cortisol levels in response to the conflict. The couples in the positive interaction group but not those in the negative interaction group showed the expected increase in cortisol levels in response to the marital conflict. Women in the asymmetric group also showed the expected increase.

The researchers offered a reason for why the couples in the negative interaction group did not show the expected increase in cortisol levels in response to the marital conflict. The researcher argued that because those couples have had many unresolved conflicts from fruitless discussions in the past and probably have grown accustom to such conflict, the marital conflict seemed like a chronic source of stress, any given instance of which not necessarily warranting an extra increase in cortisol. 

Consequently, these results support the idea that marital conflicts do result in increased stress, unless the couples are so used to such conflicts that they see them as the norm.

Source: Fehm-Wolfsdorf, G., Groth, T., Kaiser, A., Hahlweg, K. (1999). Cortisol responses to marital conflict depend on marital interaction quality. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 6, 207-227.

Predicting Emotional Distress

For many years, researchers have looked at many aspects of the self and how well they can predict emotional distress. One aspect of the self is ego-strength, for example. Freud used this term to refer to how well people could defend them selves psychologically against certain types of threats. The psychological literature in this area has gotten very muddled and confusing. It is unclear which aspect of the self is which and which if any are important by themselves or together. Researchers at the University of Rochester and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill recently conducted a study help solve this problem.

Using questionnaire measures and complex statistical analyses, they were able to determine that two classes of aspects of the self are important when predicting emotional distress. They referred to these two classes as elasticity and permeability. Elasticity refers to people's ability to be resourceful and "bounce back" from setbacks. Permeabilityrefers to the degree to which people hold back (i.e., less permeable) or give in to impulses (i.e., more permeable). Essentially, people who are more elastic tend to be less agitated (e.g., less anxious, less nervous, less worried) and less dejected (e.g., less sad, less disappointed, less dissatisfied). People who are more permeable tend to be less dejected, but this is partially because people who are more permeable are also more elastic. When the influence of elasticity is taken into consideration, being more permeable actually is related to being more dejected.

Source: Gramzow, R. H., Sedikides, C., Panter, A. T., & Insko, C. A. (2000). Aspects of self-regulation and self-structure as predictors of perceived emotional distress. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 188-205.

Trauma and Health

Writing about the perceived benefits of trauma


After experiencing a traumatic event, simply taking the time to write about it can have health benefits, such as less frequent health problems, improved immune system functioning, and better adjustment. Researchers at Southern Methodist University recently explored a related idea. They conducted a study to see whether writing about the perceived benefits of traumatic events, instead of writing about the actual traumatic events, also could have health benefits.

In the study, 118 undergraduate students wrote for 20 minutes each day for 3 days. In particular, they wrote about a traumatic event, the perceived benefits of a traumatic event, both, or neither. They also responded to some questionnaires. Additionally, after getting the necessary permission from the participants, the researchers examined the health center records for each participant.

Just like in other research on this topic, the results demonstrated that writing about trauma could lead to health benefits. The results also demonstrated that writing about the perceived benefits of trauma could lead to health benefits. These findings are important because, compared to writing about trauma, writing about the perceived benefits of traumatic events may provide a less upsetting but effective way to benefit from writing after experiencing a traumatic event.

Source: King, L. A., & Miner, K. N. (2000). Writing about the perceived benefits of traumatic events: Implications for physical health. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 220-230.

Trauma and Health

Writing about the perceived benefits of trauma

After experiencing a traumatic event, simply taking the time to write about it can have health benefits, such as less frequent health problems, improved immune system functioning, and better adjustment. Researchers at Southern Methodist University recently explored a related idea. They conducted a study to see whether writing about the perceived benefits of traumatic events, instead of writing about the actual traumatic events, also could have health benefits.

In the study, 118 undergraduate students wrote for 20 minutes each day for 3 days. In particular, they wrote about a traumatic event, the perceived benefits of a traumatic event, both, or neither. They also responded to some questionnaires. Additionally, after getting the necessary permission from the participants, the researchers examined the health center records for each participant.

Just like in other research on this topic, the results demonstrated that writing about trauma could lead to health benefits. The results also demonstrated that writing about the perceived benefits of trauma could lead to health benefits. These findings are important because, compared to writing about trauma, writing about the perceived benefits of traumatic events may provide a less upsetting but effective way to benefit from writing after experiencing a traumatic event.

Source: King, L. A., & Miner, K. N. (2000). Writing about the perceived benefits of traumatic events: Implications for physical health. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 220-230.

Stress in the Workplace

Are some people more affected by it than others are?

Some people are better than others are at being able to tell whether their body is running at a faster or slower pace. For example, some people are better than others are at noticing how fast their heart is beating. These types of differences among people are referred to as individual differences in autonomic feedback. Researchers at Ohio State University and Erasmus University recently investigated whether such differences are important for people who work in stressful work environments.

Surveys were sent to salespeople at 23 Dutch manufacturing, servicing, or wholesaling companies. A total of 194 surveys were returned and used in the study.

The findings confirmed the expectations of the researchers. Individual differences in autonomic feedback did matter for people who worked in stressful workplaces. Those who were more able to notice autonomic feedback experienced more burnout, demonstrated poorer performance on certain types of job performance, and expressed more negative job attitudes than did those who were less able to notice autonomic feedback. Furthermore, the more that the workplace was stressful, the more that individual differences in autonomic feedback mattered.

In other words, for a variety of reasons, people who work in stressful environments seem to be better off if they are not very good at noticing autonomic feedback.

Source: Klein, D. J., & Verbeke, W. (1999). Autonomic feedback in stressful environments: How do individual differences in autonomic feedback relate to burnout, job performance, and job attitudes in salespeople? Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 911-924.

Depression and Lack of Social Support

The role of community involvement

Many studies have identified a link between depression and lack of social support, not having support available from other people, when people are trying to deal with stress. Researchers at Duke University and the University of Albany, State University of New York recently explored what makes up this link.

What was the research about?

The researchers proposed a model to describe the association between depression and lack of social support in times of stress. They found that the model was supported by statistical tests. In particular, they found that social support could be thought of in terms of its structure and function. The structure of social support is made up of people's involvement in community activities, the number of people they tend to come into contact with, and whether or not people have spouses or intimate partners. The function of social support is considered in terms of the degree to which people believe they are receiving support compared to how much support they actually do receive, the degree to which the support they receive helps solve problems compared to how much support serves to make them feel better, and the degree to which support is available for people whenever they need it compared to it only being available during crises.

In general, the model shows that more involvement in community activities leads to more contact with other people and more intimate relationships, which in turn, lead to less depression. The conditions in which this process takes place, however, depend on the three ways in which the model indicates that the function of social support can differ.

Why should it matter to me?

The findings from this study suggest that, if people increase their involvement in community activities such as becoming more involved with volunteer organizations, they may be less vulnerable to depression. Involvement in community activities seems to promote other more person-to-person forms of social support that can reduce the risk of depression in response to stress.

Source: Xiaolanye, N. L., & Ensel, W. M. (1999). Social support and depressed mood: A structural analysis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 344-359.

Coping With Stress

Why are some women more vulnerable to depression?

When dealing with something stressful, people can cope in a variety of different ways. A common distinction between coping styles is approach vs. avoidance. Approach copinginvolves forms of coping in which people actually try to do something about the problem, such as behaviors like seeking guidance and support and thoughts involving logical problem solving. Avoidance coping involves forms of coping in which people do not really do anything about the problem, such as behaviors like yelling and screaming and thoughts involving denial of the problem.

Research has shown that women tend to be more vulnerable to depression and that society tends to socialize women to be more passive. Consequently, because cognitive avoidance coping (i.e., the type of avoidance coping involving thoughts) is the most passive coping style, women may be more vulnerable to depression because they rely more on cognitive avoidance coping. Researchers at the University of Texas and Florida State University recently explored this issue.

What was the research about?

One hundred and seventy-nine undergraduate students completed questionnaires measuring coping styles, stress, depression, and anxiety on two separate occasions that were 3 weeks apart. They found that higher levels of stress predicted more anxiety and depression among women who used more cognitive avoidance coping than among women who used other forms of coping more. This effect was not found for men.

Why should it matter to me?

Women who rely on cognitive avoidance coping may be able to handle stress better and avoid negative consequences like anxiety and depression if they try to use other types of coping styles more. For example, instead of trying to pretend that problems don't exist, such women might be better off if they try to seek guidance and support from others.

Source: Blalock, J. A., & Joiner, T. E., Jr. (2000). Interaction of cognitive avoidance coping and stress in predicting depression/anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 47-65.