UCLA

Background: The extensive literature on stress and coping primarily focuses on intra-individual processes. The vital role of close relationships in influencing psychosocial, physiological, and behavioral adaptation to stressors warrants greater attention. The construct of communal coping involves two processes: an appraisal of the stressor as shared (i.e., “our problem” as opposed to “my/your problem”) and cooperative efforts to manage the stressor (Lyons, Mickelson, Sullivan, & Coyne, 1998). Research suggests that communal coping is associated with greater relationship satisfaction, more positive relationship processes, and lower engagement in unhealthy behaviors. However, the current body of literature is entirely correlational and has yet to eliminate third variable or reverse causality explanations. Intended to provide a more definitive test of the effects of communal coping, the present controlled experiment was designed to test the effects of induced communal appraisal and coping intentions on relevant psychosocial, physiological, and behavioral outcomes.

Method: Adults currently in an intimate relationship (N = 133) were randomized to write about a conflict in their relationship from a communal perspective as the couple’s problem, a non-communal perspective as the participant’s problem, or a non-communal perspective as the partner’s problem over two in-person laboratory sessions. Participants completed psychosocial, relational, and behavioral measures within each writing session and one week prior to and following the writing sessions. The present study examined differences between experimental conditions in primary outcomes (negative affect, relationship satisfaction, physical symptoms, alcohol use, heart rate) and secondary outcomes (perceived stress, sleep, interpersonal approach behaviors) over time, as well as moderators (dispositional communion, attitudes toward emotional expression).

Results: Experimental condition produced a statistically significant effect on change in state partner-directed negative affect from Session 1 pre-induction to Session 2 post-induction, with greater decreases in state partner-directed negative affect for participants in the Communal Coping condition than participants in the Non-Communal Partner condition. Participants in the Communal Coping condition had increases in physical symptoms, whereas participants in the Non-Communal Partner condition had decreases in self-reported physical symptoms. Experimental condition had no significant effect on relationship satisfaction, heart rate reactivity or recovery, interpersonal approach behaviors, and sleep. Dispositional communion significantly moderated the effect of experimental condition on within-session state individual negative affect and perceived stress, as well as perceived stress at one-week follow-up, such that participants with greater dispositional communion assigned to the Communal Coping condition experienced greater improvement on those variables than did participants in the Non-Communal conditions. Attitudes toward emotional expression significantly moderated the relationship between experimental condition and change in alcohol use from baseline to follow-up, participants in the Non-Communal Partner condition with more positive attitudes toward emotional expression had greater increases in alcohol use from baseline to follow-up than participants in the Communal Coping condition.

Conclusions: Taken collectively, the findings suggest that experimentally-induced communal appraisal and coping intentions may benefit individuals during relationship conflicts, particularly by buffering against negative partner-directed affect, individual negative affect, and perceived stress. However, induced communal coping produced an increase in physical symptoms, and further research is needed to examine the potential costs of coping communally.