Shared appraisals and collaboration within couples play important roles in optimizing health. Less is known about concordance regarding collaboration, factors associated with concordance, and implications for health. Data from 2,761 couples from the Health and Retirement Study (2014/2016 and 2016/2018 waves) were examined to determine within-couple concordance in completion of two tasks (family decisions and medical forms). The majority of couples were concordant regarding who makes family decisions (69.7%) and who completes medical forms (64.4%); 62% agreed they make family decisions collaboratively versus 25.5% completing medical forms collaboratively. Concordance was significantly associated with greater marital support and longer marital duration. Concordance was not significantly associated with depressive symptoms 2 years later, but the link between concordance in making major family decisions and self-rated health differed by age and gender. Future research at the intersection of concordance and collaboration may shed important light on how older couples navigate tasks and decisions.
AcitelliL. K.BadrH. J. (2005). My illness or our illness? Attending to the relationship when one partner is ill. In RevensonT. A.KayserK.BodenmannG. (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping (pp. 121–136). American Psychological Association.
2.
AcquatiC.KayserK. (2019). Dyadic coping across the lifespan: A comparison between younger and middle-aged couples with breast cancer. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 404. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00404
3.
BergC. A.HelgesonV. S.TracyE. L.ButnerJ.KellyC. S.Van VleetM.LitchmanM. (2020). Daily illness appraisal and collaboration in couples with Type 1 diabetes. Health Psychology, 39(8), 689–699. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000871
4.
BergC. A.JohnsonM. M. S.MeeganS. P.StroughJ. (2003). Collaborative problem-solving interactions in young and old married couples. Discourse Processes, 35(1), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3501_2
5.
BergC. A.UpchurchR. (2007). A Developmental-Contextual model of couples coping with chronic illness across the adult life span. Psychological Bulletin, 133(6), 920–954. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.6.920
6.
BodenmannG. (1997). Dyadic coping - a systematic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples: Theory and empirical findings. European Review of Applied Psychology, 47(2), 137–140.
7.
BondsK.WhitlatchC. J.SongM.LyonsK. S. (2021). Factors influencing quality of life in African-American dementia dyads. Aging & Mental Health, 25(4), 703–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1711865
8.
BuckH. G.HupceyJ.Juarez-VelaR.VelloneE.RiegelB. (2019). Heart failure care dyadic typology: Initial conceptualization, advances in thinking, and future directions of a clinically relevant classification system. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 34(2), 159–165. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCN.0000000000000548
9.
BuckH. G. A. S.StrombergA.ChungM. L.DonovanK. A.HarknessK.HowardA. M.KatoN.PoloR.EvangelistaL. S. (2018). A systematic review of heart failure dyadic self-care interventions focusing on intervention components, contexts, and outcomes. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 77, 232–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.10.007
10.
BurkeL. K.RauerA.SabeyA. K. (2019). A developmental perspective on marital closeness and health in older adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(8), 2397–2415. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518788696
11.
CarstensenL. L. (1992). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 7(3), 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.7.3.331
12.
ChampionV. L.WagnerL. I.MonahanP. O.DaggyJ.SmithL.CoheeA.ZinerK. W.HaaseJ. E.MillerK. D.PradhanK.UnverzagtF. W.CellaD.AnsariB.SledgeG. W. (2014). Comparison of younger and older breast cancer survivors and age-matched controls on specific and overall quality of life domains. Cancer, 120(15), 2237–2246. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28737
13.
CorneliusT. (2021). Dyadic disruption theory. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(6), Article e12604. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12604
14.
FalconierM. K.KuhnR. (2019). Dyadic coping in couples: A conceptual integration and a review of the empirical literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 571. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00571
15.
GabrielS.GardnerW. L. (1999). Are there “his” and “hers” types of interdependence? The implications of gender differences in collective versus relational interdependence for affect, behavior, and cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 642–655. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.642
16.
GodfreyW. B.YorgasonJ. B.ZhangY.HickenB. L.ChenW.RupperR. W. (2018). Variability in spousal perceptions of caregiving and its relationship to older caregiver health outcomes. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(9), 1504–1511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4408-8
17.
GrayB. T.LiuY.AsebedoS. D. (2022). Household agreement and financial satisfaction: A bargaining perspective. Applied Economics Letters, 29(4), 282–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2020.1864271
18.
HanS. H.KimK.BurrJ. A. (2021). Activity limitations and depressive symptoms among older couples: The moderating role of spousal care. The Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 76(2), 360–369. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbz161
19.
HelgesonV. S.ZajdelM.TracyE. L.AllenN. A.Kent de GreyR. G.LitchmanM.BergC. A. (2022). Observed dyadic collaboration among couples coping with Type 1 diabetes. Journal of Family Psychology, 36(1), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000763
20.
HoppmannC. A.GerstorfD. (2013). Spousal goals, affect quality, and collaborative problem solving: Evidence from a time-sampling study with older couples. Research in Human Development, 10(1), 70–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2013.760260
21.
HorneR. M.JohnsonM. D.GalambosN. L.KrahnH. J. (2018). Time, money, or gender? Predictors of the division of household labour across life stages. Sex Roles, 78(11–12), 731–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0832-1
22.
IraniE.BuckH. G.LyonsK. S.MargeviciusS.VelloneE.BugajskiA.De MariaM. (2023). Examining how congruence in and satisfaction with dyadic care type appraisal contribute to quality of life in heart failure care dyads. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 22(2), 158–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvac052
23.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. The Guilford Press.
24.
KimB.KimK.BurrJ. A.KimJ.HanG. (2020). Dyadic profiles of health behaviors among Korean baby boomer couples. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 40(10), 1320–1329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464820932003
25.
LachmanM. E.WeaverS. L. (1998). The sense of control as a moderator of social class differences in health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 763–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.763
26.
LawsH. B.SayerA. G.PietromonacoP. R.PowersS. I. (2015). Longitudinal changes in spouses’ HPA responses: Convergence in cortisol patterns during the early years of marriage. Health Psychology, 34(11), 1076–1089. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000235
27.
LazarusR. S.FolkmanS. (1984). Stress appraisal and coping. Springer.
28.
LeopoldT.SkopekJ. (2018). Retirement and changes in housework: A panel study of dual earner couples. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 73(4), 733–743. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw121
29.
LimH.ShinS. H.WilmarthM. J.ParkN. (2022). Who decides? Financial decision-making among older couples. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 43(2), 310–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-021-09775-3
30.
LyonsK. S.FlatleyC.GormanJ. R.HananD. M.Hayes-LattinB. (2022). Challenges experienced and resources identified by young to midlife couples 1–3 years post-cancer diagnosis. Psycho-Oncology, 31(1), 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5788
LyonsK. S.LeeC. S. (2020). The association of dyadic symptom appraisal with physical and mental health over time in care dyads living with lung cancer. Journal of Family Nursing, 26(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074840719889967
33.
MariniC. M.WilsonS. J.TateA. M.MartireL. M.FranksM. M. (2021). Short- and long-term effects of support visibility on support providers’ negative affect. The Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 76(3), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbz114
34.
MartireL. M.SchulzR.KeefeF. J.RudyT. E.StarzT. W. (2007). Couple-oriented education and support intervention: Effects on individuals with osteoarthritis and their spouses. Rehabilitation Psychology, 52(2), 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.52.2.121
35.
MillerL. M.WhitlatchC. J.LyonsK. S. (2016). Shared decision-making in dementia: A review of patient and family carer involvement. Dementia, 15(5), 1141–1157. https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301214555542
36.
MoonH.TownsendA. L.WhitlatchC. J.Dilworth-AndersonP. (2017). Quality of life for dementia caregiving dyads: Effects of incongruent perceptions of everyday care and values. The Gerontologist, 57(4), 657–666. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw055
OzdemirS.NgS.MalhotraC.TeoI.FinkelsteinE. A.COMPASS Study Group. (2021). Patient-caregiver treatment preference discordance and its association with caregiving burden and esteem. Innovation in Aging, 5(3), igab020. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igab020
39.
PaulyT.GerstorfD.WahlH.-W.HoppmannC. A. (2021). A developmental–contextual model of couple synchrony across adulthood and old age. Psychology and Aging, 36(8), 943–956. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000651
40.
QueenT. L.BergC. A.LowranceW. (2015). A framework for decision making in couples across adulthood. In HessT. M.StroughJ.LockenhoffC. E. (Eds.), Aging and decision making: Empirical and applied perspectives (pp. 371–392). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-417148-0.00018-2
41.
RadloffL. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167700100306
42.
RAND Center for the Study of Aging. (2021). RAND HRS longitudinal file 2018 (v1). RAND Center for the Study of Aging.
43.
RauerA.WilliamsL.JensenJ. (2017). Finer distinctions: Variability in satisfied older couples’ problem-solving behaviors. Family Process, 56(2), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12198
SonnegaA.FaulJ. D.OfstedalM. B.LangaK. M.PhillipsJ. W. R.WeirD. R. (2014). Cohort profile: The health and retirement study (HRS). International Journal of Epidemiology, 43(2), 576–585. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyu067
46.
StataCorp. (2019). Stata statistical software. StataCorp LLC.
47.
StefanutA. M.VintilaM.TudorelO. I. (2021). The relationship of dyadic coping with emotional functioning and quality of the relationship in couples facing cancer - a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 594015. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.594015
48.
SweetingH.BhaskarA.BenzevalM.PophamF.HuntK. (2014). Changing gender roles and attitudes and their implications for wellbeing around the new millennium. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 49(5), 791–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-013-0730-y
49.
TennysonS.YangH. K.WoolleyF. (2022). My wife is my insurance policy: Household bargaining and couples’ purchase of long-term care insurance. Research on Aging, 44(9–10), 692–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/01640275211046322
50.
UmbersonD.ThomeerM. B. (2020). Family matters: Research on family ties and health, 2010-2020. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 404–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12640
51.
Van BuurenS. (2007). Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 16(3), 219–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280206074463
52.
Winters-StoneK. M.LyonsK. S.DobekJ.DieckmannN. F.BennettJ. A.NailL.BeerT. M. (2016). Benefits of partnered strength training for prostate cancer survivors and spouses: Results from a randomized controlled trial of the exercising together project. Journal of Cancer Survivorship, 10(4), 633–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-015-0509-0
53.
YorgasonJ. B.JohnsonL. N.HillM. S.SellandB. (2018). Marital benefits of daily individual and conjoint exercise among older couples. Family Relations, 67(2), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12307
54.
ZambranoE.PaulyT.GerstorfD.AsheM. C.MaddenK. M.HoppmannC. A. (2022). Partner contributions to goal pursuit: Findings from repeated daily life assessments with older couples. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 77(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbab052
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
