The current study tests an explanation inspired by social baseline theory (Beckes & Coan, 2011. Social baseline theory: The role of social proximity in emotion and economy of action. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 976–988. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00400) for the mixed blessings associated with received emotional support from one’s partner. We reason that the receipt of emotional support engenders benefits only up to individualized baseline points—that is, support effects will be nonmonotonic. In two dyadic daily-diary samples (N = 38/80 couples, over 21/35 days, respectively), we used piecewise multilevel modeling, finding support for our hypotheses. Receiving emotional support exceeding one’s baseline was associated with little affective change; receiving emotional support falling short of one’s baseline was consistently associated with worsened moods and relationship feelings. This work highlights the importance of individuals’ baseline levels as reference or comparison points for understanding support’s effects.
Bar-KalifaE.RafaeliE. (2013). Disappointment’s sting is greater than help’s balm: Quasi-signal detection of daily support matching. Journal of Family Psychology, 27, 956–967. doi:10.1037/a0034905
2.
BarreraM. (1986). Distinctions between social support concepts, measures, and models. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 413–445. doi:10.1007/BF00922627
3.
BaumeisterR. F.BratslavskyE.FinkenauerC.VohsK. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
4.
BeckesL.CoanJ. (2011). Social baseline theory: The role of social proximity in emotion and economy of action. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 976–988. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00400
5.
BerscheidE.SnyderM.OmotoA.M. (1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 792–807. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792
6.
BodenmannG.RandallA. K. (2012). Common factors in the enhancement of dyadic coping. Behavior Therapy, 43, 88–98. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2011.04.003
7.
BolgerN.AmarelD. (2007). Effects of social support visibility on adjustment to stress: Experimental evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 458–475. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.458
8.
BolgerN.DavisA.RafaeliE. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579–616. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030
9.
BolgerN.FosterM.VinokurA. D.NgR. (1996). Close relationships and adjustment to a life crisis: The case of breast cancer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 283–294. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.283
10.
BolgerN.LaurenceauJ. P. (2013). Intensive longitudinal methods: An introduction to diary and experience sampling research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
11.
BolgerN.ZuckermanA.KesslerR. C. (2000). Invisible support and adjustment to stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 953–961. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.953
12.
BowlbyJ. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
13.
CampbellL.SimpsonJ. A.BoldryJ.KashyD. A. (2005). Perceptions of conflict and support in romantic relationships: The role of attachment anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 510–531. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.510
14.
CohenS.WillsT. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310
15.
ChenY.FeeleyT. H. (2012). Enacted support and well-being: A test of the mediating role of perceived control. Communication Studies, 63, 608–625. doi:10.1080/10510974.2012.674619
16.
CoanJ. A.KasleS.JacksonA.SchaeferH. S.DavidsonR. J. (2013). Mutuality and the social regulation of neural threat responding. Attachment & Human Development, 15, 303–315. doi:10.1080/14616734.2013.782656
17.
CoanJ. A.SchaeferH. S.DavidsonR. J. (2006). Lending a hand: Social regulation of the neural response to threat. Psychological Science, 17, 1032–1039. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01832.x
18.
CohenS.McKayG. (1984). Social support, stress, and the buffering hypothesis: A theoretical analysis. In BaumA.TaylorS. E.SingerJ. E. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and health (Vol. 4, pp. 253–267). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
CollinsN. L.Dunkel-SchetterC.LobelM.ScrimshawS. C. M. (1993). Social support in pregnancy: Psychosocial correlates of birth outcomes and postpartum depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1243–1258. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1243
20.
CranfordJ. A.ShroutP. E.IidaM.RafaeliE.YipT.BolgerN. (2006). A procedure for evaluating sensitivity to within-person change: Can mood measures in diary studies detect change reliably?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 917–929. doi:10.1177/0146167206287721
21.
CrespiL. P. (1944). Amount of reinforcement and level of performance. Psychological Review, 51, 341–357. doi:10.1037/h0057359
22.
CutronaC. E.RussellD. W. (1990). Type of social support and specific stress: Toward a theory of optimal matching. In SarasonB. R.SarasonI. G.PierceG. R. (Eds.), Social support: An interactional view (pp. 319–366). New York, NY: Wiley.
23.
CutronaC. E.RussellD. W.GardnerK. A. (2005). The relationship enhancement model of social support. In RevensonT.KayserK.BodenmannG. (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping (pp. 73–95). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24.
DiamondL. M.HicksA. M.Otter-HendersonK. D. (2008). Every time you go away: Changes in affect, behavior, and physiology associated with travel-related separations from romantic partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 385–403. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.2.385
25.
EisenbergerN. I.TaylorS. E.GableS. L.HilmertC. J.LiebermanM. D. (2007). Neural pathways link social support to attenuated neuroendocrine stress responses. NeuroImage, 35, 1601–1602. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.01.038
26.
GableS. L.GosnellC. L.MaiselN. C.StrachmanA. (2012). Safely testing the alarm: Close others' responses to personal positive events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 963–981. doi:10.1037/a0029488
27.
GableS. L.ReisH. T.DowneyG. (2003). He said, she said a quasi-signal detection analysis of daily interactions between close relationship partners. Psychological Science, 14, 100–105. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.t01-1-01426
28.
GirmeY. U.OverallN. C.SimpsonJ. A. (2013). When visibility matters short-term versus long-term costs and benefits of visible and invisible support. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1441–1454. doi:10.1177/0146167213497802
29.
GleasonM. E. J.IidaM.BolgerN.ShroutP. E. (2003). Daily supportive equity in close relationships. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1036–1045.
30.
GleasonM. E. J.IidaM.ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2008). Receiving support as a mixed blessing: Evidence for dual effects of support on psychological outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 824–838. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.824
31.
GottmanJ. (1994). Why marriages succeed or fail. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
32.
GottmanJ. M.KrokoffL. J. (1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 47–52. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.57.1.47
33.
HaberM. G.CohenJ. L.LucasT.BaltesB. B. (2007). The relationship between self-reported received and perceived social support: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 133–144. doi:10.1007/s10464-007-9100-9
34.
HobfollS. E. (2009). Social support: The movie. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26, 93–101. doi:10.1177/0265407509105524
35.
KappesH. B.ShroutP. E. (2011). When goal sharing produces support that is not caring. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 662–673. doi:10.1177/0146167211399926
36.
KashdanT. B. (2007). Social anxiety spectrum and diminished positive experiences: Theoretical synthesis and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 348–365. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2006.12.003
37.
LakeyB.CassadyP. B. (1990). Cognitive processes in perceived social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 337–343. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.2.337
38.
LakeyB.OrehekE. (2011). Relational regulation theory: A new approach to explain the link between perceived social support and mental health. Psychological Review, 118, 482–495. doi:10.1037/a0023477
39.
LemayE. P.JrNealA. M. (2014). Accurate and biased perceptions of responsive support predict well-being. Motivation and Emotion. doi:10.1007/s11031-013-9381-2
40.
LiuB. S.RookK. S. (2013). Emotional and social loneliness in later life: Associations with positive versus negative social exchanges. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 813–832. doi: 10.1177/0265407512471809
41.
LorrM.McNairD. M. (1971). The profile of mood states manual. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
42.
MaiselN. C.GableS. L. (2009). The paradox of received social support: The importance of responsiveness. Psychological Science, 20, 928–932. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02388.x
43.
MarkmanH. J.RenickM. J.FloydF. J.StanleyS. M.ClementsM. (1993). Preventing marital distress through communication and conflict management training: A 4- and 5-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 70–77. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.61.1.70
44.
McClureM. J.XuJ. H.CrawJ. P.LaneS. P.BolgerN.ShroutP. E. (2013). Understanding the costs of support transactions in daily life. Journal of Personality. doi:10.1111/jopy.12061
45.
NurullahA. S. (2012). Received and provided social support: A review of current evidence and future directions. American Journal of Health Studies, 27, 173–188.
46.
PaschL. A.BradburyT. N. (1998). Social support, conflict, and the development of marital dysfunction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 219. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.66.2.219
47.
PeughJ. L. (2014). Conducting three-level cross-sectional analyses. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 34, 7–37. doi:10.1177/0272431613498646
48.
PreacherK. J.CurranP. J.BauerD. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448. doi:10.3102/10769986031004437
49.
RafaeliE.CranfordJ. A.GreenA. S.ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2008). The good and bad of relationships: How social hindrance and social support affect relationship moods in daily life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1703–1718. doi:10.1177/0146167208323742
50.
RafaeliE.GleasonM. E. J. (2009). Skilled support within intimate relationships. Journal of Family Theory and Review, 1, 20–37. doi:10.1111/j.1756-2589.2009.00003.x
51.
ReinhardtJ. P.BoernerK.HorowitzA. (2006). Good to have but not to use: Differential impact of perceived and received support on well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 117–129. doi:10.1177/0265407506060182
52.
ReisH. T.ClarkM. S.HolmesJ. G. (2004). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing construct in the study of intimacy and closeness. In MashekD. J.AronA. (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 201–225). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
53.
ReisH. T.ClarkM. S. (2013). Responsiveness. In SimpsonJ. A.CampbellL. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 400–423). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
54.
ReisH. T.ManiaciM. R.RoggeR. D. (2013). The expression of compassionate love in everyday compassionate acts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. doi:10.1177/0265407513507214.
55.
RiniC.Dunkel SchetterC. (2010). The effectiveness of social support attempts in intimate relationships. In SullivanK. T.DavilaJ. (Eds.), Support processes in intimate relationships (pp. 26–67).New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
56.
SAS Institute. (2003). The SAS system for Windows (Version 8.02). Cary,NC: Author.
57.
SelcukE.OngA. D. (2012). Perceived partner responsiveness moderates the association between received emotional support and all-cause mortality. Health Psychology, 32, 231–235. doi:10.1037/a0028276
58.
ShroutP. E.BolgerN.IidaM.BurkeC.GleasonM. E. J.LaneS. P. (2010). The effects of daily support transactions during acute stress: Results from a diary study of bar exam preparation. In SullivanK. T.DavilaJ. (Eds.), Support processes in intimate relationships (pp. 291–317). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
59.
ShroutP. E.HermanC. M.BolgerN. (2006). The costs and benefits of practical and emotional support on adjustment: A daily diary study of couples experiencing acute stress. Personal Relationships, 13, 115–134. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00108.x
60.
ShroutP. E.LaneS. P. (2012) Psychometrics. In MehlM. R.ConnerT. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 302–320). New York, NY: Guilford.
61.
SnijdersT. A. B.BoskerR. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London, England: SAGE.
62.
StadlerG.SnyderK. A.HornA. B.ShroutP. E.BolgerN. P. (2012). Close relationships and health in daily life: A review and empirical data on intimacy and somatic symptoms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 74, 398–409. doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e31825473b8
63.
SullivanK. T.PaschL. A.JohnsonM. D.BradburyT. N. (2010). Social support, problem solving, and the longitudinal course of newlywed marriage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 631–644. doi:10.1037/a0017578
64.
TaylorS. E. (2007). Social support. In FreidmanH. S.SilverR. C. (Eds.), Foundations of health psychology (pp. 145–171). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
65.
WatsonD.TellegenA. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219–235. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.219
66.
XuY.BurlesonB. R. (2004). The association of experienced spousal support with marital satisfaction: Evaluating the moderating effects of sex, ethnic culture, and type of support. The Journal of Family Communication, 4, 123–145. doi:10.1207/s15327698jfc0402_3
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.
