Relational turbulence during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal analysis of the reciprocal effects between relationship characteristics and outcomes of relational turbulence

Abstract

This study offers a longitudinal and dyadic test of relational turbulence theory during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, this study highlights the severity of irritations and the aggressiveness and openness of relational communication as outcomes of relational turbulence that both shape and reflect relationship characteristics during this transition. Romantic dyads (N = 151) completed four weekly surveys during the pandemic’s early stages. We used multilevel modeling to document between- and within-person effects and evaluate reciprocal effects over time. Results indicated that relational uncertainty and partner interference were positively associated with relational turbulence, whereas partner facilitation was negatively associated with turbulence. Relational turbulence was positively associated with the severity of irritations and the aggressiveness of communication, and negatively associated with the openness of communication, above and beyond the effects of the relationship mechanisms. Over-time analyses showed that relational turbulence, severity of irritations, aggressive communication, and open communication predicted subsequent levels of relationship qualities. These findings showcase the theoretical utility of relational turbulence theory for explaining how relationships are affected by the pandemic and highlight relationship processes to target in helping couples manage their relationship during these stressful times.

Keywords

Aggression COVID-19 interdependence irritations openness relational turbulence relational uncertainty

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Afifi

T. D.

Joseph

Aldeis

(2012). The “standards for openness hypothesis”. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(1), 102–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/065407511420193

Baxter

L. A.

Montgomery

B. M.

(1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. The Guilford Press.

Brisini

K. S. C.

Solomon

D. H.

(2018). Relationship transitions for parents of children with autism spectrum disorder: types, turbulence, and transition processing communication. Journal of the American College of Radiology: JACR, 46(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2018.1498980.

Brisini

K. S. C.

Solomon

D. H.

(2021). Distinguishing relational turbulence, marital satisfaction, and parenting stress as predictors of ineffective arguing among parents of children with autism. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520958197

Bryk

A. S.

Raudenbush

S. W.

(1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. SAGE Publications.

Dillard

J. P.

Solomon

D. H.

Samp

J. A.

(1996). Framing social reality: The relevance of relational judgments. Communication Research, 23(6), 703–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023006004.

Goodboy

A. K.

Dillow

M. R.

Knoster

K. C.

Howard

H. A.

(2021). Relational turbulence from the COVID-19 pandemic: within-subjects mediation by romantic partner interdependence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(6), 1800–1818. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211000135

Haleem

Javaid

Vaishya

(2020). Effects of COVID-19 pandemic in daily life. Current Medicine Research and Practice, 10, 78–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmrp.2020.03.011

Hammonds

Kerrisey

Tomaskovic-Devey

(2020, June 5). Stressed, unsafe, and insecure: Essential workers need a new, new deal. University of Massachusetts Amherst Labor Center. http://www.umass.edu/lrrc/sites/default/files/Stressed%2C%20Unsafe%2C%20and%20Insecure-%20Essential%20Workers%20Need%20A%20New%2C%20New%20Deal%20.pdf

10.

Infante

D. A.

Rancer

A. S.

(1996). Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness: A review of recent theory and research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 19(1), 319–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1996.11678934

11.

King

M. E.

Theiss

J. A.

(2016). The communicative and physiological manifestations of relational turbulence during the empty-nest phase of marital relationships. Communication Quarterly, 64(5), 495–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2015.1129353

12.

Kline

R. B.

(2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford.

13.

Knobloch

L. K.

(2007). Perceptions of turmoil within courtship: associations with intimacy, relational uncertainty, and interference from partners. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24(3), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407507077227

14.

Knobloch

L. K.

Basinger

E. D.

Theiss

J. A.

(2018). Relational turbulence and perceptions of partner support during reintegration after military deployment. Journal of the American College of Radiology: JACR, 46(1), 52–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2017.1409906

15.

Knobloch

L. K.

Solomon

D. H.

(2004). Interference and facilitation from partners in the development of interdependence within romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 11(1), 115–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00074.x

16.

Knobloch

L. K.

Theiss

J. A.

(2010). An actor-partner interdependence model of relational turbulence: Cognitions and emotions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(5), 595–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510368967

17.

Knobloch

L. K.

Theiss

J. A.

(2011). Relational uncertainty and relationship talk within courtship: a longitudinal actor-partner interdependence model. Communication Monographs, 78(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2010.542471

18.

Kofman

Y. B.

Garfin

D. R.

(2020). Home is not always a haven: The domestic violence crisis amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 12(S1), S199–S201. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000866

19.

Agnew

C. R.

(2001). Need fulfillment and emotional experience in interdependent romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18(3), 423–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407501183007.

20.

Samp

J. A.

(2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on same-sex couples’ conflict avoidance, relational quality, and mental health. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(6), 1819–1843. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211006199

21.

Luetke

Hensel

Herbenick

Rosenberg

(2020). Romantic relationship conflict due to the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in intimate and sexual behaviors in a nationally representative sample of American adults. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 46(8), 747–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/009263X

22.

McLaren

R. M.

Haunani Solomon

Priem

J. S.

(2011). Explaining variation in contemporaneous responses to hurt in premarital romantic relationships: a relational turbulence model perspective. Communication Research, 38(4), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210377896

23.

Mervosh

Swales

(2020, April 20). See which states and cities have told residents to stay at home. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-stay-at-home-order.html.

24.

Overall

Chang

Pietromonaco

P. R.

Low

R. S. T.

Henderson

A. M. E.

(2020). Partners’ attachment insecurity and stress predict poorer relationship functioning during COVID-19 quarantines. Social Psychological Personality Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7cvdm

25.

Pietromonaco

P. R.

Overall

N. C.

(2020). Applying relationship science to evaluate how the COVID-19 pandemic may impact couples’ relationships. American Psychologist, 76(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000714

26.

Priem

J. S.

Solomon

D. H.

(2015). Emotional support and physiological stress recovery: The role of support matching, adequacy, and invisibility. Communication Monographs, 82(1), 88–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2014.971416

27.

Rodriguez

Solomon

de Lemos

J. A.

Das

S. R.

Morrow

D. A.

Bradley

S. M.

Elkind

M. S. V.

Williams

J. H.

Holmes

Matsouaka

R. A.

Gupta

Gluckman

T. J.

Abdalla

Albert

M. A.

Yancy

C. W.

Wang

T. Y.

(2021). Racial and ethnic differences in presentation and outcomes for patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Findings from the American heart Association’s COVID-19 cardiovascular disease registry. Circulation, 143(24), 2332–2342. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.052278

28.

Scott

A. M.

Stafford

(2018). An investigation of relational turbulence and depressive symptoms in newly married women. Personal Relationships, 25(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12225

29.

Sillars

Roberts

L. J.

Leonard

K. E.

Dun

(2000). Cognition during marital conflict: The relationship of thought and talk. Journal of Social and Personal relationships, 17(4), 479–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407500174002

30.

Solomon

D. H.

Brisini

K. S. C.

(2017). Operationalizing relational turbulence theory: Measurement and construct validation. Personal Relationships, 24(4), 768–789. https://doi.org/10.111/pere12212

31.

Solomon

D. H.

Brisini

K. S. C.

(2019). Relational uncertainty and interdependence processes in marriage: A test of relational turbulence theory. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(8), 2416–2436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518788700

32.

Solomon

D. H.

Knobloch

L. K.

(2001). Relationship uncertainty, partner interference, and intimacy within dating relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18(6), 804–820. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407501186004

33.

Solomon

D. H.

Knobloch

L. K.

Theiss

J. A.

McLaren

R. M.

(2016). Relational turbulence theory: Explaining variation in subjective experiences and communication within romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 42(4), 507–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/here.12091

34.

Theiss

J. A.

Knobloch

L. K.

(2009). An actor-partner interdependence model of irritations in romantic relationships. Communication Research, 36(4), 510–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650309333033

35.

Theiss

J. A.

Knobloch

L. K.

(2013). A relational turbulence model of military service members’ relational communication during reintegration. Journal of Communication, 63(6), 1109–1129. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12059

36.

Theiss

J. A.

Solomon

D. H.

(2006a). Coupling longitudinal data and multilevel modeling to examine the antecedents and consequences of jealousy experiences in romantic relationships: a test of the relational turbulence model. Human Communication Research, 32(4), 469–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2006.00284.x

37.

Theiss

J. A.

Solomon

D. H.

(2006b). A relational turbulence model of communication about irritations in romantic relationships. Communication Research, 33(5), 391–418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650206291482

38.

Theiss

J. A.

Solomon

D. H.

(2008). Parsing the mechanisms that increase relational intimacy: The effects of uncertainty amount, open communication about uncertainty, and the reduction of uncertainty. Human Communication Research, 34(4), 625–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00335.x

39.

Trope

Liberman

(2003). Temporal Construal. Psychological Review, 110(3), 403–421. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403

40.

Yoon

D. B.

Theiss

J. A.

(2019). The role of identity uncertainty in predicting perceived support quality and relational turbulence for individuals coping with infertility. [Paper presentation]. National Communication Association, Baltimore, MD.