Support for a spouse with psychological distress can be expressed in many different ways. Previous research indicates that support expression is shaped by gender, but we do not know much about how support within marriage is provided in response to a spouse’s distress outside of a different-sex couple context. In this study, we analyze dyadic data from 378 midlife married couples (35–65 years; N = 756 individuals) within the U.S. to examine how men and women in same- and different-sex relationships provide support when they perceive that their spouse is experiencing distress. We find women in different-sex couples are less likely to report taking care of their distressed spouse’s tasks or giving their distressed spouse more personal time and space compared to women in same-sex couples and men. We also find that men in different-sex couples are less likely to report encouraging their spouse to talk compared to men in same-sex couples and women. Being personally stressed by a spouse’s distress is positively associated with providing support to that spouse, whereas feeling that a spouse’s distress is stressful for the marriage is negatively associated with providing support. This study advances understanding of gendered provisions of support in response to psychological distress in marriage, moving beyond a framing of women as fundamentally more supportive than men to a consideration of how these dynamics may be different or similar in same- and different-sex marital contexts.
AllenS. H.MendezS. N. (2018). Hegemonic heteronormativity: Toward a new era of queer family theory. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 10(1), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12241
2.
AlmeidaD. M.KesslerR. C. (1998). Everyday stressors and gender differences in daily distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 670–680. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.670
3.
BergerL. M.CarlsonM. J. (2020). Family policy and complex contemporary families: A decade in review and implications for the next decade of research and policy practice. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 478–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12650
4.
BodenmannG. (1997). Dyadic coping-a systematic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples: Theory and empirical findings. European Review of Applied Psychology, 47, 137–140.
5.
BodenmannG. (2008). Dyadisches coping inventar: Test manual [Dyadic coping inventory: Test manual]. Huber.
6.
BouazizA.-R.LafontaineM.-F.GabbayN.CaronA. (2013). Investigating the validity and reliability of the caregiving questionnaire with individuals in same-sex couple relationships. Journal of Relationships Research, 4, e2. https://doi.org/10.1017/jrr.2013.2
7.
CherlinA. (2009). Marriage, divorce, remarriage. Harvard University Press.
ConnellR. W.MesserschmidtJ. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639
10.
Few-DemoA. L. (2014). Intersectionality as the “new” critical approach in feminist family studies: Evolving racial/ethnic feminisms and critical race theories. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 6(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12039
11.
FishJ. N.RussellS. T. (2018). Queering methodologies to understand queer families. Family Relations, 67(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12297
12.
FunkJ. L.RoggeR. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction Index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.572
13.
GarciaM. A.UmbersonD. (2019). Marital strain and psychological distress in same-sex and different-sex couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(5), 1253–1268. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12582
14.
GatesG. J. (2015). Demographics of married and unmarried same-sex couples: Analyses of the 2013 American Community Survey. The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law.
15.
GoldbergA. E.SmithJ. Z. (2013). Predictors of psychological adjustment in early placed adopted children with lesbian, gay, and heterosexual parents. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(3), 431–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032911
16.
GuschlbauerA.SmithN. G.DeStefanoJ.SoltisD. E. (2019). Minority stress and emotional intimacy among individuals in lesbian and gay couples: Implications for relationship satisfaction and health. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(3), 855–878. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407517746787
17.
HammenC. (2006). Stress generation in depression: Reflections on origins, research, and future directions. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(9), 1065–1082. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20293
18.
HomanP. (2019). Structural sexism and health in the United States: A new perspective on health inequality and the gender system. American Sociological Review, 84(3), 486–516. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0003122419848723
19.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Press.
20.
MeyerD.Kemper-DammB.ParolaF.SalasJ. (2019). Depressive symptoms as a predictor of men’s relationship satisfaction. The Family Journal, 27(1), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480718809058
21.
MeyerI. H.FrostD. M. (2013). Minority stress and the health of sexual minorities. In PattersonC. J.D’AugelliA. R. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and sexual orientation (pp. 252–266). Oxford University Press.
22.
MoninJ. K.LevyB.DoyleM.SchulzR.KershawT. (2019). The impact of both spousal caregivers’ and care recipients’ health on relationship satisfaction in the caregiver health effects study. Journal of Health Psychology, 24(12), 1744–1755. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1359105317699682
23.
NeffL. A.KarneyB. R. (2005). Gender differences in social support: A question of skill or responsiveness?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(1), 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.79
24.
OgolskyB. G.MonkJ. K.RiceT. M.TheisenJ. C.ManiotesC. R. (2017). Relationship maintenance: A review of research on romantic relationships. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 9(3), 275–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12205
25.
OuteJ.HunicheL. (2017). Who gets involved with what? A discourse analysis of gender and caregiving in everyday family life with depression. Outlines: Critical Practice Studies, 18(1), 5–27.
26.
PrickettK. C.Martin-StoreyA.CrosnoeR. (2015). A research note on time with children in different- and same-sex two-parent families. Demography, 52(3), 905–918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-015-0385-2
27.
ProulxC. M.ErmerA. E.KanterJ. B. (2017). Group-based trajectory modeling of marital quality: A critical review. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 9(3), 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12201
28.
RandallA. K.Messerschmitt-CoenS. (2019). Dyadic coping as relationship maintenance. In OgolskyB. G.MonkJ. (Eds.), Relationship maintenance: Theory, process, and context (pp. 178–193). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108304320.010
29.
ReczekC.ThomeerM. B.Gebhardt-KramL.UmbersonD. (2020). “Go see somebody”: How spouses promote mental health care. Society and Mental Health, 10(1), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2156869319834335
SimonR. W.NathL. E. (2004). Gender and emotion in the United States: Do men and women differ in self-reports of feelings and expressive behavior?American Journal of Sociology, 109(5), 1137–1176. https://doi.org/10.1086/382111
32.
SolomonS. E.RothblumE. D.BalsamK. F. (2005). Money, housework, sex, and conflict: Same-sex couples in civil unions, those not in civil unions, and heterosexual married siblings. Sex Roles, 52(9–10), 561–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3725-7
33.
SwinkelsJ.van TilburgT.VerbakelE.van GroenouM. B. (2019). Explaining the gender gap in the caregiving burden of partner caregivers. Journals of Gerontology Series B, 74(2), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbx036
ThoitsP. A. (2011). Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022146510395592
36.
ThomeerM. B.Ostergren ClarkK. (2021). The development of gendered health-related support dynamics over the course of a marriage. Journal of Women & Aging, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/08952841.2020.1826624
37.
ThomeerM. B.ReczekC.UmbersonD. (2015). Relationship dynamics around depression in gay and lesbian couples. Social Science & Medicine, 147, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.10.048
38.
ThomeerM. B.UmbersonD.PudrovskaT. (2013). Marital processes around depression: A gendered and relational perspective. Society and Mental Health, 3(3), 151–169. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2156869313487224
39.
ThomeerM. B.UmbersonD.ReczekC. (2020). The gender-as-relational approach for theorizing about romantic relationships of sexual and gender diverse mid- to later-life adults. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 12(2), 220–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12368
40.
UmbersonD.ThomeerM. B.KroegerR. A.ReczekC.DonnellyR. (2017). Instrumental- and emotion-focused care work during physical health events: Comparing gay, lesbian, and heterosexual marriages. Journals of Gerontology Series B, 72(3), 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw133
41.
UmbersonD.ThomeerM. B.PollittA. M.MernitzS. E. (2020). The psychological toll of emotion work in same-sex and different-sex marital dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(4), 1141–1158. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12686
WestT. V.PoppD.KennyD. A. (2008). A guide for the estimation of gender and sexual orientation effects in dyadic data: An actor-partner interdependence model approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167207311199
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.
