We examined whether the impact of the pandemic on couple relationships varied across cultural contexts. Following from studies showing better outcomes (lower disease risk, greater well-being) within cultures higher in tightness (having strong norms promoting conformity) or collectivism (vs. individualism), we predicted that tighter and more collectivistic contexts would be associated with better relationship functioning. Preregistered analyses using existing data collected during the pandemic (N = 2510; 12 countries), indicated, counter to predictions, that individuals from countries higher in tightness or collectivism evidenced greater relationship conflict. Cultural context was unrelated to relationship quality. Stress, attachment insecurity, and perceived partner responsiveness predicted relationship quality during the pandemic, but cultural context generally did not moderate these links. Perceived partner responsiveness, however, predicted relationship quality more strongly within more collectivistic (vs. more individualistic) countries. We discuss possible explanations for these findings, limitations of the data, and the need for larger studies including a broader range of countries, individuals, and cultural contexts.
BalzariniR. N.MuiseA.ZoppolatG.Di BartolomeoA.RodriguesD. L.Alonso-FerresM.UrganciB.DebrotA.Bock PichayayothinN.DharmaC.ChiP.KarremansJ. C.SchoebiD.SlatcherR. B. (2023). Love in the time of COVID: Perceived partner responsiveness buffers people from lower relationship quality associated with COVID-related stressors. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14(3), 342–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221094437
2.
Bar-ShacharY.LopataS.Bar-KalifaE. (2023). Relationship satisfaction during COVID-19: The role of partners’ perceived support and attachment. Family Relations, 72(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12767
BevanJ. L.MurphyM. K.LannuttiP. J.SlatcherR. B.BalzariniR. N. (2023). A descriptive literature review of early research on COVID-19 and close relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 40(1), 201–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221115387
5.
BidenE. J.GreenwoodC. J.MacdonaldJ. A.SpryE. A.LetcherP.HutchinsonD.YoussefG. J.McIntoshJ. E.OlssonC. A. (2021). Preparing for future adversities: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia for promoting relational resilience in families. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, Article 717811. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.717811
6.
BoigerM. (2019). A cultural psychological perspective on close relationships. New directions in the psychology of close relationships (pp. 83–99). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351136266-6
7.
BoigerM.Kirchner-HäuslerA.SchoutenA.UchidaY.MesquitaB. (2022). Different bumps in the road: The emotional dynamics of couple disagreements in Belgium and Japan. Emotion, 22(5), 805–819. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000910
8.
BraikerH. B.KelleyH. H. (1979). Conflict in the development of close relationships. In BurgessR. L.HustonT. L. (Eds.), Social exchange in developing relationships (pp. 135–168). Academic Press.
9.
BurkovaV. N.ButovskayaM. L.RandallA. K.FedenokJ. N.AhmadiK.AlghraibehA. M.AllamiF. B. M.AlpaslanF. S.Al-Zu’biM. A. A.BiçerD. F.CetinkayaH.DavidO. A.DonatoS.DuralS.EricksonP.ErmakovA. M.ErtuğrulB.FayankinnuE. A.FisherM. L.ZinurovaR. I. (2021). Predictors of anxiety in the COVID-19 pandemic from a global perspective: Data from 23 countries. Sustainability, 13(7), 4017. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13074017
10.
ConwayL. G.WoodardS. R.ZubrodA.TiburcioM.Martínez-VélezN. A.SorgenteA.LanzM.SeridoJ.VosylisR.FonsecaG.LepŽ.LiL.ZupančičM.CrespoC.RelvasA. P.PapageorgiouK. A.GianniouF.-M.TruhanT.MojtahediD.Balmores-PaulinoR. (2022). How culturally unique are pandemic effects? Evaluating cultural similarities and differences in effects of age, biological sex, and political beliefs on COVID impacts. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 937211. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.937211
11.
CrastaD.RoggeR. D.ManiaciM. R.ReisH. T. (2021). Toward an optimized measure of perceived partner responsiveness: Development and validation of the perceived responsiveness and insensitivity scale. Psychological Assessment, 33(4), 338–355. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000986
12.
CrossS. E.LamB. C. P. (2018). Dialecticism in close relationships and marriage. In Spencer-RodgersJ.PengK. (Eds.), The psychological and cultural foundations of East Asian cognition: Contradiction, change, and holism (pp. 353–381). Oxford University Press.
13.
DobrowolskaM.Groyecka-BernardA.SorokowskiP.RandallA. K.HilpertP.AhmadiK.AlghraibehA. M.AryeeteyR.BertoniA.BettacheK.BłażejewskaM.BodenmannG.BortoliniT. S.BoscC.ButovskayaM.CastroF. N.CetinkayaH.CunhaD.DavidD.SorokowskaA. (2020). Global perspective on marital satisfaction. Sustainability, 12(21), 8817. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218817
14.
EderS. J.NicholsonA. A.StefanczykM. M.PieniakM.Martínez-MolinaJ.PešoutO.BinterJ.SmelaP.ScharnowskiF.SteyrlD. (2021). Securing your relationship: Quality of intimate relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic can be predicted by attachment style. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 647956. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.647956
15.
EndressA. D. (2022). Socio-cultural values are risk factors for COVID-19-related mortality. Cross-Cultural Research: Official Journal of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research, 56(2–3), 150–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/10693971211067050
16.
ErikssonK.StrimlingP.GelfandM.WuJ.AbernathyJ.AkotiaC. S.AldashevA.AnderssonP. A.AndrighettoG.AnumA.ArikanG.AycanZ.BagherianF.BarreraD.Basnight-BrownD.BatkeyevB.BelausA.BerezinaE.BjörnstjernaM.Van LangeP. A. M. (2021). Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies. Nature Communications, 12(1), 1481. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21602-9
17.
FletcherG. J. O.SimpsonJ. A.ThomasG. (2000). The measurement of perceived relationship quality components: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 340–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200265007
18.
FraleyR. C.HeffernanM. E.VicaryA. M.BrumbaughC. C. (2011). The experiences in close relationships-relationship structures questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 615–625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022898
19.
FríasM. T.ShaverP. R.Díaz-LovingR. (2014). Individualism and collectivism as moderators of the association between attachment insecurities, coping, and social support. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 31(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407513484631
20.
FriedmanM.RholesW. S.SimpsonJ.BondM.Diaz-LovingR.ChanC. (2010). Attachment avoidance and the cultural fit hypothesis: A cross-cultural investigation. Personal Relationships, 17(1), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01256.x
21.
GainesS. O.Jr.MarelichW. D.BledsoeK. L.SteersW. N.HendersonM. C.GranroseC. S.BarájasL.HicksD.LydeM.TakahashiY.YumN.RíosD. I.GarcíaB. F.FarrisK. R.PageM. S. (1997). Links between race/ethnicity and cultural values as mediated by racial/ethnic identity and moderated by gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1460–1476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1460
22.
GeF.ParkJ.PietromonacoP. R. (2022). How you talk about it matters: Cultural variation in communication directness in romantic relationships. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 53(6), 583–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221221088934
23.
GelfandM. J.JacksonJ. C.PanX.NauD.PieperD.DenisonE.DagherM.Van LangeP. A. M.ChiuC.-Y.WangM. (2021). The relationship between cultural tightness–looseness and COVID-19 cases and deaths: A global analysis. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(3), e135–e144. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30301-6
24.
GelfandM. J.NishiiL. H.RaverJ. L. (2006). On the nature and importance of cultural tightness-looseness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1225–1244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1225
25.
GelfandM. J.RaverJ. L.NishiiL.LeslieL. M.LunJ.LimB. C.DuanL.AlmaliachA.AngS.ArnadottirJ.AycanZ.BoehnkeK.BoskiP.CabecinhasR.ChanD.ChhokarJ.D’AmatoA.Subirats FerrerM.FischlmayrI. C.YamaguchiS. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332(6033), 1100–1104. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197754
26.
HaleT.AngristN.GoldszmidtR.KiraB.PetherickA.PhillipsT.WebsterS.Cameron-BlakeE.HallasL.MajumdarS.TatlowH. (2021). A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker). Nature Human Behaviour, 5(4), 529–538. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8
27.
HamamuraT.BettacheK.XuY. (2018). Individualism and collectivism. In Zeigler-HillV.ShackelfordT. K. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of personality and individual differences: Origins of personality and individual differences (pp. 365–382). Sage Reference. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526451200.n20
28.
HanD. E.ParkH. G.AnU. J.KimS. E.KimY.-H. (2022). Emotion suppression on relationship and life satisfaction: Taking culture and emotional valence into account. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 39(9), 2766–2781. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221088521
29.
HarringtonJ. R.GelfandM. J. (2014). Tightness–looseness across the 50 United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(22), 7990–7995. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317937111
30.
HaydonK. C.SalvatoreJ. E. (2022). A prospective study of mental health, well-being, and substance use during the initial COVID-19 pandemic surge. Clinical Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 10(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026211013499
31.
HilpertP.RandallA. K.SorokowskiP.AtkinsD. C.SorokowskaA.AhmadiK.AghraibehA. M.AryeeteyR.BertoniA.BettacheK.BłażejewskaM.BodenmannG.BordersJ.BortoliniT. S.ButovskayaM.CastroF. N.CetinkayaH.CunhaD.DavidO. A.YooG. (2016). The associations of dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction vary between and within nations: A 35-nation study. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1106. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01106
32.
HofstedeG.HofstedeG. J.MinkovM. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill Professional.
33.
JoelS.EastwickP. W.AllisonC. J.ArriagaX. B.BakerZ. G.Bar-KalifaE.BergeronS.BirnbaumG. E.BrockR. L.BrumbaughC. C.CarmichaelC. L.ChenS.ClarkeJ.CobbR. J.CoolsenM. K.DavisJ.de JongD. C.DebrotA.DeHaasE. C.WolfS. (2020). Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(32), 19061–19071. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1917036117
34.
JooM.LamB. C. P.CrossS. E.ChenS. X.LauV. C. Y.NgH. K. Y.GünsoyC. (2022). Cross-cultural perspectives on self-change in close relationships: Evidence from Hong Kong Chinese and European Americans. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(7), 1118–1133. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211026129
35.
KarneyB. R.BradburyT. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, method, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3
36.
KarneyB. R.BradburyT. N. (2020). Research on marital satisfaction and stability in the 2010s: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12635
37.
KashimaY.YamaguchiS.KimU.ChoiS. C.GelfandM. J.YukiM. (1995). Culture, gender, and self: A perspective from individualism-collectivism research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 925–937. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.69.5.925
KroenckeL.HumbergS.BreilS. M.GeukesK.ZoppolatG.BalzariniR. N.Alonso-FerresM.SlatcherR. B.BackM. D. (2023). Extraversion, social interactions, and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: Did extraverts really suffer more than introverts?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125(3), 649–679. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000468
40.
KumarR. (2021). Impact of societal culture on Covid-19 morbidity and mortality across countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 52(7), 643–662. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221211025100
41.
LiC.GelfandM. J. (2022). The influence of cultural tightness-looseness on cross-border acquisition performance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 195, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.01.004
MarkusH. R.HamedaniM. G. (2019). People are culturally shaped shapers: The psychological science of culture and culture change. Handbook of cultural psychology (2nd ed., pp. 11–52). The Guilford Press.
44.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
45.
MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (2017). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics and change (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
46.
MojaverianT.KimH. S. (2013). Interpreting a helping hand: Cultural variation in the effectiveness of solicited and unsolicited social support. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(1), 88–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212465319
47.
MorlingB.KitayamaS.MiyamotoY. (2002). Cultural practices emphasize influence in the United States and adjustment in Japan. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(3), 311–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202286003
OverallN. C.ChangV. T.CrossE. J.LowR. S. T.HendersonA. M. E. (2021). Sexist attitudes predict family-based aggression during a COVID-19 lockdown. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 35(8), 1043–1052. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000834
50.
OverallN. C.ChangV. T.PietromonacoP. R.LowR. S. T.HendersonA. M. E. (2022). Partners’ attachment insecurity and stress predict poorer relationship functioning during COVID-19 quarantines. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550621992973
51.
OverallN. C.HowardC.OsborneD.PietromonacoP. R.SatherleyN.SibleyC. G. (2023). Applying propensity score matching to assess the impact of the pandemic on intimate relationships. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17(7), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12747
52.
OverallN. C.LowR. S. T.ChangV. T.HendersonA. M. E.McRaeC. S.PietromonacoP. R. (2022a). Enduring COVID-19 lockdowns: Risk versus resilience in parents’ health and family functioning across the pandemic. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 39(11), 3296–3319. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221095781
53.
OverallN. C.McNultyJ. K. (2017). What type of communication during conflict is beneficial for intimate relationships?Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.002
54.
OverallN. C.PietromonacoP. R.SimpsonJ. A. (2022b). Buffering and spillover of adult attachment insecurity in couple and family relationships. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(2), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00011-1
55.
PaulyT.LüscherJ.BerliC.ScholzU. (2022). Dynamic associations between stress and relationship functioning in the wake of COVID-19: Longitudinal data from the German family panel (pairfam). Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 39(11), 3183–3203. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221092360
56.
PietromonacoP. R.OverallN. C. (2021). 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
57.
PietromonacoP. R.OverallN. C. (2022). Implications of social isolation, separation, and loss during the COVID-19 pandemic for couples’ relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 43, 189–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.07.014
58.
PietromonacoP. R.OverallN. C. (2023). Romantic relationships during a global pandemic. In OgolskyB. G. (Ed.), The socio-cultural context of romantic relationships (pp. 247–272). Cambridge University Press.
59.
PietromonacoP. R.OverallN. C. (2024). How sociocultural contexts may shape the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on couples’ relationships. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 16(1), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12523
60.
RandallA. K.LeonG.BasiliE.MartosT.BoigerM.BaldiM.HockerL.KlineK.MasturziA.AryeeteyR.Bar-KalifaE.BoonS. D.BotellaL.BurkeT.CarnelleyK. B.CarrA.DashA.FitrianaM.GainesS. O.ChiarolanzaC. (2022). Coping with global uncertainty: Perceptions of COVID-19 psychological distress, relationship quality, and dyadic coping for romantic partners across 27 countries. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 39(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211034236
61.
SchmidL.WörnJ.HankK.SawatzkiB.WalperS. (2021). Changes in employment and relationship satisfaction in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from the German family Panel. European Societies, 23(sup1), S743–S758. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1836385
62.
SchoutenA.BoigerM.Kirchner-HäuslerA.UchidaY.MesquitaB. (2020). Cultural differences in emotion suppression in Belgian and Japanese couples: A social functional model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1048. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01048
63.
SchwartzS. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In KimU.TriandisH. C.KâğitçibaşiÇ.ChoiS.-C.YoonG. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 85–119). Sage Publications, Inc. 1996-97151-003.
64.
SchwartzS. H. (2006). A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5(2–3), 137–182. https://doi.org/10.1163/156913306778667357
65.
SmithP. B.EasterbrookM. J.al-SelimH.LunV. M. C.KocY.GulP.PapastylianouD.GrigoryanL.TorresC.EfremovaM.HassanB.AhmadA. H.al-BayatiA.AndersonJ.CrossS. E.DelfinoG. I.GamsakhurdiaV.GavreliucA.GavreliucD.ChobthamkitP. (2020). Sex differences in self-construal and in depressive symptoms: Predictors of cross-national variation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 51(7–8), 616–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022120939655
66.
TasfilizD.SelcukE.GunaydinG.SlatcherR. B.CorrieroE. F.OngA. D. (2018). Patterns of perceived partner responsiveness and well-being in Japan and the United States. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 32(3), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000378
67.
TaylorS. E.ShermanD. K.KimH. S.JarchoJ.TakagiK.DunaganM. S. (2004). Culture and social support: Who seeks it and why?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 354–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.354
TsaiW.LuQ. (2018). Culture, emotion suppression and disclosure, and health. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12373
70.
VandelloJ. A.CohenD. (1999). Patterns of individualism and collectivism across the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(2), 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.279
71.
VishkinA.KitayamaS.BergM. K.DienerE.Gross-ManosD.Ben-AriehA.TamirM. (2023). Adherence to emotion norms is greater in individualist cultures than in collectivist cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(6), 1256–1276. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000409
72.
VowelsL. M.CarnelleyK. B. (2020). Attachment styles, negotiation of goal conflict, and perceived partner support during covid-19. Personality and Individual Differences, 171, 110505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110505
WebsterG. D.HowellJ. L.LoseeJ. E.MaharE. A.WongsomboonV. (2021). Culture, COVID-19, and collectivism: A paradox of American exceptionalism?Personality and Individual Differences, 178, 110853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110853
75.
WelzelC. (2013). Freedom rising: Human empowerment and the quest for emancipation. Cambridge University Press.
WuD. C.KimH. S.CollinsN. L. (2021). Perceived responsiveness across cultures: The role of cultural fit in social support use. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(9), Article e12634. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12634
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.
