Dyadic Coping Strategies of Spouses as a Factor in Latent Dysfunctional Relationships in the Family: an Empirical Study in a Pandemic

1221

Abstract

Objective. Identification of the nature of the relationship between the dyadic coping strategies of spouses and their subjective perception of the characteristics of changes in family relations during the period of forced self-isolation, due to the threat of the spread of a new coronavirus infection COVID-19. Background. The increase in the number of divorces in countries that have overcome the pandemic of COVID-19 coronavirus infection leads to the actualization of the problem of providing effective psychological assistance to families in conditions of forced self-isolation. The development of such measures should be based on evidence-based information about the factors that cause the strengthening or, on the contrary, the destruction of family relations in non-standard situations of family life. Study design. The study was conducted from April 15 to May 10, 2020 using an online psychological survey. At the beginning of the study, the period of self-isolation was two weeks. The study was carried out in two stages: 1) a survey of family members about their subjective perception of changes that occurred in interpersonal relations with the spouse during the period of self-isolation (online questionnaire); 2) the study of the relationship between indicators of dyadic coping strategies and the subjective perception of inter-marital relations. To measure the dyadic coping strategies of the spouses, proven valid and reliable methods were used. Participants. At the first stage of the study, 674 people were interviewed, of which 503 were women aged 24 to 43 years, and 171 were men from 27 to 47 years old. At the second stage, those respondents who noted an improvement or deterioration in relations in their family were selected from the first sample. As a result of online interviewing, two samples were generated for the second stage of the study, equalized by the number of married couples: the first sample included 34 married couples, who, according to a preliminary survey, noted a deterioration in family relations (average age of men — 36,7; women — 34,4). In the second, there were also 34 married couples who noted positive changes in relations with each other (average age of men — 38,1; women — 33,2). Measurements. The study used comparative analyzes with the calculation of the χ2 criterion, Student t-test, Spearman correlation coefficient. For data processing, SPSS 22.0 programs were used. Results. As a result of the research, it was revealed that there are reliable relationships between the subjective perception of spouses of the features of relationships in the family and their chosen strategies of coping behavior in non-standard and difficult life situations. Conclusions. Dyadic coping strategies of spouses are one of the dominant factors of the nature and features of inter-marital relations, which makes it necessary to take them into account in the construction of programs for providing psychological assistance to the family in non-standard conditions of its life.

General Information

Keywords: dyadic coping strategies, family coping, inter-marital relationships, social deprivation of the family

Journal rubric: Empirical Research

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2020110303

For citation: Bonkalo T.I., Marinova T.Y., Feoktistova S.V., Shmeleva S.V. Dyadic Coping Strategies of Spouses as a Factor in Latent Dysfunctional Relationships in the Family: an Empirical Study in a Pandemic. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2020. Vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 35–50. DOI: 10.17759/sps.2020110303. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

1. Bonkalo T.I. Osobennosti diadicheskikh koping-strategii suprugov v sem’yakh raznogo

urovnya funktsional’noi deesposobnosti [Features of dyadic coping strategies of spouses in families

of different levels of functional capacity]. Izvestiya samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra Rossiiskoi akademii

nauk = News of the Samara Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2009. Vol. 11,

no. 4—6, pp. 1476—1480.

2. Dubrov D.I. Informatsionno-kommunikatsionnye tekhnologii i semeinye otnosheniya: vred ili

pol’za? [Information and communication technologies and family relationships: harm or benefit?].

Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social psychology and society, 2020. Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 72—

91. DOI:10.17759/sps.2020110105

3. Ekimchik O.A., Kryukova T.L. Diadicheskii koping v rossiiskikh parakh: issledovanie

psikhometricheskikh kachestv Oprosnika diadicheskogo sovladaniya G. Bodenmanna [Elektronnyi

resurs] [Dyadic coping in Russian couples: a study of psychometric qualities of G. Bodenmann’s

Dyadic Coping Questionnaire]. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya = Psychological Research, 2017.

Vol. 10, no. 55, pp. 4. URL: http://psystudy.ru (Accessed: 25.04.2020).

4. Koreneva E.P. Psikhologiya semeinogo krizisa: podkhody k semeinomu konsul’tirovaniyu

pri nenormativnykh krizisakh [Elektronnyi resurs] [Psychology of family crisis: approaches to

family counseling in non-normative crises]. Kontsept = Concept, 2019, no. 3, pp. 102—107. DOI

10.24411/2304-120X-2019-12012

5. Koroleva E.M., Kryukova T.L. Issledovanie diadicheskogo kopinga: rol’ v ukreplenii

supruzheskikh otnoshenii i psikhologicheskogo blagopoluchiya pary [Study of dyadic coping: a role

in strengthening marital relations and psychological well-being of a couple] Vestnik Kostromskogo

gosudarstvennogo universiteta: seriya: Pedagogika. Psikhologiya. Sotsiokinetika = Bulletin of Kostroma

State University: Series: Pedagogy. Psychology. Sociokinetics, 2018, no. 2, pp. 84—88.

6. Kuftyak E.V. Kontseptsiya semeinogo sovladaniya [Elektronnyi resurs] [The concept of family

coping]. Meditsinskaya psikhologiya v Rossii = Medical psychology in Russia, 2012, no. 5 (16). URL:

http://www.medpsy.ru/mprj/archiv_global/2012_5_16/nomer/nomer10.php (Accessed: 18.04.2020).

7. Kryukova T.L. Metody izucheniya sovladayushchego povedeniya: tri koping—shkaly:

[metodicheskoe rukovodstvo] Methods for studying coping behavior: three coping scales:

[methodological guide]. Kostroma: Avantitul,] 2007. 64 p.

8. Rasskazova E.I., Gordeeva T.O., Osin E.N. Koping-strategii v strukture deyatel’nosti i

samoregulyatsii: psikhometricheskie kharakteristiki i vozmozhnosti primeneniya metodiki COPE

[Coping strategies in the structure of activity and self-regulation: psychometric characteristics and

the possibility of using the COPE methodology]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki =

Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2013. Vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 82—118.

9. Rostovskaya T.K., Karpovskaya E.E. Izuchenie osobennostei semeino-demograficheskoi

politiki kak faktora izmenenii molodoi sem’i: sotsiologicheskii analiz [Study of the peculiarities of

family and demographic policy as a factor of changes in a young family: a sociological analysis].

Nauchnyi rezul’tat. Sotsiologiya i upravlenie = Scientific result. Sociology and Management, 2019.

Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 53—56.

10. Feoktistova S.V., Marinova T.Yu., Vasil’eva N.N. Psikhologiya: uchebnoe posobie dlya

akademicheskogo bakalavriata [Psychology: Study Guide for Academic Bachelor’s Degree]. 2-e izd.

Moscow: Publ. OOO “Yurayt”, 2017. 241 p.

11. Tsvetkova N.A. Osobennosti koping-strategii, ispol’zuemykh dlya razresheniya konfliktov v

sem’yakh s raznym stazhem braka [Features of coping strategies used to resolve conflicts in families

with different length of marriage]. Razvitie lichnosti = Personal Development, 2018, no. 1, pp. 95—104.

12. Eidemiller E.G., Yustitskis V.V. Psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya sem’i [Family psychology and

psychotherapy]. 4-e izd. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2008. 672 p.

13. Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping and its significance for marital functioning. In T.A. Revenson,

K. Kayser, G. Bodenmann (eds.). Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping.

Washington: DC: American Psychological Association, 2005, pp. 33—49.

14. Bouchard G., Guillemette A., Landry-Leger N. Situational and dispositional coping: an

examination of their personality, cognitive appraisals and psychological distress. European Journal

of Personality, 2004. Vol. 18, pp. 221—238.

15. Campbell A. An increasing risk of family violence during the Covid-19 pandemic: Strengthening

community collaborations to save lives [Elektronnyi resurs]. Forensic Science International: Reports.

2020. Vol. 2. DOI:10.1016/j.fsir.2020.100089

16. Coyne J.C., Smith D.A. Couples coping with a myocardial infarction: a contextual perspective

on wives’ distress. Journ. Personal. Soc. Psychol, 1991. Vol. 61 (3), pp. 404—412.

17. Hardie E., Critchley C., Morris Z. Self-coping complexity: role of self-construal in relational.,

individual and collective coping styles and health outcomes. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,

2006. Vol. 9, pp. 224—235.

18. Hobfoll S.E., Wells J.D., Lavin J. Resource loss, resource gain, and communal coping during

pregnancy among women with multiple roles. Psychol. Women Q, 1997. Vol. 21 (4), pp. 645—662.

19. Lazarus R.S. Coping theory and research: Past, present, and future. Psychosomatic Medicine,

1993, pp. 234—247.

20. Lasarus R. Emotions and interpersonal relationships: toward a person-centered conceptualization

of emotions and coping. Journal of Personality, 2006. Vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 9—43.

21. Liu H., Zhang F., Wei C., Jia Y. Prevalence and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak

in China hardest-hit areas: Gender differences matter [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psychiatry Research,

2020. Vol. 287. 112921. DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112921

22. Miceli M. Castelfranchi C. Further distinction between coping and defensive mechanisms.

Journal of Personality, 2001. Vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 287—296.

23. Wind T.R., Rijkeboer M., Andersson G., Riper H. The COVID-19 pandemic: The ‘black swan’

for mental health care and a turning point for e-health [Elektronnyi resurs]. Internet Interventions,

2020. Vol. 20. 100317. DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2020.100317

Information About the Authors

Tatyana I. Bonkalo, Doctor of Psychology, Head of the Department of Comprehensive Expertise and Coordination, State Budgetary Institution “Research Institute for Healthcare Organization and Medical Management of Moscow Healthcare Department”, Kuban State University, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0887-4995, e-mail: bonkalotatyanaivanovna@yandex.ru

Tatiana Y. Marinova, PhD in Biology, Associate Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Social Psychology, Moscow State University of Psychology and Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1062-1391, e-mail: marinovatu@mgppu.ru

Svetlana V. Feoktistova, Doctor of Psychology, Professor of the Department of General Psychology and Psychology of Labor, Russian New University, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2486-0745, e-mail: svfeoktistova@mail.ru

Svetlana V. Shmeleva, Doctor of Medicine, Professor of the Department of Psychology and Pedagogy of Professional Education, K.G. Razumovsky Moscow State University of technology and management (the First Cossack University), Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0390-194X, e-mail: 89151479832@mail.ru

Metrics

Views

Total: 1115
Previous month: 28
Current month: 34

Downloads

Total: 1221
Previous month: 32
Current month: 32