Dyadic coping refers to how two closely connected people (a dyad) interact and mutually support each other when dealing with a stressful situation that impacts them both.
It is a dynamic, transactional process that involves coping behaviors, thought processes, communication styles, and other mechanisms that unfold within a dyadic framework.
Key TakeawaysThe review identified six main areas of child-related stressors: pregnancy/transition to parenthood, parenting, child mental health, child disability, child chronic illness, and child death.Adapting a “we-perspective” and engaging in common DC was particularly beneficial for couples across different types of child-related stressors.Positive forms of DC were associated with better relationship functioning, individual well-being, and child adjustment, while negative DC had detrimental effects.DC appears especially important for helping couples manage major child-related stressors like child illness or disability.There is a lack of research on DC in the context of minor everyday parenting stressors, which may accumulate over time to impact relationships.Few studies have examined the effects of parental DC on child outcomes, though initial findings suggest benefits for child adjustment.Most research has focused on heterosexual couples in Western countries, limiting generalizability to diverse family structures and cultural contexts.Interventions to enhance DC, like the Couples Coping Enhancement Training, show promise for improving outcomes for parents and children.The field would benefit from more longitudinal studies, research on diverse families and cultures, and examination of DC across different stages of child development.Understanding how couples cope together with child-related stress has important implications for couple/family interventions and child well-being.
Key Takeaways
Rationale
Dyadic coping (DC), how couples cope together with stress, plays an important role in helping couples manage child-related stressors and is associated with better individual, relationship, and child outcomes.
In the context of child-related stressors, dyadic coping refers to how parents work together to manage challenges related to pregnancy, childrearing, child health issues, and other parenting demands.
This systematic review aimed to synthesize and integrate research on dyadic coping (DC) in couples facing child-related stressors over the past three decades. The rationale for conducting this review stems from several key factors:
By integrating quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies on this topic, the review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the field and identify key gaps for future research.
This synthesis contributes new knowledge on DC that goes beyond previous reviews focused on other stressors or contexts.
Method
The authors conducted asystematic reviewfollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines (Page et al., 2021). The review was not registered and no protocol was prepared for publication.
Search strategy and terms:
The literature search was conducted on March 24, 2021 using three electronic databases: PsycINFO, Psyndex, and Medline. The following search terms were used: “dyadic coping,” “communal coping,” “couple coping,” “collaborative coping,” or “relationship-focused coping.” No additional search terms were specified for child-related stressors to capture a wide range of relevant topics.
Studies were included if they met the following criteria:
Studies were excluded if they:
The initial search identified 5,600 sources. After removing duplicates, 4,583 studies remained for screening. Titles and abstracts were screened, resulting in 1,082 full-text articles assessed for eligibility. The final review included 55 publications based on 47 distinct data sets.
Narrative synthesis approach:
Due to the heterogeneity of included studies, a narrative synthesis approach was used rather than meta-analysis. The authors followed three stages of narrative synthesis: 1) developing a preliminary synthesis, 2) exploring relationships within and between studies, and 3) assessing the robustness of findings through quality assessment.
Quality assessment was conducted using adapted versions of theNIH Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies, theNIH Study Quality Assessment Tools for Controlled Intervention Studies, and theCritical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP)checklist for qualitative studies. Studies were rated as “good” if they met at least 80% of the quality criteria.
Results
Overall, results highlighted the importance of DC for both individual and relationship functioning across different types of child-related stressors. Adapting a “we-perspective” and engaging in common DC emerged as particularly beneficial approaches.
The review identified six main areas of child-related stressors examined in relation to DC:
Pregnancy and transition to parenthood (17 studies)
Parenting (8 studies)
Child mental health (12 studies)
Child disability (4 studies)
Child chronic physical illness (8 studies)
Child death (6 studies)
Insight
This systematic review provides several key insights into the role of dyadic coping (DC) in helping couples manage child-related stressors:
Future research could benefit from:
Strengths
The study had several methodological strengths:
Limitations
These limitations highlight the need for more diverse and longitudinal research on DC in the context of child-related stress. Future studies should aim to include underrepresented populations and examine DC across the full spectrum of parenting experiences.
Clinical Implications
The findings of this review have several important implications for research, practice, and policy:
References
Primary reference
Roth, M., Weitkamp, K., Landolt, S. A., & Bodenmann, G. (2024). Couples’ dyadic coping in the context of child-related stressors: A systematic review across three decades.Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 13(3), 202–223.https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000237
Other references
Bodenmann, G. (1995). A systemic-transactional conceptualization of stress and coping in couples. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 54(1), 34-49.
Bodenmann, G., & Shantinath, S. D. (2004). The Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET): A new approach to prevention of marital distress based upon stress and coping. Family Relations, 53(5), 477-484.
Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development: Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development, 56(2), 289-302.
Nelson, S. K., Kushlev, K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). The pains and pleasures of parenting: When, why, and how is parenthood associated with more or less well-being? Psychological Bulletin, 140(3), 846-895.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.
Papp, L. M., Cummings, E. M., & Goeke-Morey, M. C. (2009). For richer, for poorer: Money as a topic of marital conflict in the home. Family Relations, 58(1), 91-103.
Weitkamp, K., Feger, F., Landolt, S. A., Roth, M., & Bodenmann, G. (2021). Dyadic coping in couples facing chronic physical illness: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 722740.
Keep Learning
Socratic questions for a college class to discuss this paper:
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
Saul McLeod, PhD
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
