Adverse Childhood Experiences and Romantic Relationship Satisfaction of Turkish Emerging Adults: The Role of Dyadic Coping

ABSTRACT

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can negatively affect relationship satisfaction and quality in adulthood. The current study aims to explore the direct and indirect associations of ACEs and romantic relationship satisfaction and examine whether dyadic coping could be a potential protective mechanism against ACEs. Participants (N = 361) were recruited through social media platforms and word of mouth. The study’s eligibility criteria were being 18 to 30 years old, unmarried, and in a committed relationship for at least six months. Participants completed online surveys through Qualtrics. Structural equation modeling analysis revealed that ACEs were negatively associated with dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction. Besides, dyadic coping was positively associated with relationship satisfaction. Dyadic coping partially mediated the relationship between ACEs and relationship satisfaction. There were no moderating effects of gender or individual coping style in the final structural equation model. These findings illustrate that adults with a history of ACEs may be less satisfied in romantic relationships, yet they may benefit from dyadic coping strategies. Results have implications for clinical practice, underscoring the utility of assessing ACEs of partners in couples therapy, addressing ACEs and their potential spillover effects in romantic relationships, and promoting dyadic coping skills to improve couples’ relational well-being.

KEYWORDS:

• Adverse childhood experiences
• dyadic coping
• gender
• individual coping
• relationship satisfaction
• stressors

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data, syntax, and output are available from the first author on request.

Notes

¹ Dyadic coping includes several domains; a) stress communication (communication of the experience of stress between partners), b) individual positive dyadic coping (one partner’s positive responses to help the other partner to cope with stress via support such as empathic responding, delegated dyadic coping, and active engagement), c) positive conjoint dyadic coping (what partners do together to cope with shared or dyadic stress. Examples include common, collaborative, communal dyadic coping, mutual responsiveness), d) negative individual dyadic coping (one partner’s negative responses to the other partner’s stress including protective buffering, overprotection, hostile/ambivalent responses, and controlling behavior, mocking the other partner’s feelings and patronizing them, invalidating their experience, providing insincere, superficial, and ambivalent support), and e) negative conjoint dyadic coping (partners’ conjoint negative response to deal with a shared or dyadic stress. Examples are common negative dyadic coping and disengaged avoidance; Bodenmann et al., 2019; Falconier & Kuhn, 2019).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Koç University Graduate School of Social Sciences and Humanities.