Relational load: Implications for executive functioning, mental health, and feelings of unity in romantic relationships

ABSTRACT

This study examined how ongoing relationship maintenance and communal perspectives influence relational load and executive functioning immediately after a stressful conversation in the laboratory in a sample of predominantly white romantic partners. It also explored the aftermath of relational load on partners’ communal perspectives and mental health five consecutive days following the conversation. Receiving greater maintenance from one’s partner before the conversation was associated with increased unity and less conflict, which reduced relational load. This was particularly true for men. Women’s communal perspectives were also associated with better executive functioning for themselves and their partners. Finally, greater relational load diminished feelings of unity and mental health in the days after the laboratory, but the effect on mental health was short-lived.

KEYWORDS:

• The theory of resilience and relational load
• communal perspectives
• executive functioning
• mental health

Disclosure statement

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

Notes

1 We did not examine the impact of conflict on executive functioning in a structural equation model because the measures for participants’ perceptions of conflict in the discussion task were collected after the executive functioning task.

2 We ran both latent structural models with parcels and LC (latent composite) models to compare the two approaches. The parceling approach required more parameters to estimate and reduced the power in the models. For example, one path from each model that was significant in the LC approach became non-significant in the latent model with parcels (the path from male communal perspectives to relational load [–.22], the path from male communal perspectives to male executive functioning [.29], and male conflict to male relational load [.16] became nonsignificant). To preserve power, we decided to retain the LC approach. Re-evaluating the Stephenson and Holbert method of identification in light of these recent changes to using omega instead of alpha for internal reliability is beyond the scope of the present report.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Tamara D. Afifi

Tamara D. Afifi is a Professor (PhD, 1999, University of Nebraska-Lincoln) in the Department of Communication at the University of California Santa Barbara.

Chantel Haughton

Chantel Haughton is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication at the University of California Santa Barbara.

Callie Parrish

Callie Parrish is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication at the University of California Santa Barbara.