On the Move: Exploring the Trajectories of Stressors and Rewards Among Relocating Couples
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In today’s globalized world, relocation is an increasingly common experience. For example, in the past five years, people from 531,400 households in Canada have relocated due to new job opportunities (Statistics Canada, 2022). Similarly, remote working has led to five million Americans moving to different areas since 2020 (Insider, 2022). This includes relocations between different cities, states/provinces, or countries. Relocation is a stressful time for individuals, especially for couples who move for one partner’s job, as career and lifestyle adjustments for both partners can introduce additional challenges and intensify partners’ stress (Brown, 2008; Challiol & Mignonac, 2005; Harvey, 1998). However, the existing body of research on relocation largely focuses on the job-specific impact of relocation, and less attention has been given to individuals’ romantic relationships during this time. Further, past work has mostly emphasized the stressful nature of relocation, either examined from the perspective of those initiating the move (i.e., relocaters; Clark & Withers, 2002; Martin, 1996; Vohlidalova, 2014) or their accompanying partners (Harvey, 1998; Hiller & McCraig, 2007; McNulty, 2012), using retrospective assessments of stress that ask partners to recall stress levels from previous moves (e.g., Munton, 1990) or through a single follow-up survey post relocation (e.g., Fisher & Shaw, 1994). Consequently, little is known about the couple’s relationship and partners’ stress levels, as well as positive experiences couples may have during a relocation, especially over time. The current study aims to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the trajectories of stressors and rewards for both partners, spanning from before couples move and extending across a one-year period after relocation. Past work has established that relocation is a stressful time (e.g., Brown, 2008; Harvey, 1998; Sterle et al., 2018), involving unique stressors related to one’s identity, relationship, daily life, and changing social life (Brown, 2008). Moreover, relocation can be considered an acute stressor, as it has an identifiable onset and the possibility of an endpoint (Karney & Neff, 2013). Given the time limited nature of acute stressors, their negative effects should also be time limited (Lucas et al., 2003). As such, stressors may give way to rewards the farther couples get into the relocation and adjust to their new environment. Indeed, past work has identified some rewards associated with job relocation, including career advancement (e.g., higher salary; Hippler, 2009), and learning about other cultures (Riemer, 2000). However, it is still unclear how couples’ experiences of stressors and rewards change across the span of a move. Additionally, it is possible that these trajectories are different for relocaters and accompanying partners. Past work has shown that relocaters may have an easier time adjusting to the move since they have some stability in their life via their job, whereas accompanying partners often have to start anew, especially if they have lost their job because of the move (Harvey, 1998; Hausman & Reed, 1991). It is also possible that relocaters may feel responsible for the relocation and the changes made to the couples’ daily life, and in turn experience additional stress. Relatedly, past work has identified differences in the experiences of men and women during the move. Relocation has historically been a gendered phenomenon, with men being the relocaters and women the accompanying partners. This means that women were more likely to sacrifice their careers during relocation and engaged in more housework during this time (Challiol & Mignonac, 2005; Harris, 2004; Hiller & McCraig, 2007). Yet, given that women experience more stress in relationships in general (Karney & Neff, 2013; Merz et al., 2014), it is unclear whether the higher stress documented for accompanying partners is related to the partner’s role or gender. Thus, we will explore the trajectories of stress separately for relocaters and accompanying partners as well as the influence of gender on the trajectories.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».