Relationship satisfaction in the time of COVID-19: The role of shared reality in perceiving partner support for frontline health-care workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People often rely on partner support and shared reality during stressful and uncertain times. As such, the current research explored how these may relate to relationship satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic. To do so, 155 frontline health-care workers and their significant others completed measures of shared reality and relationship satisfaction, while also indicating their levels of perceived or provided support, respectively. We proposed that shared reality would foster partners providing and health-care workers perceiving support which would, in turn, promote greater relationship satisfaction. Overall, both shared reality and partner support were positively associated with relationship satisfaction for health-care workers and their significant others. Using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model with Mediation (APIMeM), we found shared reality to be associated with greater relationship satisfaction through health-care workers perceiving greater support from their partner. Our research demonstrates that shared reality may be a way for people under stress to perceive greater partner support, providing relational benefits for the couple as a whole.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".