Daily dyadic coping: Associations with postpartum sexual desire and sexual and relationship satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transition to parenthood involves numerous stressors. Consequently, many new parents report negative changes to their sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction relative to pre-pregnancy, with the most disruption reported at 3-months postpartum. While prior research suggests that dyadic coping—a couple’s capacity to deal with stress effectively and mutually—is positively linked with relationship satisfaction, little is known about how it relates to sexual and relational outcomes in new parents’ daily lives. This study examined how common and negative dyadic coping were associated with new parents’ own and their partner’s daily sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction. New parent couples ( N = 120) completed a baseline survey and 21 days of daily diaries between 3- and 4-months postpartum. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. After controlling for mood, for both women who gave birth and their partners, on days that they reported higher common dyadic coping, they reported greater sexual desire, and sexual and relationship satisfaction. On days when women reported lower negative dyadic coping, both they and their partner reported greater relationship satisfaction. When women reported higher common dyadic coping, their partners reported greater sexual desire. When women reported lower negative dyadic coping, they reported greater sexual desire. When partners reported lower negative dyadic coping, they reported greater relationship satisfaction. Focusing on strategies to encourage common and reduce negative daily dyadic coping may be beneficial for sexual and relationship well-being early in the postpartum when couples report experiencing a peak in sexual and relationship challenges.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".