The moderating role of parenting stress when it comes to romantic attachment and sexual satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual satisfaction is at the heart of a thriving romantic relationship and is intertwined with both partners romantic attachment orientations. Prior research has found that insecure romantic attachment orientations (anxiety and avoidance) are associated with lower sexual satisfaction in oneself and one’s partner. Stress is known to exacerbate insecure attachment tendencies, and couples with children are often exposed to parenting stress, which has been associated with lower sexual satisfaction. It is therefore possible that parenting stress moderates the association between the attachment and sexual systems, such that among those who are high in parenting stress, the negative link between attachment insecurity and sexual satisfaction is stronger. The objective of this study was to examine the link between romantic attachment and sexual satisfaction, and the impact of parenting stress on this association. One hundred three mixed-sex couples completed self-report questionnaires and were included in actor and partner analyses. Both parents’ attachment avoidance was associated with their own reduced sexual satisfaction. Fathers’ attachment avoidance was associated with mothers’ reduced sexual satisfaction. Additionally, fathers’ parenting stress moderated the association between their own romantic attachment avoidance and their partner’s sexual satisfaction. Contrary to prediction, as fathers’ parenting stress increased, the association between their higher attachment avoidance and mothers’ lower sexual satisfaction became weaker. Findings are discussed in light of research and theory on the role of attachment and parenting stress for sexual satisfaction in couples with children.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".