When love hurts: Testing the stress generation hypothesis between depressive symptoms, conflict behaviors, and breakup rumination in romantic couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: In this study we investigated the stress generation hypothesis in romantic relationships, testing how individuals’ depressive symptoms can lead to interpersonal stress that worsens their depressive symptoms. Interpersonal stress was operationalized as conflict enactment (critical, hostile, and rejecting behaviors toward one's romantic partner) and breakup rumination (persistent and intense thoughts of ending the relationship). Methods: Participants included 226 heterosexual adult romantic couples, with a mean age of 21.48 years for women and 22.35 years for men. A short-term longitudinal design was employed, involving three waves of data collection, including a daily diary portion. Depressive symptoms were measured in the lab at the beginning of the study (Wave 1) and again one month later (Wave 3). Following Wave 1, conflict enactment and breakup rumination were measured online over a 14-day period (Wave 2) through daily diary entries, which were then averaged across the 14 days into a single score for each construct. Results: Using actor-partner interdependence mediation modelling, we found women's and men's depressive symptoms at Wave 1 positively predicted their own conflict enactment and breakup rumination at Wave 2, as well as their own depressive symptoms at Wave 3 (actor effects). Women's depressive symptoms at Wave 1 positively predicted men's conflict enactment at Wave 2 (partner effect). Additionally, women's conflict enactment at Wave 2 positively predicted their own depressive symptoms at Wave 3 (actor effect) and mediated the increase in their own depressive symptoms from Wave 1 to 3 (indirect effect). Discussion: Findings illustrate how depressive symptoms are embedded in an interpersonal context and exacerbated by conflictual behaviors within romantic relationships over a period of one month.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".