Attachment, conflict, and relationship satisfaction of couples transitioning to parenthood: The moderator role of intimacy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On average, couples experience increase in conflicts and decrease in relationship satisfaction during the transition to parenthood. How couples manage conflicts may improve or erode their relationship over time. While romantic attachment (anxiety, avoidance) is known to modulate couples' adaptation during the transition to parenthood, the contribution of conflict resolution styles and intimacy to better understand these links seems promising. The goal of this study was to examine the mediator role of conflict resolution styles in the associations between romantic attachment and relationship satisfaction and the moderator role of intimacy in the conflict-satisfaction associations. In a dyadic prospective study involving 211 couples welcoming their first child, we assessed prenatal romantic attachment, conflict resolution style and intimacy at 4-month postpartum, and relationship satisfaction at 12-month postpartum. Results from structural equation modeling indicated that prenatal attachment insecurities predicted a higher use of conflict engagement, compliance, and withdrawal and a lower use of positive problem-solving conflict resolution styles in both partners at the actor and partner levels. Bearing mothers' lower relationship satisfaction was explained by their own and their partners' attachment insecurities through their lower use of positive problem solving and by their partners' higher use of conflict engagement. Partners' lower relationship satisfaction was explained by their own and the bearing mothers' attachment insecurities through their own compliance and withdrawal styles, as well as the bearing mother's conflict engagement. When partners perceived a high level of intimacy, their withdrawal and compliance were related to a higher level of relationship satisfaction. Implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".