The Moderating Role of Partner Support in the Links Between Body Image Concerns and Sexual Satisfaction Among Couples Transitioning to Parenthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New parent couples often experience fluctuations in postpartum sexual satisfaction, with body image concerns being a significant factor. While these concerns are linked to decreased sexual satisfaction, potential protective factors remain underexplored. In this study, we examined the moderating role of perceived partner support in the longitudinal links between new parents’ own body image concerns and both their own and their partner’s sexual satisfaction. Couples (n = 184) completed online validated questionnaires at 8 (T1), 12 (T2), and 24 (T3) months postpartum. A dyadic latent growth curve analysis based on the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model revealed a positive association between perceived partner support and sexual satisfaction at T1 for both parents, but no associations with the parents’ sexual satisfaction trajectory. Two moderations were found: first, only when non-bearing partners received high levels of support, their own body image concerns were associated with their lower sexual satisfaction at T1. Second, only in bearing mothers receiving high levels of support, their own body image concerns were associated with a smaller decrease in their partners’ sexual satisfaction from T1 to T3. Findings provide nuanced insights into partner support and sexual satisfaction among new parents, aiding in the development of targeted interventions.
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 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".