MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412035813 · doi:10.1111/jmft.70051

Daily Conflict and Relationship Satisfaction in Couples of New Parents: The Moderating Roles of Romantic Attachment and Intimacy

2025· article· en· W4412035813 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Lessard, Audrey Brassard, Noémie Beaulieu, Patrick Gosselin, Anne Brault‐Labbé, Marie‐France Lafontaine, Katherine Péloquin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marital and Family Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyPartner effectsMultilevel modelRomanceAnxietyAttachment theorySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the transition to parenthood, parents face challenges, such as new roles, responsibilities, and less couple time. This often increases conflict, which may in turn reduce relationship satisfaction. Yet it remains unclear whether certain factors modulate these associations. In this dyadic daily diary study with 196 first-time parent couples, we examined the moderating roles of romantic attachment (anxiety, avoidance) and intimacy in the links between conflict and relationship satisfaction for each partner. Participants completed online diaries for 14 days at 4-month postpartum. Results from multilevel modeling following the actor-partner interdependence model showed that greater conflict was associated with lower relationship satisfaction (daily and across 14 days) in both partners. They also suggest that mothers' higher attachment anxiety amplified the harmful effects of conflict on relationship satisfaction at the actor level, along with higher attachment anxiety and avoidance at the partner level, whereas intimacy protected against them. Clinical implications are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Marital and Family TherapySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207