On the Move: Exploring the Trajectories of Stressors and Rewards Among Relocating Couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In today’s globalized world, relocation is an increasingly common experience. For example, in the past five years, people from 531,400 households in Canada have relocated due to new job opportunities (Statistics Canada, 2022). Similarly, remote working has led to five million Americans moving to different areas since 2020 (Insider, 2022). This includes relocations between different cities, states/provinces, or countries. Relocation is a stressful time for individuals, especially for couples who move for one partner’s job, as career and lifestyle adjustments for both partners can introduce additional challenges and intensify partners’ stress (Brown, 2008; Challiol & Mignonac, 2005; Harvey, 1998). However, the existing body of research on relocation largely focuses on the job-specific impact of relocation, and less attention has been given to individuals’ romantic relationships during this time. Further, past work has mostly emphasized the stressful nature of relocation, either examined from the perspective of those initiating the move (i.e., relocaters; Clark & Withers, 2002; Martin, 1996; Vohlidalova, 2014) or their accompanying partners (Harvey, 1998; Hiller & McCraig, 2007; McNulty, 2012), using retrospective assessments of stress that ask partners to recall stress levels from previous moves (e.g., Munton, 1990) or through a single follow-up survey post relocation (e.g., Fisher & Shaw, 1994). Consequently, little is known about the couple’s relationship and partners’ stress levels, as well as positive experiences couples may have during a relocation, especially over time. The current study aims to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the trajectories of stressors and rewards for both partners, spanning from before couples move and extending across a one-year period after relocation. Past work has established that relocation is a stressful time (e.g., Brown, 2008; Harvey, 1998; Sterle et al., 2018), involving unique stressors related to one’s identity, relationship, daily life, and changing social life (Brown, 2008). Moreover, relocation can be considered an acute stressor, as it has an identifiable onset and the possibility of an endpoint (Karney & Neff, 2013). Given the time limited nature of acute stressors, their negative effects should also be time limited (Lucas et al., 2003). As such, stressors may give way to rewards the farther couples get into the relocation and adjust to their new environment. Indeed, past work has identified some rewards associated with job relocation, including career advancement (e.g., higher salary; Hippler, 2009), and learning about other cultures (Riemer, 2000). However, it is still unclear how couples’ experiences of stressors and rewards change across the span of a move. Additionally, it is possible that these trajectories are different for relocaters and accompanying partners. Past work has shown that relocaters may have an easier time adjusting to the move since they have some stability in their life via their job, whereas accompanying partners often have to start anew, especially if they have lost their job because of the move (Harvey, 1998; Hausman & Reed, 1991). It is also possible that relocaters may feel responsible for the relocation and the changes made to the couples’ daily life, and in turn experience additional stress. Relatedly, past work has identified differences in the experiences of men and women during the move. Relocation has historically been a gendered phenomenon, with men being the relocaters and women the accompanying partners. This means that women were more likely to sacrifice their careers during relocation and engaged in more housework during this time (Challiol & Mignonac, 2005; Harris, 2004; Hiller & McCraig, 2007). Yet, given that women experience more stress in relationships in general (Karney & Neff, 2013; Merz et al., 2014), it is unclear whether the higher stress documented for accompanying partners is related to the partner’s role or gender. Thus, we will explore the trajectories of stress separately for relocaters and accompanying partners as well as the influence of gender on the trajectories.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| 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".