Exploring the Relationship between Partner Communication and Depressive Symptoms: A Longitudinal Study of Acceptance and Rejection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation draws upon the interactional theory of depression (Coyne, 1976) and interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (Rohner, 2016) to explore the relationship between partner communication and depressive symptoms. A non-clinical sample of 280 partnered adults living in the United States and Canada completed self-report surveys at two time points separated by approximately eight weeks. The online surveys measured participant’s perceptions of accepting and rejecting communication they received from their romantic partners. Accepting and rejecting communication consisted of communication of warmth, indifference, and neglect. Participants also self-reported depressive symptomatology, excessive reassurance seeking, relationship satisfaction, and demographic variables. Based on a longitudinal hierarchical multiple regression analysis, results indicated that the communication variables (warmth, indifference, and neglect) did not predict depression symptoms, but prior depression symptoms did strongly predict subsequent symptoms. Excessive reassurance seeking was also a significant (albeit weak) predictor of depression symptoms. Implications for therapeutic practice and future research 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 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".