Core beliefs about you and me: Schema structures, relationship quality, and depressive severity in romantic couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Romantic relationship distress and depression are mutually reinforcing phenomena with common vulnerability factors. In particular, negative 'schema structures' (i.e., cognitive organizations of an individual's core beliefs) containing beliefs about one's partner ('partner-schema structures') and beliefs about oneself ('self-schema structures') are established vulnerability factors of relationship distress and depressive severity. To our knowledge, no existing studies have examined the effects of partner- and self- schema structures on these outcomes in a dyadic sample. The current study aimed to investigate the effects of partner- and self- schema structures on relationship quality and depressive severity in a community sample of 253 romantic couples. A multilevel model approach was used, following guidelines of the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model, to account for interdependence and allow for a novel examination of partner effects. Results suggested that loosely interconnected positive partner-schema content was associated with actors' and partners' lower perceived relationship quality, whereas both loosely interconnected positive self-schema content and tightly interconnected negative self-schema content were associated with actors' higher depressive severity. Future studies should examine these models in clinical samples (i.e., couples are included based on their current experience with clinical levels of relationship distress and/or depression), examine possible mediating factors to better explain the link between partner-schema structures and relationship quality, and determine the longitudinal associations among schemas and relationship outcomes over time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".