(PS4-D94) How’s It Going? A Longitudinal Model Predicting Romantic Relationship Quality and Stability During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Karney and Bradbury (1995) synthesized extensive literature to propose the Vulnerability-Stress-Adaptation model of relationship well-being and stability. This model suggested that pre-existing individual and contextual vulnerabilities, in combination with external stressors, can pose challenges to couples’ ability to engage in adaptive relationship processes (e.g., communication, support, problem-solving). Problematic processes in turn predict erosion of relationship well-being over time, which can ultimately lead to relationship dissolution. Pietromonaco and Overall (2021) revised and adapted this theoretical model to consider how the COVID-19 pandemic might potentially provide challenges to romantic relationships. Despite their intuitive appeal, however, neither of these theoretical models has yet been tested empirically in its entirety. We used data from a longitudinal on-line study of relationship functioning during the pandemic to test a version of these theoretical models, using structural equation modeling. Participants (N=287; including 57 LGBTQ+ individuals) completed an intake survey in the summer of 2020, during the first wave of the pandemic, followed immediately by up to four weeks of diary entries. Approximately 1.5 years later (winter 2021/2022), participants were invited to complete a follow-up survey. Three types of vulnerabilities were assessed at intake: intolerance of uncertainty (an individual vulnerability that may challenge a person’s ability to cope effectively with uncertain and stressful situations), LGBTQ+ status (a contextual vulnerability exposing one to the stressors of being part of a marginalized group), and amount of pre-existing external stressors (as assessed by a checklist of stressful events experienced in the previous year). These three vulnerabilities were all positively associated with each other. As expected, each significantly predicted heightened subjective feelings of stress at Week 1, followed by higher levels of subjective stress predicting poorer relationship functioning at Week 2, which in turn predicted lower perceived relationship quality (Week 3). This model fit the data well (CFI=.96, SRMR=.05). A second model (N=185; CFI=.92, SRMR=.07) showed that relationship quality then significantly predicted relationship stability at the 1.5-year follow-up. This study provides an important contribution to the research literature, being the first to empirically test these influential theoretical models, and doing so with a strong prospective, longitudinal design that helps to rule out potential reverse causation. More importantly, this study provides insights to individual and couples’ therapists who wish to support their clients. Discussion of the model as a whole might help couples understand how challenging outside environments can potentially seep in and undermine their relationship interactions. Helping individuals better manage their capacity to tolerate uncertainty may be an important and understudied pathway through which clinicians can help individuals better manage their stress, with potential associated benefits for their relationship.