Search

During times of stress, we look to close others for support. Social support conversations are critical for relationship maintenance and well-being. Yet, certain ways of talking about problems-such as co-ruminating-can exacerbate stress. Since social support and co-rumination are both dyadic processes, it is important to examine physiological responses during these conversations in a dyadic manner. Little research has examined physiological synchrony of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) during social support conversations or co-ruminative conversations. The current research capitalizes on an experimental manipulation of co-rumination using a sample of close friends (147 dyads) and romantic partners (113 dyads) to examine physiological covariation in the context of support. Across both samples, dyads exhibited significant physiological covariation in pre-ejection period reactivity (PEP). Contrary to our hypothesis, dyads in the co-rumination condition did not show more covariation. Close friend dyads did, however, exhibit more covariation as compared to romantic dyads. We also found significant variability in physiological covariation across dyads, with a minority of dyads exhibiting negative covariation of PEP reactivity. The homogeneity of the samples limits the generalizability of the findings and highlights the need for more diverse samples in future work. These findings underline the need for further exploration into the mechanisms that contribute to distinct patterns of physiological synchrony, the conditions in which negative synchrony occurs, and what predicts especially strong positive synchrony. This work extends our understanding of physiological synchrony of the sympathetic nervous system during support conversations and emphasizes the importance of considering heterogeneity in physiological processes., (© 2024 Society for Psychophysiological Research.)

Restrictiveness, a component of relationship dominance associated with monitoring and regulating partners' behavior, is a risk factor and accelerant of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). Few studies, however, have examined in vivo physiological responses associated with restrictiveness. Toward this end, 105 romantic couples (N = 210) completed measures of restrictiveness and had their physiological responses recorded in anticipation of and during a dyadic interaction in which they discussed a hypothetical transitional period in which one person (the discloser) revealed to their partner (the responder) that they had just gotten into their dream school or was offered their dream job. Individuals high (vs. low) in restrictiveness exhibited physiological responses indicative of greater psychological challenge (e.g., elevated cardiac output and lower peripheral resistance) in anticipation of and during the conversation. In contrast, their partners exhibited greater physiological indicators of psychological threat in anticipation of (but not during) the conversation, particularly when assigned to the discloser role. Exploratory analyses of communication behaviors corroborated the physiological data. This research integrates the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat with theories of relationship power and dominance to demonstrate the physiological manifestations of a well-known risk factor for IPV in romantic relationships and interpersonal restrictiveness., (© 2020 Society for Psychophysiological Research.)