Dyadic Coping and Relationship Quality: The Polish Version of the Dyadic Coping Inventory in Actor-Partner Interdependence Model Analyses

Anna Wendołowska; Dorota Czyżowska

doi:10.18290/rpsych2025.0008

Published : 2026-03-04

No. Online First

Dyadic Coping and Relationship Quality: The Polish Version of the Dyadic Coping Inventory in Actor-Partner Interdependence Model Analyses

Anna Wendołowska

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2497-4099

Dorota Czyżowska

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7062-4789

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18290/rpsych2025.0008

Abstract

Dyadic coping (DC) is a key mechanism that supports relationship functioning; however, in Poland, there are no studies using comprehensive tools to assess these processes from a couple-level perspective. The aim of the present study was to examine the associations between DC strategies and romantic relationship quality, as well as to introduce the Polish version of the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI). We studied 275 heterosexual couples (N = 550) who completed the Polish DCI and the Partnership Functioning Scale (PFB). We applied the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) within a structural equation modelling (SEM) framework, controlling for relationship duration, financial situation, number of children, and relationship status. The models demonstrated excellent fit (RMSEA = 0.043–0.050; CFI = 0.981–0.987; TLI = 0.969–0.978). Actor effects were stronger than partner effects, particularly for positive strategies (supportive and common), which most strongly predicted relationship quality (R² up to 37%). Women more frequently reported stress communication, whereas men reported higher use of delegated and negative DC strategies. Men’s relationship quality was significantly associated with their perception of their partner’s stress communication and delegated support. In contrast, women were more sensitive to their own strategies and their perception of their partner’s engagement in common coping. The Polish adaptation of the DCI is a valuable tool for studying coping mechanisms in couples and may be useful in clinical practice. The findings highlight the crucial role of constructive DC strategies in fostering relationship quality, with an asymmetrical importance of self versus partner behaviours for women and men.

Keywords:

dyadic coping with stress, relationship quality, Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM), dyadic analyses

Details

References

Statistics

Authors

Download files

pdf
pdf (Supplement 1)
pdf (Supplement 2)

Altmetric indicators

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Aguilar-Raab, C., Winter, F., Jarczok, M. N., Ditzen, B., & Warth, M. (2022). Feeling low and unhappy together? An Actor–Partner–Interdependence Model uncovering the linkage between different operationalizations of relationship quality and depression in different-sex couples. PLoS ONE, 17(11), Article e0274756. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274756

Arican-Dinc, B., & Gable, S. L. (2026). Dyadic emotion regulation. Dyadic Emotion Regulation. Annual Review of Psychology, 77(1), 365–391. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020325-033825

Bodenmann, G. (2005). Dyadic coping and its significance for marital functioning. In T. A. Revenson, K. Kayser, & G. Bodenmann (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping (pp. 33–49). American Psychological Association.

https://doi.org/10.1037/11031-002

Bodenmann, G., Randall, A. K., & Falconier, M. K. (2016). Coping in couples: The Systemic Transactional Model (STM). In M. K. Falconier, A. K. Randall, & G. Bodenmann (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: A cross-cultural perspective (pp. 5–22). Routledge.

Bodenmann, G., & Randall, A. K. (2012). Common factors in the enhancement of dyadic coping. Behavior Therapy, 43(1), 88–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2011.04.003

Bühler, J. L., Krauss, S., & Orth, U. (2021). Development of relationship satisfaction across the life span: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 147(10), 1012–1053. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000342

Carlson, D. L., Miller, A. J., & Rudd, S. (2020). Division of housework, communication, and couples’ relationship satisfaction. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 6.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120924805

Cutrona, C. E., & Russell, D. W. (2017). Autonomy promotion, responsiveness, and emotion regulation promote effective social support in times of stress. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 126–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.07.002

Falconier, M. K., Jackson, J. B., Hilpert, P., & Bodenmann, G. (2015). Dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 42, 28–46.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.07.002

Falconier, M. K., Randall, A. K., & Bodenmann, G. (2016). Cultural considerations in understanding dyadic coping across cultures. In M. K. Falconier, A. K. Randall, & G. Bodenmann (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: A cross-cultural perspective (pp. 23–35). Routledge.

Falconier, M. K., & Kuhn, R. (2019). Dyadic coping in couples: A conceptual integration and a review of the empirical literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 571.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00571

Ferguson, E. K., & Karantzas, G. C. (2023). The roles of self‐regulation and partner regulation on romantic relationship quality. Family Process, 62(1), 406–422.

https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12782

Fitzgerald, M., & Shuler, J. (2022). Coping together or separate: Attachment and dyadic coping as mediators linking childhood maltreatment to intimate relationship quality. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 22(4), 344–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332691.2022.2149650

Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781

Hahlweg, K. (1979). Construction and validation of a marital interaction questionnaire (PFB). Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 8(1), 17–40.

Heim, C., & Heim, C. (2025). How long-term couples cope with chronic stressors and adverse life course events in marriage: A qualitative study. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 53(4), 450–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2025.2459688

Helgeson, V. S., Jakubiak, B. K., Van Vleet, M., & Zajdel, M. (2018). Communal coping and adjustment to chronic illness: Theory update and evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(2), 170–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317735767

Herzberg, P. Y. (2013). Coping in relationships: The interplay between individual and dyadic coping and their effects on relationship satisfaction. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 26(2), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2012.655726

Hoan, E., & MacDonald, G. (2024). “Sisters are doin’ it for themselves”: Gender differences in singles’ well-being. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 16(6), 610–619.

https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506241287960

Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Hudson, N. W., Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2020). The highs and lows of love: Romantic relationship quality moderates whether spending time with one’s partner predicts gains or losses in well-being. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(4), 572–589.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219867960

Janicka, I. (2008). Stosunki partnerskie w związkach niemałzeńskich [Partner relations in non-marital couples]. Przegląd Psychologiczny, 51(1), 37–53.

Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3–34.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3

Kenny, D. A. (2015). APIM: Dyadic data analysis [Unpublished manuscript].

http://davidakenny.net/dyad.htm

Landolt, S. A., Weitkamp, K., Roth, M., Sisson, N. M., & Bodenmann, G. (2023). Dyadic coping and mental health in couples: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 106, Article 102344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102344.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99–128. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4

Milek, A., Butler, E. A., & Bodenmann, G. (2015). The interplay of couple’s shared time, women’s intimacy, and intradyadic stress. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(6), 831–842. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000133

Perelli-Harris, B., Hoherz, S., Lappegård, T., & Evans, A. (2019). Mind the “happiness” gap: The relationship between cohabitation, marriage, and subjective well-being in the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, and Norway. Demography, 56(4), 1219–1246.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00792-4

Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L. (2015). Responsiveness. Current Opinion in Psychology, 1, 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.01.001

Revenson, T. A., Griva, K., Luszczynska, A., Morrison, V., Panagopoulou, P., Vilchinsky, N., & Hagedoorn, M. (2016). Caregiving in the illness context. Palgrave Macmillan.

https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137558985

Rhoades, G., Stanley, S., Markman, H., & Allen, E. (2015). Can marriage education mitigate the risks associated with premarital cohabitation? Journal of Family Psychology, 29(3), 500–506. http://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000081

Robles, T. F., Slatcher, R. B., Trombello, J. M., & McGinn, M. M. (2014). Marital quality and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), 140–187.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031859

Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

Roth, M., Good, N., Ledermann, T., Landolt, S. A., Weitkamp, K., & Bodenmann, G. (2024). Building happier bonds: Gratitude as a mediator between dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction in romantic couples. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1452397.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1452397

Ruan, Y., Le, J. D. V., & Reis, H. T. (2024). How can I help?: Specific strategies used in interpersonal emotion regulation in a relationship context. Emotion, 24(2), 329–344.

https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001272

Rusu, P. P., Nussbeck, F. W., Leuchtmann, L., & Bodenmann, G. (2020). Stress, dyadic coping, and relationship satisfaction: A longitudinal study disentangling timely stable from yearly fluctuations. PLoS ONE, 15(4), Article e0231133. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231133

Schirl, J., Ruth, E., & Zemp, M. (2023). The moderating role of dyadic coping in the link between parenting stress and couple relationship quality in parents of children with ADHD. International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, 8(Suppl 2), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-022-00082-2

Stanley, S. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Markman, H. J. (2006). Sliding versus deciding: Inertia and the premarital cohabitation effect. Family relations, 55(4), 499–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00418.x

Vedelago, L., Balzarini, R. N., Fitzpatrick, S., & Muise, A. (2023). Tailoring dyadic coping strategies to attachment style: Emotion-focused and problem-focused dyadic coping differentially buffer anxiously and avoidantly attached partners. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 40(6), 1830–1853. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221133575

Wendołowska, A. M., Czyżowska, D., & Bodenmann, G. (2022). Psychometric properties and measurement invariance of the Polish version of the Dyadic Coping Inventory. Current Psychology, 41(3), 1159–1173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00623-5

Yöyen, E., Çalık, S., & Güneri Barış, T. (2025). Predictors of young adult women’s psychological well-being in romantic relationships. Behavioral Sciences, 15(1), 82.

https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15010082

Zeidner, M., Kloda, I., & Matthews, G. (2013). Does dyadic coping mediate the relationship between emotional intelligence (EI) and marital quality? Journal of Family Psychology, 27(5), 795–805. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034009