Explores how social support impacts stress and emotional well-being in couples with spinal cord injury, indicating a potential buffer effect.
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) and their caregiving partners often experience elevated stress and reduced emotional well-being. However, the dyadic relationship between stress and emotional well-being in the context of SCI remains unclear. According to the buffer hypothesis, social support can mitigate the adverse effects of stress. This study examined the dyadic reciprocal associations between work- and housework-related stress and negative affect, representing one dimension of emotional well-being, among individuals with SCI and their caregiving partners, including the moderating role of perceived social support within these relationships. RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: Data were collected from 144 dyads participating in the longitudinal pro-WELL study, with assessments conducted at three intervals over 1 year. The examined variables included work- and housework-related stress, negative affect, and perceived social support from the partner. Analyses were conducted using the actor-partner interdependence model. RESULTS: Individuals with SCI and their caregiving partners' own work- and housework-related stress were associated with one's own negative affect, and vice versa (actor effects), at the between-person level. No within-person associations were observed. Primarily for the caregiving partner, moderating effects of perceived social support emerged. These included moderation of the between-person association between negative affect and housework-related stress, as well as the within-person association between stress and negative affect. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest that mutual social support may play a role in buffering stress in couples facing SCI, particularly for caregiving partners. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lüthi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: