Skip to main content

Does talking about their relationship affect couples’ marital and psychological adjustment to lung cancer?

Journal of Cancer Survivorship volume 2, pages 53–64 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

Introduction

Relationship talk refers to talking with a partner about the relationship, what one needs from one’s partner, and/or the relationship implications of a shared stressor. This prospective study examined the effects of relationship talk on couples’ psychosocial adaptation to lung cancer.

Methods

A total of 169 patients (63% male) and 167 of their partners completed a series of questionnaires within 4-weeks of treatment initiation for newly diagnosed lung cancer (baseline). Follow-up questionnaires were administered 3 and 6 months later.

Results

Multilevel models using the couple as the unit of analysis showed that patients and partners who reported more frequent relationship talk had less distress (effect size r = 0.16) and greater marital adjustment over time (effect size r = 0.21), regardless of gender. Satisfaction with the frequency of relationship talk was associated with lower baseline distress for patients and partners (effect size r = 0.25). However, over time, greater communication regarding the relationship was related to less distress in the partner (effect size r = 0.15) than in the cancer patient.

Discussion

Expanding the study of spousal communication in cancer beyond patient cancer-related disclosures to include the effects of talking about the spousal relationship may help clarify the role of relationship processes in couples’ psychosocial adaptation. Patients and partners who begin talking about the relationship implications of lung cancer early on in their cancer experience may be better able to prepare together for the challenges they may face as cancer progresses and the patient moves toward the end-of-life.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

Results of this study underscore the need for couple-focused interventions in lung cancer that address the communication and relationship needs of both partners. Working with couples during the initial diagnosis and treatment period and emphasizing the benefits of discussing relationship issues during this time of major upheaval may facilitate couples’ successful adaptation to lung cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Figure 1

References

  1. Schmidt GM, Niland JC, Forman SJ, et al. Extended follow-up in 212 long-term allogeneic bone marrow transplant survivors. Transplantation. 1993;55:551–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Rieker PP, Fitzgerald EM, Kalish LA. Adaptive behavioral responses to potential infertility among survivors of testis cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:347–55.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hodges L, Humphris G, Macfarlane G. A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between the psychological distress of cancer patients and their carers. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:1–12.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kornblith AB, Anderson J, Cella DF. Quality of life assessment of Hodgkin's disease survivors: a model for cooperative clinical trials. Oncology 1990;4:93–101.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Karney B, Story L, Bradbury T. Marriages in context: Interactions between chronic and acute stress among newlyweds. Couples Coping with Stress. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 13–32.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Burman B, Margolin G. Analysis of the association between marital relationships and health problems: An interactional perspective. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:39–63.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lichtman RR, Taylor SE, Wood JV. Social support and marital adjustment after breast cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1987;5:47–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zahlis EH, Shands ME. Breast cancer: Demands of the illness on the patient's partner. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1991;9:75–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cleek MG, Pearson TA. Perceived Causes of Divorce: An Analysis of Interrelationships. J Marriage Fam 1985;47:179–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Caughlin JP. The demand/withdraw pattern of communication as a predictor of marital satisfaction over time. Unresolved issues and future directions. Human Commun Res. 2002;28:49–85.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Reynolds JS, Perrin NA. Mismatches in social support and psychosocial adjustment to breast cancer. Health Psychol. 2004;23:425–30.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Manne S, Ostroff J, Winkel G, et al. Posttraumatic Growth After Breast Cancer: Patient, Partner, and Couple Perspectives. Psychosom Med. 2004;66:442–54.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dorval M, Guay S, Mondor M, et al. Couples who get closer after breast cancer: Frequency and predictors in a prospective investigation. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3588–96.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Manne S, Ostroff J, Rini C, et al. The interpersonal process model of intimacy: The role of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and partner responsiveness in interactions between breast cancer patients and their partners. J Fam Psychol. 2004;18:589–99.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Manne S, Badr H. Intimacy and relationship processes in couples’ psychosocial adaptation to cancer. Cancer. (in press).

  16. Revenson TA. Scenes from a marriage: The coupling of support, coping, and gender within the context of chronic illness. Social psychological foundations of health and illness. London: Blackwell; 2003. p. 530–59.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Manne S, Ostroff J, Sherman M, et al. Couples’ support-related communication, psychological distress and relationship satisfaction among women with early stage breast cancer. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72:660–70.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Manne S, Ostroff J, Norton T, et al. Cancer-related relationship communication in couples coping with early stage breast cancer. Psycho-Oncol. 2006;15:234–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Manne S. Intrusive thoughts and psychological distress among cancer patients: the role of spouse avoidance and criticism. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1999;67:539–46.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Manne S, Taylor KL, Dougherty J, Kerneny N. Supportive and negative responses in close relationships: Their association with psychological adjustment among individuals with cancer. J Behav Med. 1997;20:101–26.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Badr H, Carmack Taylor CL: Effects of relational maintenance on psychological distress and dyadic adjustment among couples coping with lung cancer. Health Psychology. (in press).

  22. Hagedoorn M, Kuijer RG, Buunk BP, et al. Marital satisfaction in patients with cancer: Does support from intimate partners benefit those who need it the most? Health Psychol. 2000;19:274–82.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kornblith AB, Regan M, Kim Y, et al. Cancer-related communication between female patients and male partners scale: A pilot study. Health Psychol. 2006;15:780–94.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Manne S, Zautra AJ. Spouse criticism and support: Their association with coping and psychological adjustment among women with rheumatoid arthritis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56:608–17.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Manne S, Norton T, Ostroff J, et al. Protective buffering and psychological distress among couples coping with breast cancer: The moderating role of relationship satisfaction. J Fam Psychol. 2007;21:380–88.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wortman CB, Dunkel-Schetter C. Interpersonal relations and cancer. J Soc Issues. 1979;35:120–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pistrang N, Barker C, Rutter C. Social support as conversation: Analysing breast cancer patients’’ interactions with their partners. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45:773–82.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Figueiredo M, Fries E, Ingram K. The role of disclosure patterns and unsupportive social interactions in the well-being of breast cancer patients. Psycho-Oncol. 2004;13:96–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Porter L, Keefe F, Hurwitz H, Faber M. Disclosure between patients with gastrointestinal cancer and their spouses. Psycho-Oncol. 2005;14:1030–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pennebaker J. Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process. Psychol Sci. 1997;8:162–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lepore SJ. A social-cognitive processing model of emotional adjustment to cancer. Psychosocial Interventions for Cancer. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; 2001. p. 99–116.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Badr H, Carmack Taylor C. Social constraints and spousal communication in lung cancer. Psycho-Oncolo. 2006;15:673–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Harrison J, Maguire G, Pitceathly C. Confiding in crisis: Gender differences in pattern of confiding among cancer patients. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:1255–60.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Foa EB, Steketee G, Rothbaum BO. Behavioral/cognitive conceptualizations of post-traumatic stress disorder. Behav Ther. 1989;20:155–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Coyne JC, Smith DAF. Couples coping with a myocardial infarction: A contextual perspective on wives’ distress. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991;61:404–12.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Holmberg SK, Scott LL, Alexy W, Fife BL. Relationship issues of women with breast cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2001;24:53–60.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Ptacek JT, Ptacek JJ, Dodge KL. Coping with breast cancer from the perspectives of husbands and wives. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1994;12:47–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Douglass G. Reciprocal support in the context of cancer: Perspectives of the patient and spouse. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1997;24:1529–36.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Dindia K, Canary D. Definitions and theoretical perspectives on maintaining relationships. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1993;10:163–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Duck S. Steady as (s)he goes: Relational maintenance as a shared meaning system. Communication and relational maintenance. New York: Academic Press; 1994. p. 45–60.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Canary D, Stafford L, Semic BA. A panel study of the associations between maintenance strategies and relational characteristics. J Marriage Fam. 2002;64:395–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Goldsmith D, Baxter LA. Constituting relationships in talk: A taxonomy of speech events in social and personal relationships. Human Commun Res. 1996;23:87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Acitelli LK. When spouses talk to each other about their relationship. Pers Relatsh. 1988;5:185–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Badr H, Acitelli LK. Relationship talk and dyadic adjustment in couples coping with chronic illness. J Fam Psychol 2005;19:465–69.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Duck S. Talking relationships into being. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1995;12:535–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Baxter LA, Bullis C. Turning points in developing romantic relationships. Human Commun Res. 1986;12:469–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Stafford L, Dainton M, Haas S. Measuring routine and strategic relational maintenance: Scale development, sex versus gender roles, and the prediction of relational characteristics. Commun Monogr. 2000;67:306–23.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Acitelli LK. Relationship awareness: Crossing the bridge between cognition and communication. Commun Theory. 2002;12:92–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Canary D, Stafford L. Maintaining relationships through strategic and routine interaction. Communication and Relational Maintenance. San Diego, CA: Academic; 1994. p. 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Acitelli LK. You, me, and us: Perspectives on relationship awareness. Understanding Relationship Processes I: Individuals and Relationships. London: Sage; 1993. p. 144–74.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Zhang S, Siminoff L. Silence and cancer: Why do families fail to communicate? Health Commun. 2003;15:415–29.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Schag CA, Ganz PA, Wing DS, Sim MS, Lee JJ. Quality of life in adult survivors of lung, colon and prostate cancer. Qual Life Res. 1994;3:127–41.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Oken M, Creech R, Tormey D, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5:649–55.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Canary D, Stafford L. Relational maintenance strategies and equity in marriage. Commun Monogr. 1992;59:243–67.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Badr H. Chronic Illness As A Relationship Challenge. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Houston; 2002.

  57. Spanier GB. Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. J Marriage Fam. 1976;38:15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Jacobson NS, Schmaling KB, Holzworth-Munroe A. Component analysis of behavioral marital therapy. J Marital Fam Ther. 1987;13:187–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Derogatis LR. Brief Symptom Inventory: Administration, scoring and procedures manual. 3rd ed. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems, Inc.; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Derogatis LR, Melisaratos N. The Brief Symptom Inventory: An introductory report. Psychol Med. 1983;13:595–605.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Amenson CS, Lewinsohn PM. An investigation of observed sex differences in prevalence of unipolar depression. J Abnorm Psychol. 1981;90:1–13.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Croog SH, Levine S, Tets MA, et al. The effects of antihypertensive therapy on quality of life. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1657–64.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Zabora J, Brintzenhofeszoc K, Curbow B, Hooker C, Piantadosi S. The prevalence of psychological distress by cancer site. Psycho–Oncol. 2001;10:19–28.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Malcarne VL, Compas BE, Epping-Jordan JE, Howell DC. Cognitive factors in adjustment to cancer: Attributions of self-blame and perceptions of control. J Behav Med. 1995;18:401–17.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Gonzalez R, Griffin D. The correlational analysis of dyad-level data in the distinguishable case. Pers Relatsh. 1999;6:449–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Kashy DA, Kenny DA. The analysis of data from dyads and groups. Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 451–77.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kenny D, Kashy DA, Cook D. Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Snijders T, Bosker R. Multilevel analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Bolger N, Shrout PE. Accounting for statistical dependency in longitudinal data on dyads. In: Little TD, Bovaird JA, Card NA, editors. Modeling ecological and contextual effects in longitudinal studies of human development. Mahwah, NJ: LEA; 2007. p. 285–98.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Lyons R, Mickelson KD, Sullivan M, Coyne JC. Coping as a communal process. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1998;15:579–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Badr H, Acitelli LK, Carmack Taylor CL. Does couple identity mediate the stress experienced by caregiving spouses? Psychol Health. 2007;22:211–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Bernal G, Baker J. Toward a metacommunicational framework of couple interaction. Fam Proc. 1979;18:293–302.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Hagedoorn M, Buunk BP, Kuijer RG, Wobbes T, Sanderman R. Couples dealing with cancer: Role and gender differences regarding psychological distress and quality of life. Psycho-Oncol. 2000;9:232–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Coyne JC, Fiske V. Couples coping with chronic and catastrophic illness. Family Health Psychology. Washington, DC: Hemisphere; 1992. p. 129–49.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Lyons R, Sullivan MJL, Ritvo P, Coyne JC, editors. Relationships in chronic illness and disability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995.

  76. Baider L, Kaufman B, Peretz T, et al. Mutuality of fate: adaptation and psychological distress in cancer patients and their partners. Cancer in the Family. Chichester: Wiley; 1996. p. 173–86.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Northouse LL, Dorms G, Charron-Moore C. Factors affecting couples’ adjustment to recurrent breast cancer. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:69–76.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Acitelli LK, Young AM. Gender and thought in relationships. Knowledge Structures and Interactions in Close Relationships: A Social Psychological Approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1996. p. 147–68.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Acitelli LK, Badr H. My illness or our illness? Attending to the relationship when one partner is ill. Couples Coping with Stress: Emerging Perspectives on Dyadic Coping. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 121–36.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  80. de Groot JM, Mah K, Fyles A, et al. The psychosocial impact of cervical cancer among affected women and their partners. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005;15:918–25.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Dr. Sharon Manne for her important conceptual contributions to this work. Special thanks to: Bena Ellickalputhenpura, Anne Gorman, Trayce Hall, and Ji H. Lee who assisted with data collection.

This research was supported, in part, by a cancer prevention fellowship from the National Cancer Institute awarded to Hoda Badr R25 CA57730, Robert M. Chamberlain, Ph.D., Principal Investigator, and by a National Cancer Institute grant R03 CA96462, Cindy L. Carmack Taylor, Ph.D., Principal Investigator.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Behavioral Science-Unit 1330, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, P.O. Box 301439, Houston, TX, 77230-1439, USA

    Hoda Badr & Cindy L. Carmack Taylor

  2. Department of Psychology, The University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA

    Linda K. Acitelli

Authors
  1. Hoda Badr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Linda K. Acitelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cindy L. Carmack Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hoda Badr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Badr, H., Acitelli, L.K. & Carmack Taylor, C.L. Does talking about their relationship affect couples’ marital and psychological adjustment to lung cancer?. J Cancer Surviv 2, 53–64 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-008-0044-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-008-0044-3

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Couples
  • Communication
  • Marital adjustment
  • Distress
  • Prospective study