Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The structure of dyadic support among couples with and without long-term disability

  • Published:
Journal of Behavioral Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines support relationships among 65 couples in which the husband had a long-term spinal cord injury, and a comparison group of 65 couples without disability. Based on facet theory, we constructed a mapping sentence that forms a definitional framework for couple support, and developed a detailed inventory to assess attitudes regarding mutual support in couple relations, the sense of support availability, support behaviors of giving and receiving, the degree to which the support meets one’s needs, response to received support, and preference for support from within the couple and from external sources. These are all measured with respect to instrumental, emotional and informational support. Smallest space analysis showed various structures of the relations between elements of support among men and women living with and without disability, as well as a core element of reciprocal support common to both men and women in couples with and without disability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Facets B and C are based primarily on current theory and literature on couple support, as reviewed above. Facets A and D were developed based on the qualitative interviews that illuminated specific experiences of support in couples, thus enriching the definition of the concept. Facet E (range) is a basic component in Facet theory that is commonly used in Likert-type scales.

  2. The reasons for refusal were not known. It could partly be explained by a condition of participation that both spouses be willing to participate (see “Procedure”).

  3. See, for example, the Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ) and its abbreviated version (Sarason et al. 1987); the Social Undermining Scale (Vinokur and van Ryn 1993); the Quality of Relationships Inventory (Pierce et al. 1997); the Support in Intimate Relationships Rating Scale (SIRRS; Dehle et al. 2001); the Dyadic Coping Questionnaire (Bodenmann et al. 2006), and others (e.g., Ptacek et al. 1997, 1999).

References

  • Barbee, A. P., Rowatt, T. L., & Cunningham, M. R. (1998). When a friend is in need: Feelings about seeking, giving, and receiving social support. In P. A. Andersen & L. K. Guerrero (Eds.), Handbook of communication and emotion: Research, theory, applications, and contexts (pp. 281–301). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodenmann, G. (1995). A systematic-transactional conceptualization of stress and coping in couples. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 54, 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodenmann, G. (1997). Dyadic coping—a systemic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples: Theory and empirical findings. European Review of Applied Psychology, 47, 137–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodenmann, G. (2005). Dyadic coping and its significance for marital functioning. In T. Revenson, K. Kayser, & G. Bodenmann (Eds.), Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping (pp. 33–50). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bodenmann, G., Pihet, S., Santinath, S. D., Cina, A., & Widmer, K. (2006). Improving dyadic coping with a stress-oriented approach: A 2-year longitudinal study. Behavior Modification, 30, 571–597. doi:10.1177/0145445504269902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borg, I., & Shye, S. (1995). Facet theory: Form and content. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, T. N., Beach, S. R., Fincham, F. D., & Nelson, G. M. (1996). Attribution and behavior in functional and dysfunctional marriages. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 569–576. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.64.3.569.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, T. N., & Fincham, F. D. (1992). Attribution and behavior in marital interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 613–628. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.613.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. W., & Harris, T. O. (Eds.). (1978). Social origins of depression: A study of psychiatric disorder in women. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J., & Weir, T. (1982). Husband-wife helping relationships as moderators of experienced stress: The “mental hygiene” function in marriage. In A. McCubbin, E. Cauble, & J. Patterson (Eds.), Family stress coping and social support (pp. 221–238). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, N. M., & Krause, B. A. (1988). Marital relationship and spinal cord injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 69, 435–438.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, N. M., & Krause, J. S. (1991). Marital status and adjustment to spinal cord injury. The Journal of the American Paraplegia Society, 15(1), 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutrona, C. E. (1990). Stress and social support: In search of optimal matching. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutrona, C. E. (1996). Social support in couples: Marriage as a resource in times of stress. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutrona, C. E., Russell, D. W., & Gardner, A. K. (2005). The relationship enhancement model of social support. In T. A. Revenson, K. Kayser, & G. Bodenman (Eds.), Couples coping with stress (pp. 73–97). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dehle, C., Larsen, D., & Landers, J. E. (2001). Social support in marriage. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 29, 307–324. doi:10.1080/01926180152588725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elizur, D. (1991). Work and nonwork relations: The conical structure of work and home life relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 313–322. doi:10.1002/job.4030120406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elizur, D., & Guttman, I. (1976). The structure of the attitudes toward work and technological change within an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 611–622. doi:10.2307/2391719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fincham, F. D., & Bradbury, T. N. (1992). Assessing attributions in marriage: The relationship attribution measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 457–468. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.3.457.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gilad, D. (2004). Reciprocal marital support in couples with a long-term spinal cord injury. Doctoral dissertation, University of Haifa, Hebrew, Israel.

  • Guttman, A. L. (1968). A general nonmetric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points. Psychometrica, 33, 469–507. doi:10.1007/BF02290164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. (1982). Facet theory: Smallest space analysis and factor analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 54, 491–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1998). Facet theory: Its development and current status. European Psychologist, 3, 13–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, J. S., & Crewe, N. M. (1991). Chronological age, time since injury and time of measurement: Effect on adjustment after spinal cord injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 72, 91–100.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S. (1985). Lawful roles of facets in social theories. In D. Canter (Ed.), Facet theory: Approaches to social research (pp. 59–96). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S. (Ed.). (1994). Louis Guttman on theory and methodology: Selected writing. Aldershot, England: Dartmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGowan, M. S., & Roth, S. (1987). Family functioning and functional independence in spinal cord injury adjustment. Paraplegia, 25, 357–365.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pasch, L. A., Bradbury, T. N., & Sullivan, K. T. (1997). Social support in marriage: An analysis of intraindividual and interpersonal component. In G. R. Pierce, B. Lakey, I. G. Sarason, & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Sourcebook of social support and personality (pp. 361–368). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, L. C., Stambrook, M., & Moore, A. D. (1992). Differential effects of spinal cord injury and head injury on marital adjustment. Brain Injury: [BI], 6, 461–467. doi:10.3109/02699059209008141.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, G. R., Sarason, I. G., & Sarason, B. R. (1991). General and relationship-based perceptions of social support: Are two constructs better than one? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 1028–1039. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.6.1028.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, G. R., Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., Josefh, H. J., & Hennderson, C. A. (1996). Conceptualizing and assessing social support in the context of the family. In G. R. Pierce, B. R. Sarason, & I. G. Sarason (Eds.), Handbook of social support and the family. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, G. R., Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., Solky-Butzel, J. A., & Nagle, C. L. (1997). Assessing the quality of personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 339–356. doi:10.1177/0265407597143004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ptacek, J. T., Pierce, G. R., Dodge, K. L., & Ptacek, J. J. (1997). Social support in spouses of cancer patients: What do they get and to what end? Personal Relationships, 4, 431–449. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1997.tb00155.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ptacek, J. T., Pierce, G. R., Ptacek, J. J., & Nogel, C. (1999). Stress and coping process in men with prostate cancer: The divergent views of husbands and wives. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 299–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Revenson, T. A., Kayser, K., & Bodenman, G. (Eds.). (2005). Couples coping with stress. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland, J. S. (Ed.). (1994). Families, illness and disability: An integrative treatment model. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., & Pierce, G. R. (1990). Social support: The search for theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 133–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., Shearin, E. N., & Pierce, G. R. (1987). A brief measure of social support: Practical and theoretical implications. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 497–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shye, S., Elizur, D., & Hoffman, M. (1994). Introduction to facet theory: Content design and intrinsic data analysis in behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoits, P. A. (1991). Gender differences in coping with emotional distress. In J. Eckenrode (Ed.), The social context of coping (pp. 107–138). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trieschmann, R. B. (Ed.). (1987). Aging with a disability. New York: Demos Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinokur, A. D., & van Ryn, M. (1993). Social support and undermining in close relationship: Their independent effects on the mental health of unemployed persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 350–359. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.2.350.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, D. L., & Aquilino, W. S. (1998). Influence of emotional support exchange in marriage on caregiving wives’ burden and marital satisfaction. Family Relations, 47, 195–204. doi:10.2307/585624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, School of Social Work, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Dvorit Gilad & Yoav Lavee

  2. The National Program “Non-violent City”, 23 Granit st., 73142, Shoham, Israel

    Orly Innes-Kenig

Authors
  1. Dvorit Gilad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoav Lavee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Orly Innes-Kenig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dvorit Gilad.

Appendix: Couple support inventory

Appendix: Couple support inventory

This questionnaire deals with support relationships in couples. We want to learn about your beliefs and attitudes, your thoughts, your own and your partner’s behavior, and your life experiences regarding support relationships between intimate partners. There are no right or wrong answers; we are only interested in your own personal experience. Please check your agreement with each item on a scale ranging between “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (6).

Part I: Schemata

  1. 1.

    When they need help, most people tend to turn first to their spouses

  2. 2.

    Most people share their feelings with their spouses

  3. 3.

    Spouses usually consult each other when making decisions

  4. 4.

    Most spouses tend to assist each other in everyday matters (errands, household chores, etc.)

  5. 5.

    When practical help is needed (for example, because of illness, bad feelings, disability, etc.) most people turn to their spouses

  6. 6.

    One of the main objectives of couple relations is providing emotional support

  7. 7.

    People can tell what type of help their spouses need, even without their saying it explicitly

  8. 8.

    It is possible to obtain emotional help from a variety of sources, not necessarily from the spouse (for example, friends, extended family, etc.)

  9. 9.

    The level of support and assistance that spouses provide each other determines the quality of their married life

  10. 10.

    When there is no emotional support at home, it is preferable to dissolve the marriage

  11. 11.

    It is possible to obtain practical help from a variety of sources, not necessarily from the spouse (for example, friends, extended family, etc.)

  12. 12.

    People are expected to sense what their partners feel, even if they don’t say it

  13. 13.

    There are various situations in which it is preferable to turn for assistance to someone else and not to the spouse

  14. 14.

    Supporting another person empowers the one who provides the support

  15. 15.

    Supporting another person can weaken the one who provides the support

  16. 16.

    When one supports another person, one does so at the expense of things one could have done for oneself

  17. 17.

    Support between spouses must be mutual and balanced, otherwise it will not last

  18. 18.

    Most important in life is to support family members

  19. 19.

    Some people’s personality makes it easy for them to support others, and other people’s personality makes it difficult

  20. 20.

    Someone who receives support finds it easy to provide support in return

  21. 21.

    Someone who received support from parents in childhood becomes an adult who likes/is ready to support others

Part II: Availability

  1. 22.

    When I need practical help, I can turn to my partner

  2. 23.

    When I need emotional help, I can turn to my partner

  3. 24.

    When I need good advice about a decision I must make, I can turn to my partner

  4. 25.

    When I ask for practical help from my partner, she is ready to grant my request

  5. 26.

    When I ask for emotional help from my partner she is ready to grant my request

  6. 27.

    My partner offers me practical help, even when I don’t ask for it

  7. 28.

    I can count on my partner to be at my side when I need her, even without asking

  8. 29.

    I feel that I help my partner more than she helps me

  9. 30.

    There are areas in which I help more and areas in which she helps more

  10. 31.

    I feel that our support of each other is mutual

  11. 32.

    I feel that when my partner needs practical help, I provide it

  12. 33.

    I feel that when my partner needs emotional help, I provide it

  13. 34.

    I feel that when my partner needs advice and guidance, I give it to her

  14. 35.

    I think I’m a person who knows how to help others

  15. 36.

    I think that my partner is a person who knows how to help others

Part III: Behaviors

  1. 37.

    When I need practical help, I ask my partner for it directly

  2. 38.

    When I need emotional help, I ask my partner for it directly

  3. 39.

    When I need advice and guidance, I ask my partner for it directly

  4. 40.

    When I ask for practical help from my partner, she gives it to me

  5. 41.

    When I ask for emotional help from my partner, she gives it to me

  6. 42.

    When I ask for advice and guidance from my partner, she gives it to me

  7. 43.

    When I need practical support, my partner provides it, even without my asking

  8. 44.

    When I need emotional support, my partner provides it, even without my asking

  9. 45.

    When I need advice and guidance, my partner provides it, even without my asking

  10. 46.

    My partner supports and encourages me on her own initiative

  11. 47.

    My partner inspires me with confidence when I am in a crisis

  12. 48.

    My partner inspires me with confidence when I have a health problem

  13. 49.

    My partner does things that make it easier for me on her own initiative

  14. 50.

    My partner supports me even when I am having difficulties because of things related to her

  15. 51.

    When my partner gives me practical help, I experience relief

  16. 52.

    When my partner gives me practical help, I feel that she does it in a way that suits me

  17. 53.

    When my partner gives me practical help, I feel that she does more than is necessary

  18. 54.

    When my partner gives me practical help, I experience her help as more of a burden than a relief

  19. 55.

    When my partner helps me emotionally, I experience relief

  20. 56.

    When my partner helps me emotionally, I feel that she does it in a way that suits me

  21. 57.

    When my partner helps me emotionally, I feel that she does more than is necessary

  22. 58.

    When my partner helps me emotionally, I experience her help as more of a burden than a relief

  23. 59.

    I am satisfied with the way in which my partner gives me practical help

  24. 60.

    I am satisfied with the way in which my partner supports me emotionally

  25. 61.

    I am satisfied with the way in which my partner helps me make decisions

Part IV: Response

  1. 62.

    When my partner helps me in practical matters, I express my thanks and appreciation directly

  2. 63.

    When my partner helps me in practical matters, I express my thanks and appreciation in indirect ways

  3. 64.

    When my partner helps me in emotional matters, I express my thanks and appreciation directly

  4. 65.

    When my partner helps me in emotional matters, I express my thanks and appreciation in indirect ways

  5. 66.

    When my partner does not help me in practical matters, I express anger toward Her

  6. 67.

    When my partner does not help me in practical matters, I feel disappointed but drop the matter

  7. 68.

    When my partner does not help me in practical matters, I ask again or tell her how I would like to receive the help

  8. 69.

    When my partner does not help me in emotional matters, I express anger toward her

  9. 70.

    When my partner does not help me in emotional matters, I feel disappointed but drop the matter

  10. 71.

    When my partner does not help me in emotional matters, I ask again or tell her how I would like to receive the help

Part V: Alternative sources of support

Please rate the degree to which each of the following helps you in practical matters, emotionally and in making decisions. For each item, please check the degree of support you receive on a scale ranging between 1 (I hardly receive any help in this area) and 6 (I receive extensive help).

Your spouse

  1. 72.

    Practical help

  2. 73.

    Emotional help

  3. 74.

    Help in making decisions

Your extended family

  1. 75.

    Practical help

  2. 76.

    Emotional help

  3. 77.

    Help in making decisions

Your friends

  1. 78.

    Practical help

  2. 79.

    Emotional help

  3. 80.

    Help in making decisions

Professionals

  1. 81.

    Practical help

  2. 82.

    Emotional help

  3. 83.

    Help in making decisions

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gilad, D., Lavee, Y. & Innes-Kenig, O. The structure of dyadic support among couples with and without long-term disability. J Behav Med 32, 453–465 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-009-9216-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-009-9216-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation