Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Joshua Daniel Landvatter
 + 1219 word(s) 1219 2022-01-12 09:52:39 |
2 format is correct
Yvaine Wei
 Meta information modification 1219 2022-01-25 01:57:38 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Landvatter, J. Partner’s Perceived Social Support Influences Their Spouse’s Inflammation. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/18724 (accessed on 05 August 2024).
Landvatter J. Partner’s Perceived Social Support Influences Their Spouse’s Inflammation. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/18724. Accessed August 05, 2024.
Landvatter, Joshua. "Partner’s Perceived Social Support Influences Their Spouse’s Inflammation" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/18724 (accessed August 05, 2024).
Landvatter, J. (2022, January 24). Partner’s Perceived Social Support Influences Their Spouse’s Inflammation. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/18724
Landvatter, Joshua. "Partner’s Perceived Social Support Influences Their Spouse’s Inflammation." Encyclopedia. Web. 24 January, 2022.
Partner’s Perceived Social Support Influences Their Spouse’s Inflammation
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/ijerph19020799

Social support has been linked to lower cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, most studies have examined perceived support as an intrapersonal construct. A dyadic approach to social support highlights how interdependence between individuals within relationships, including partner perceptions and interactions, can influence one’s health. 

social support dyad inflammation interpersonal actor–partner

1. Introduction

The quality of one’s social relationships is reliably related to physical health outcomes [1][2][3]. 
Much of the prior work has focused on the biological mechanisms underlying the link between social support and health [4]. Of these biological mechanisms, inflammation has emerged as one of the more compelling pathways, considering its mechanistic links to cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality [5][6][7]. A recent meta-analysis reported a small effect size linking social support to inflammatory cytokines [8]. Given the links between social support and broad-based mortality [9][4], an inflammatory pathway might explain part of its ties to health.
An important limitation in the literature is that all studies to date appear to examine if a person’s level of social support predicts their own inflammatory outcomes [10][11][12]. This intra-individual perspective highlights models in which social support processes perceived by the individual might influence their health and assumes that these perceptions, in part, reflect past support exchanges. However, research on invisible support and early life determinants of perceived support makes it clear that there are interpersonal determinants of support that have implications for its conceptualization [13][14]. Such interpersonal determinants of social support can be tested using actor–partner models, highlighting the interdependence between individuals within relationships [15]. 
There is strong evidence that close social network members influence inflammation [16]. In a study by Donoho and colleagues, 2013, marital quality was seen as an important predictor of inflammation on the inflammatory biomarkers of C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 [17]. However, only limited work has examined dyadic influences on biomarkers to date, revealing links with cortisol, cardiovascular reactivity, and inflammation. Coregulation of actor–partner cortisol levels has been shown between couples and their mood states, with marital satisfaction acting as a possible buffer to the partner’s negative mood or stress state [18][19]. Furthermore, dyadic effects on cardiovascular reactivity measures have been observed [20][21][22][23][24][25], including partner influences of trait hostility and anger [26]. A review examining the immune system, marriage, and divorce also found that partners influence each other’s mood and health behaviors, producing both direct and indirect downstream effects on the immune system [27]. This evidence suggests that one’s perceived social support may influence inflammatory biomarkers in their partner.
When conceptualized as a dyadic or interpersonal process, there are several specific reasons to expect partner influences of perceived support on health. For example, being married to a person high in perceived support might simply be less stressful compared to being married to someone low in support [16][28]. Given that the partner has adequate support, they would have the resources needed to attend to their partner’s socio-emotional needs [29][30]. Additionally, perceived support is related to received support. Therefore, if a partner has higher levels of perceived support, this may be reflective of more responsive reciprocity in support processes [31]. Due to the reciprocal nature of dyadic relationships, one’s perception of support can ultimately affect partner responsiveness and self-disclosure and act as a buffer against stress or negative moods [18][19][22]. These processes (e.g., support reciprocity) between an actor and their partner may cushion the effects of stressors and consequent health issues [32][33].

2. Research Findings

The main results indicate that a partner’s level of perceived support was related to lower inflammation in their spouse. These results remained unchanged while statistically controlling for a number of demographic variables, including medication use and one’s own level of perceived support. These data highlight the importance of taking a dyadic perspective on perceived support, given the interdependence of individuals within relationships.
It was predicted that both actor and partner levels of perceived support would be related to lower levels of inflammation. Only partner levels of perceived support were associated with lower inflammation. There are a number of plausible reasons for the existence of such an association, and it requires future research. Given that marital relationships are among the most important in adulthood, a spouse with higher perceptions of support might be associated with smoother interpersonal interactions in daily life and over time. Importantly, such processes might not be captured by actor measures of support, which only reflect an individual’s own perception of support and their own interpersonal functioning. For instance, prior work indicated that social support is related to better social skills [34]. It is thus possible that partners high in perceived support may engage in more effective and responsive support, such that actors benefit from its positive influence [13][35]. 
It is also possible that this study captures the interpersonal and intrapersonal synchrony of perceived support within a relationship. At least one study has linked interpersonal mechanisms and close relationships to health [36] through the coregulation of emotion, cognition, behavior, and physiology within the dyad. This coregulation or psychophysiological homeostasis between partners has been seen to affect physical and emotional health [37]. Nonetheless, the interplay between intrapersonal and interpersonal perceptions within the dyad would need to be addressed in future research.
Although the directionality of effects cannot be investigated within cross-sectional data, there is some evidence suggesting a coregulation of inflammation and social behavior that could be an interesting avenue for future work. Two reviews on inflammation and social processes found that inflammatory processes regulated social behavior, inasmuch that neural sensitivity to positive and negative social feedback was seen to be enhanced [38][39]. Therefore, inflammation levels may have contributed to social behaviors that elicited support from partners. That is, when the need for support is recognized and perceived by the partner, it has the potential to influence actor levels of inflammation. Although this is speculative and requires future work, it is consistent with the growing literature documenting the bi-directional links between inflammation and social processes.
Significant relationships were found between actor–partner perceived social support, inflammation, and BMI, and between actor–partner perceived social support, inflammation, and gender. Research shows that there is a substantially increased risk of obesity when one’s partner is obese. It is thought that relationships can normalize the idea of obesity, making it more acceptable to become obese [40]. Additionally, studies have shown that increased obesity can then lead to an increase in inflammation [41][42]. In sum, the normalization of a higher BMI through one’s partner increases the likelihood of an increased actor BMI and the associated inflammation seen with increased adipose tissue. Regarding the relationship seen with gender, inflammation was seen to be lower in women than in men. This is thought to be due to the general anti-inflammatory properties associated with estrogen [43][44].

3. Conclusions

Contrary to the predictions, actor levels of perceived support did not predict lower levels of inflammation. However, in the expected direction, the association was not significant. Based on a recent meta-analysis, the effect size linking social support to inflammation is small, at r = −0.07 [8]. Hence, it is likely that the current study was underpowered to detect such an association at a conventional level of significance. The nonsignificant finding for actor support also highlights the relatively larger effect sizes for partner levels of support. If similar results are confirmed in future studies, they may underscore the importance of dyadic approaches to psychosocial risk, even for psychosocial risk factors that have traditionally been conceptualized as intrapersonal in nature.

References

  1. Berkman, L.F.; Glass, T.; Brissette, I.; Seeman, T.E. From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Soc. Sci. Med. 2000, 51, 843–857.
  2. De Vogli, R.; Chandola, T.; Marmot, M.G. Negative aspects of close relationships and heart disease. Arch. Intern. Med. 2007, 167, 1951–1957.
  3. Uchino, B. Social Support and Physical Health: Understanding the Health Consequences of Relationships; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 2004.
  4. Reblin, M.; Uchino, B.N. Social and emotional support and its implication for health. Curr. Opin. Psychiatry 2008, 21, 201–205.
  5. Libby, P.M.; Ridker, P.; Maseri, A. Inflammation and Atherosclerosis. Circulation 2002, 105, 1135–1143.
  6. Guo, Y.-Z.; Pan, L.; Du, C.-J.; Ren, D.-Q.; Xie, X.-M. Association between C-reactive Protein and Risk of Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2013, 14, 243–248.
  7. Hunter, C.; Jones, S. IL-6 as a keystone cytokine in health and disease. Nat. Immunol. 2015, 16, 448–457.
  8. Uchino, B.N.; Trettevik, R.; De Grey, R.G.K.; Cronan, S.; Hogan, J.; Baucom, B.R.W. Social support, social integration, and inflammatory cytokines: A meta-analysis. Health Psychol. 2018, 37, 462–471.
  9. Holt-Lunstad, J.; Smith, T.B.; Layton, J.B. Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review. PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000316.
  10. Loucks, E.B.; Berkman, L.F.; Gruenewald, T.L.; Seeman, T.E. Relation of Social Integration to Inflammatory Marker Concentrations in Men and Women 70 to 79 Years. Am. J. Cardiol. 2006, 97, 1010–1016.
  11. McDade, T.W.; Hawkley, L.C.; Cacioppo, J.T. Psychosocial and Behavioral Predictors of Inflammation in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: The Chicago Health, Aging, and Social Relations Study. Psychosom. Med. 2006, 68, 376–381.
  12. Bajaj, B.; Gupta, R.; Pande, N. Self-esteem mediates the relationship between mindfulness and well-being. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2016, 94, 96–100.
  13. Bolger, N.; Amarel, D. Effects of social support visibility on adjustment to stress: Experimental evidence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2007, 92, 458–475.
  14. Uchino, B.N. Understanding the Links Between Social Support and Physical Health: A Life-Span Perspective with Emphasis on the Separability of Perceived and Received Support. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2009, 4, 236–255.
  15. Reed, R.G.; Butler, E.A.; Kenny, D.A. Dyadic Models for the Study of Health. Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass 2013, 7, 228–245.
  16. Dehle, C.; Larsen, D.; Landers, J.E. Social Support in Marriage. Am. J. Fam. Ther. 2001, 29, 307–324.
  17. Donoho, C.J.; Crimmins, E.M.; Seeman, T.E. Marital Quality, Gender, and Markers of Inflammation in the MIDUS Cohort. J. Marriage Fam. 2013, 75, 127–141.
  18. Saxbe, D.; Repetti, R.L. For better or worse? Coregulation of couples’ cortisol levels and mood states. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 98, 92–103.
  19. Slatcher, R.B.; Robles, T.F.; Repetti, R.L.; Fellows, M.D. Momentary Work Worries, Marital Disclosure, and Salivary Cortisol Among Parents of Young Children. Psychosom. Med. 2010, 72, 887–896.
  20. Nealey-Moore, J.B.; Smith, T.W.; Uchino, B.N.; Hawkins, M.W.; Olson-Cerny, C. Cardiovascular Reactivity During Positive and Negative Marital Interactions. J. Behav. Med. 2007, 30, 505–519.
  21. Smith, T.W.; Cribbet, M.R.; Nealey-Moore, J.B.; Uchino, B.N.; Williams, P.G.; MacKenzie, J.; Thayer, J.F. Matters of the variable heart: Respiratory sinus arrhythmia response to marital interaction and associations with marital quality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2011, 100, 103–119.
  22. Bowen, K.S.; Birmingham, W.; Uchino, B.N.; Carlisle, M.; Smith, T.W.; Light, K.C. Specific dimensions of perceived support and ambulatory blood pressure: Which support functions appear most beneficial and for whom? Int. J. Psychophysiol. 2013, 88, 317–324.
  23. Smith, T.W.; Uchino, B.N.; MacKenzie, J.; Hicks, A.M.; Campo, R.A.; Reblin, M.; Grewen, K.M.; Amico, J.A.; Light, K.C. Effects of couple interactions and relationship quality on plasma oxytocin and cardiovascular reactivity: Empirical findings and methodological considerations. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 2013, 88, 271–281.
  24. Birditt, K.S.; Newton, N.; Hope, S. Implications of Marital/Partner Relationship Quality and Perceived Stress for Blood Pressure Among Older Adults. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2012, 69, 188–198.
  25. Birditt, K.S.; Newton, N.J.; Cranford, J.; Ryan, L.H. Stress and Negative Relationship Quality among Older Couples: Implications for Blood Pressure. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2016, 71, 775–785.
  26. Smith, T.W.; Uchino, B.N.; Bosch, J.A.; Kent, R.G. Trait hostility is associated with systemic inflammation in married couples: An actor–partner analysis. Biol. Psychol. 2014, 102, 51–53.
  27. Kiecolt-Glaser, J.K. Marriage, divorce, and the immune system. Am. Psychol. 2018, 73, 1098–1108.
  28. Ryan, L.H.; Wan, W.H.; Smith, J. Spousal social support and strain: Impacts on health in older couples. J. Behav. Med. 2014, 37, 1108–1117.
  29. Fitzsimons, G.M.; Finkel, E.J. Interpersonal Influences on Self-Regulation. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010, 19, 101–105.
  30. Coan, J.A.; Sbarra, D.A. Social Baseline Theory: The social regulation of risk and effort. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2015, 1, 87–91.
  31. Haber, M.G.; Cohen, J.L.; Lucas, T.; Baltes, B. The relationship between self-reported received and perceived social support: A meta-analytic review. Am. J. Community Psychol. 2007, 39, 133–144.
  32. Jou, Y.H.; Fukada, H. Stress, Health, and Reciprocity and Sufficiency of Social Support: The Case of University Students in Japan. J. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 142, 353–370.
  33. Robles, T.F.; Slatcher, R.B.; Trombello, J.M.; McGinn, M.M. Marital quality and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 2014, 140, 140–187.
  34. Sarason, B.R.; Sarason, I.G.; Hacker, T.A.; Basham, R.B. Concomitants of Social Support: Social Skills, Physical Attractiveness, and Gender. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1985, 49, 469–480.
  35. Zee, K.S.; Cavallo, J.V.; Flores, A.J.; Bolger, N.; Higgins, E.T. Motivation moderates the effects of social support visibility. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2018, 114, 735–765.
  36. Pietromonaco, P.R.; Collins, N.L. Interpersonal mechanisms linking close relationships to health. Am. Psychol. 2017, 72, 531–542.
  37. Sbarra, D.A.; Hazan, C. Coregulation, Dysregulation, Self-Regulation: An Integrative Analysis and Empirical Agenda for Understanding Adult Attachment, Separation, Loss, and Recovery. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2008, 12, 141–167.
  38. Eisenberger, N.I.; Moieni, M.; Inagaki, T.K.; Muscatell, K.A.; Irwin, M.R. In Sickness and in Health: The Co-Regulation of Inflammation and Social Behavior. Neuropsychopharmacology 2017, 42, 242–253.
  39. Moieni, M.; Eisenberger, N.I. Effects of inflammation on social processes and implications for health. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2018, 1428, 5–13.
  40. Christakis, N.A.; Fowler, J.H. The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years. N. Engl. J. Med. 2007, 357, 370–379.
  41. McArdle, M.A.; Finucane, O.M.; Connaughton, R.M.; McMorrow, A.M.; Roche, H.M. Mechanisms of Obesity-Induced Inflammation and Insulin Resistance: Insights into the Emerging Role of Nutritional Strategies. Front. Endocrinol. 2013, 4, 52.
  42. Burhans, M.S.; Hagman, D.K.; Kuzma, J.N.; Schmidt, K.A.; Kratz, M. Contribution of Adipose Tissue Inflammation to the Development of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Compr. Physiol. 2018, 9, 1–58.
  43. Monteiro, R.; Teixeira, D.; Calhau, C. Estrogen Signaling in Metabolic Inflammation. Mediat. Inflamm. 2014, 2014, 615917.
  44. Villa, A.; Rizzi, N.; Vegeto, E.; Ciana, P.; Maggi, A. Estrogen accelerates the resolution of inflammation in macrophagic cells. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 15224.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Psychology
Contributor MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Joshua Landvatter
View Times: 406
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 25 Jan 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback