1102 - ACTOR-PARTNER DYNAMICS OF COPING, PERSONALITY, AND TEMPERAMENT IN PREDICTING STRESS AMONG INFERTILE COUPLES

Session: D08S0016 - Family, Couple & Caregiving Processes in Health 2
AUTHORS:
Ghosh Debasruti (Mahant Darshan Das Mahila College (Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University) ~ Muzaffarpur ~ India) , Raj Saurabh (Ramdayalu Singh College (Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University) ~ Muzaffarpur ~ India)
Abstract text:
Introduction:
Infertility is a major life stressor that undermines couples' psychological well-being. Understanding how coping styles, personality traits, and temperament influence stress within couples is essential for dyadic interventions. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) provides a framework for examining reciprocal influences. This study explored actor (self-predictive) and partner (cross-predictive) effects of coping, personality, and temperament on global infertility stress among married couples in treatment.


Method:
A sample of 102 couples (102 wives, 102 husbands) undergoing infertility treatment completed standardized measures of coping, personality, and temperament. APIM analyses tested actor and partner effects on infertility stress.


Results:
Actor effects showed that husbands' rational coping (β = -1.749, p = .006) reduced stress, whereas wives' neuroticism (β = 2.314, p = .021) heightened it. Temperament traits further shaped outcomes: wives' perseverance (β = -2.002, p = .018) and endurance (β = -1.410, p = .044) reduced stress, while husbands' briskness (β = -1.890, p = .009), endurance (β = -1.456, p = .039), and activity (β = -2.090, p = .005) lowered stress, and emotional reactivity increased it (β = 1.730, p = .019). Partner effects revealed asymmetry: wives' avoidance coping (β = 1.500, p = .032) increased husbands' stress, whereas wives' rational coping (β = -1.620, p = .015) reduced it. Conversely, husbands' detached coping (β = 1.800, p = .027) and emotional coping (β = 1.640, p = .041) elevated wives' stress. Wives' neuroticism predicted stress for both partners, while their perseverance, briskness, activity, and emotional reactivity significantly predicted husbands' stress.


Conclusions:
Findings highlight asymmetrical dyadic patterns. Wives' psychological characteristics, especially neuroticism and coping, exert stronger partner effects on husbands, whereas husbands' traits largely predicted their own stress. Couple-centered interventions should prioritize wives' maladaptive coping and neuroticism alongside husbands' emotional regulation strategies.