CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Attachment and Relationship DynamicsHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlStress Responses and Cortisol

Psychophysiological Reactivity in Couples During a Marital Interaction Task

Open access
Coutinho, J., Oliveira-Silva, P., Mesquita, A. R., Barbosa, M., Perrone-McGovern, K. M., Gonçalves, O. F.·2017·Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback
DOI 10.1007/s10484-017-9380-2
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The ability to regulate our own physiological arousal when dealing with the emotional expression of our partner is crucial for satisfactory and stable intimate relationships. In previous physiological studies of marital interactions, researchers have found greater levels of psychophysiological arousal for members of the couple in conflictual interactions in comparison with positive interactions. Past researchers have established that intense and prolonged autonomic and neuroendocrine arousal during marital conflict can have negative consequences for mental and physical health. In this study we examined the physiological reactivity, as measured by skin conductance level, heart rate and cortisol levels, from both partners during a couple's interaction task consisting of a structured conversation about positive and negative aspects of their relationship. Participants were thirty-two heterosexual couples (N = 64) in a committed monogamous relationship with a minimum duration of one year. We found higher heart rate and cortisol levels during negative interaction condition when compared with the positive condition. Skin conductance was higher in the positive interaction condition, when compared with the negative interaction condition. In addition, we found a significant negative association between heart rate variability and autonomic arousal evoked by the interaction task. The implications of these findings for the effects of marital strain on health as well as for the design of risk-reducing interventions, namely biofeedback are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10484-017-9380-2

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The final combined sample is consistent with the sample sizes commonly reported in prior work on physiological synchrony in adults.

    “Importantly, the final combined sample is consistent with the sample sizes commonly reported in prior work on physiological synchrony in adults [41, 42].”

    From Interpersonal Synchronization of Autonomic Physiology via Mere Visual Contact (2026) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Participants section reports 32 adult couples (64 individuals), providing an example of a sample size in prior research on couples’ physiology. However, the Discussion describes this study as measuring physiological reactivity during interactions, not synchrony between partners, and the paper does not establish what sample sizes are commonly reported in synchrony research. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 82 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Gottman, J. M. (1994). An agenda for marital therapy. In The heart of the matter: Perspectives on emotion in marital therapy , pp. 256-293.
  2. Markman, H. J. (1981). Prediction of marital distress: A 5-year followup. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49 (5), 760.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Coutinho, J., Oliveira-Silva, P., Mesquita, A. R., Barbosa, M., Perrone-McGovern, K. M., & Gonçalves, O. F.
Affiliations
University of Minho (PT)
Corresponding author
Coutinho, J.
ORCID
Venue
Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-09-02
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
335-346
ISSN
  • 0363-3586 (ISSN-L)
  • 1090-0586
  • 1573-3270
DOI
10.1007/s10484-017-9380-2
OpenAlex
W2751363691
Cited by
20
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Fundação Bial (87/12)
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (SFRH/BPD/75014/2010)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
marital interaction, couples, psychophysiological reactivity, skin conductance, heart rate, cortisol, heart rate variability, autonomic arousal, marital conflict, relationship strain, biofeedback, risk-reducing interventions
MeSH terms
Adult, Arousal, Autonomic Nervous System, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Heart Rate, Humans, Hydrocortisone, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Spouses

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review