Emotional Neglect in Marriage: What the Term Means and What It Can Look Like
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 17, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Emotional neglect in marriage is a widely used description for a relationship in which one spouse repeatedly experiences important emotional needs, disclosures, bids for understanding, or requests for support as going unnoticed or unanswered. The phrase can capture something psychologically real: a marriage may remain intact, functional, loyal, and highly organized while one partner increasingly feels unseen, uncared for, or alone inside it.
The term itself is less precise than the underlying science. Emotional neglect in marriage is not a DSM or ICD diagnosis, and there is no single diagnostic test that establishes that a spouse is emotionally neglectful. Relationship research more often studies the mechanisms that can sit underneath the experience: perceived partner responsiveness, social support, listening, emotional expression, self-disclosure, affectionate behavior, conflict patterns, stress, and the regulation of relational risk. That distinction matters because a useful description should help identify a pattern without pretending to reveal a partner's motive, personality, attachment style, or mental state.
This article therefore uses emotional neglect as descriptive relationship language. The central question is not whether a spouse deserves a label. It is whether meaningful emotional signals repeatedly fail to receive enough attention, understanding, validation, care, or follow-through that one partner begins to expect emotional aloneness inside the marriage.
What Does Emotional Neglect in Marriage Mean?
A practical definition is this: emotional neglect in marriage is a recurring experience of insufficient emotional responsiveness within an ongoing intimate relationship. One partner reaches with a feeling, concern, hope, hurt, need, or request for connection, and the interaction repeatedly ends without the person feeling adequately understood, valued, cared for, or emotionally accompanied.
The strongest scientific anchor for that definition is perceived partner responsiveness. A 2023 review by Arican-Dinc and Gable describes responsiveness as the discloser's perception that a partner understands what is being communicated, validates or values the person's perspective, and cares about the person's well-being. Responsiveness operates across support, gratitude, listening, self-disclosure, and intimacy, which makes it a much more useful research construct than trying to measure a global label such as “emotionally neglectful spouse.” See the 2023 review on responsiveness in romantic partners.
The classic interpersonal process model of intimacy makes the mechanism even clearer. Intimacy grows through disclosure and the response to disclosure. In event-based diary research, Laurenceau, Barrett, and Pietromonaco found that self-disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness contributed to experienced intimacy, with emotional disclosure especially important. A marriage can therefore lose emotional depth without losing conversation altogether: partners may still exchange enormous amounts of information while sharing less of what is personally meaningful, vulnerable, uncertain, or painful. See Laurenceau, Barrett, and Pietromonaco (1998).
That is why emotional neglect is often experienced less as one dramatic event and more as a pattern of failed arrival. The speaker reaches the other person, but the experience itself does not seem to arrive.
What Emotional Neglect Can Look Like in Everyday Marriage
You tell your spouse what happened, but not how it affected you
A couple may talk constantly and still become emotionally sparse. One spouse describes the meeting, the school schedule, the repair bill, the doctor's appointment, and the weekend plan, but leaves out the humiliation after being criticized at work, the fear about aging, the resentment that has been building, or the hope that feels too fragile to expose. Sometimes this is simply habit. Sometimes it is learned economy: emotional disclosure has stopped feeling worth the effort because previous attempts produced little curiosity, immediate problem-solving, dismissal, distraction, or a quick change of subject.
Experimental and diary evidence supports the underlying mechanism. Ruan and colleagues found that day-to-day increases in perceived partner responsiveness were associated with greater emotional expression, and experimentally increasing perceived responsiveness led participants to express more anxiety to a romantic partner. The finding does not mean that every quiet spouse is being neglected. It shows that responsiveness can change whether people choose to reveal emotion in the first place. See Ruan et al. (2020).
Support arrives only after repeated asking
A spouse may be capable of care yet become difficult to access. Comfort comes after the third request. Help appears only after the person is visibly overwhelmed. The same concern has to be explained again because it did not seem to register the first time. Over time, the emotional meaning can shift from “my partner did not notice today” to “I have to become distressed enough to earn a response.” That expectation is often more consequential than the isolated missed moment.
Support research also warns against reducing the issue to a simple count of helpful acts. In newlyweds, the amount and type of support people wanted and received were related to affect and relationship satisfaction in nuanced ways. In a large 2024 analysis of more than 16,000 participants, provided and received support showed complex associations with relationship satisfaction rather than one universal rule that more support is always better. The relevant question is whether the response fits what the partner is actually asking for and is experienced as useful. See Lorenzo, Barry, and Khalifian (2018) and Köhler et al. (2024).
Your feelings become logistics
One partner says, “I am overwhelmed by everything happening with my mother,” and receives, “What time is her appointment?” The answer is not hostile. It may even be useful. Yet the emotional message and the logistical message are different. When the practical layer repeatedly replaces the emotional layer, the speaker can begin to feel managed rather than accompanied.
This is one reason emotional neglect can coexist with conscientious partnership. A spouse may work hard, pay bills, parent responsibly, maintain the home, keep commitments, and still miss the emotional content of what the other person is communicating. Practical care and emotional responsiveness overlap, but they are not identical.
Good news receives little emotional participation
Neglect is not only about pain. Intimacy also depends on whether a partner becomes emotionally present for joy, pride, excitement, relief, and possibility. If one spouse repeatedly brings home something meaningful and receives a distracted “that's nice,” the relationship may gradually lose the experience of being known in positive moments as well as difficult ones.
Responsiveness research treats gratitude, capitalization of positive events, support, and listening as related contexts because each asks whether a partner understands what the moment means to the other person. The emotional loss is therefore not simply “my spouse does not comfort me.” It can become “my inner life does not reliably change the emotional atmosphere between us.”
You stop asking because asking itself feels lonely
A common late-stage pattern is reduced protest. Earlier in the relationship, one spouse may have asked for more conversation, affection, recognition, or support. Later, the requests become less frequent. From the outside this can look like improvement because there are fewer complaints. Internally it may reflect lowered expectation.
Risk-regulation theory helps explain this shift. Murray's 2023 review describes partner responsiveness as a safety signal: when people feel valued and expect care, connection becomes easier to pursue; when the relationship seems less safe, self-protection becomes more attractive. In that sense, withdrawal can sometimes be a response to anticipated disappointment rather than evidence that connection no longer matters. See Murray (2023).
A Micro-Scene: The Difference Between Missing a Moment and Building a Pattern
Imagine that one spouse comes home unusually quiet and says, “Today was awful. I think I embarrassed myself in front of everyone.” The other spouse is cooking, checking a message, and trying to get a child ready for bed. They answer, “I'm sorry. Can you grab the plates?” Nothing about that exchange proves neglect. Human attention is limited, families are busy, and even loving partners miss signals.
Now imagine that the same thing happens across many domains. Shame is met with distraction. Fear is met with solutions before understanding. Excitement is met with minimal interest. Hurt is reframed as overreaction before it is explored. Requests for closeness are postponed and rarely revisited. The first spouse gradually stops bringing inner experience to the relationship. The pattern, not the imperfect evening, is what begins to resemble emotional neglect.
This distinction protects the concept from inflation. A marriage should not be classified by its worst ten minutes. Relationship patterns are built through recurrence, context, repair, and what both partners come to expect over time.
Emotional Neglect Is Not the Same as Lack of Emotional Intimacy
The concepts overlap, but they answer different questions. Lack of emotional intimacy describes a low level of emotional closeness in the relationship: less meaningful disclosure, responsiveness, affection, curiosity, or felt connection. Emotional neglect is more directional in ordinary language. It describes the experience that important emotional signals are not being sufficiently received or responded to.
A couple can have low intimacy without either partner experiencing the other as neglectful. Both may be private, tired, highly independent, or content with a less verbally expressive bond. Conversely, one spouse may feel emotionally neglected even while the other believes the marriage is close because their definitions of care and emotional presence differ. For the broader low-intimacy pattern, see Lack of Emotional Intimacy in Marriage: Signs, Causes, Effects, and What Can Help.
Emotional intimacy itself is best understood as a process rather than a personality trait. Disclosure, understanding, validation, care, trust, and repeated responsive interaction create closeness over time. For the cluster's foundational explanation, see Emotional Intimacy in Marriage: What It Is, What It Looks Like, and How Couples Build It.
Emotional Neglect Is Not the Same as Emotional Distance
Emotional distance describes separation or drift between partners: less closeness, less shared inner life, less mutual involvement, or more psychological space. Emotional neglect describes one possible lived explanation for that distance: “I reached, and my experience was repeatedly not met.” Distance can emerge for many other reasons, including mutual withdrawal, chronic overload, conflict avoidance, grief, diverging routines, life transitions, or deliberate autonomy.
This matters for interpretation. If two spouses are both withdrawing, calling one of them “the neglectful partner” may obscure a reciprocal cycle. If one spouse persistently seeks contact and the other persistently disengages, the asymmetry may be more pronounced. The interaction has to be observed before assigning a story to it.
Emotional Neglect Does Not Prove Intent, Abuse, Narcissism, or Lack of Love
The label cannot establish why a spouse is emotionally unavailable in a given period. Similar behavior can arise from very different processes: exhaustion, depression, anxiety, grief, burnout, caregiving strain, conflict avoidance, limited communication skill, neurodivergent differences in signaling, cultural expectations about emotion, resentment, fear of escalation, competing stressors, or a long-established couple pattern. The same surface behavior can therefore carry different psychological meanings.
The label also does not establish a personality disorder. “My spouse rarely validates me” is an observation about interaction. “My spouse is a narcissist” is a diagnostic-style inference that requires a completely different evidentiary standard. Relationship content is especially vulnerable to this jump because popular psychology often turns repeated hurt into a remote personality diagnosis. That move usually produces more certainty than the available information can support.
Nor does emotional neglect automatically equal abuse. Abuse and coercive control involve distinct safety concerns. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines intimate partner violence to include physical violence, sexual violence, stalking, and psychological aggression, with psychological aggression involving communication intended to harm a partner mentally or emotionally or to exert control. If a relationship includes threats, intimidation, coercion, stalking, forced sexual activity, control over movement or money, dangerous monitoring, or fear for personal safety, ordinary advice about becoming more emotionally open is not the right frame. See the CDC overview of intimate partner violence.
At the same time, the existence of a separate abuse threshold should not minimize ordinary relational pain. A non-abusive marriage can still become chronically lonely, emotionally thin, or unresponsive. Precision helps both problems receive the right name.
Why Emotional Neglect Can Develop in a Marriage
Chronic stress reduces emotional bandwidth
Stress changes what people notice, how patiently they listen, and how much energy they can invest in support. Work pressure, illness, financial strain, caregiving, sleep loss, grief, and parenting can narrow attention toward urgent tasks. A 2025 systematic review specifically examined competing hypotheses about whether stress promotes or inhibits romantic partner support, reflecting how complex the relationship is between stress and supportive behavior. The practical implication is straightforward: reduced responsiveness during overload can be real without being a complete explanation of the marriage. Stress can explain a pattern and still leave the pattern in need of repair. See Ogan and Monk (2025).
The transition to parenthood is an especially clear example because sleep, workload, identity, time, sexuality, and attention all change at once. Feeling emotionally neglected after a baby does not necessarily mean a spouse has become uncaring; the couple's capacity may have been reorganized by a demanding life transition. For the evidence on that transition, see Marriage After Baby: Why Relationships Change After Parenthood and What Research Shows.
Partners may have different maps of support
One spouse may experience advice as care; the other experiences advice before empathy as dismissal. One may value frequent verbal reassurance; the other communicates commitment through reliability and practical action. One wants to talk while distressed; the other needs time before speaking. These differences do not make every mismatch harmless, but they explain why good intention does not guarantee felt responsiveness.
The useful question is not only “Did my partner do something supportive?” It is “Did the response show that my actual experience was understood, and did it meet the kind of support this moment required?” Responsiveness is partly about accuracy.
Repeated conflict can teach both partners to protect themselves
Sometimes emotional neglect develops inside a demand-withdraw cycle. One spouse presses harder because they feel ignored; the other withdraws because the conversation feels overwhelming, critical, or impossible to resolve. The withdrawal then confirms the first partner's fear of emotional abandonment, which increases pursuit. Over time, both people may feel neglected for different reasons: one lacks response, the other lacks room to regulate.
Demand-withdraw is a relationship pattern, not a diagnosis of either spouse. Understanding the cycle is often more useful than deciding which person is “the problem.” See Demand-Withdraw Pattern in Relationships: Why One Partner Pushes and the Other Pulls Away.
Resentment can reduce willingness to respond
A spouse who feels chronically hurt, overburdened, criticized, betrayed, or taken for granted may become less emotionally generous. That does not transform neglect into a justified strategy. It means that responsiveness sometimes collapses downstream of unresolved injury. Couples can spend years debating the present interaction while each person is reacting to an older ledger.
The marriage can become optimized for functioning
Long-term couples often become highly efficient at running a shared life. Efficiency is valuable, but it can gradually dominate the relationship. Conversation becomes scheduling. Touch becomes practical. Questions concern tasks rather than experience. Partners still cooperate, but curiosity about the person behind the role thins out.
When that pattern becomes the couple's identity, people often describe the marriage as feeling more like co-management than intimacy. The popular “roommate marriage” label captures one version of this experience. See Roommate Marriage: What the Popular Term Means and Why Couples Feel Like Roommates.
How Emotional Neglect Can Affect the Person Experiencing It
The most immediate effect is often loneliness rather than anger. The person may have a spouse, share a bed, raise children, attend events together, and still feel that the most personally meaningful parts of experience have no reliable witness. Social proximity does not guarantee emotional connection.
A second effect can be reduced disclosure. When people expect low responsiveness, withholding becomes rational from their point of view. They may share less, simplify what they feel, or turn toward friends, family, therapy, online communities, or private reflection instead. This can deepen the partner's impression that “you never tell me anything,” creating a feedback loop in which the lack of disclosure is treated as the cause rather than also a possible consequence of low responsiveness.
A third effect is anticipatory self-protection. A person starts editing requests before making them: “It is probably not important,” “I do not want to be needy,” “This will only turn into an argument,” or “I can handle it myself.” Risk-regulation research suggests that expectations about responsiveness shape whether people move toward connection or protect themselves against rejection. That mechanism helps explain why emotional neglect can become self-reinforcing even without deliberate cruelty.
A fourth effect can be erosion of affectionate behavior. Research has found that perceived partner responsiveness predicts affectionate touch, and touch can in turn contribute to perceptions of responsiveness. This does not mean every low-touch marriage is neglectful, but it shows how emotional and physical channels of connection can become mutually reinforcing. See Jolink, Chang, and Algoe (2022) on responsiveness and affectionate touch.
How to Tell Whether the Pattern Is Temporary or Entrenched
Duration matters, but duration alone is not enough. A difficult month during bereavement or illness may contain much less emotional availability than the couple's baseline. An entrenched pattern is more likely when the same kind of emotional miss recurs across contexts, when attempts to discuss it repeatedly produce no meaningful adjustment, and when the person has changed what they disclose or ask for because disappointment has become predictable.
Repair is another important signal. Healthy relationships contain missed cues. The difference is often what happens afterward. Can a spouse return and say, “I realized I answered your problem but not your feeling,” or “I did not understand how important that was to you”? Can the couple learn from a failed interaction? A relationship can tolerate many imperfect moments when repair remains credible.
Emotional safety also matters. If disclosure is met with ridicule, weaponization, retaliation, or unpredictable punishment, the problem is broader than simple inattention. For a detailed account of how openness depends on the expected response to vulnerability, see Emotional Safety in Marriage: What It Means and How It Shapes Openness.
What to Do If You Feel Emotionally Neglected in Your Marriage
Describe the interaction before naming the relationship
“You emotionally neglect me” is a global conclusion. It may be emotionally accurate as a summary of experience, but it gives a partner little information about what to do differently. A more actionable starting point is concrete: “When I told you I was afraid about the test results, you gave me advice and then changed the subject. I needed you to stay with the fear for a few minutes.” The second version identifies the signal, the response, and the missing response.
Specificity also makes patterns easier to evaluate. If the same kind of moment occurs repeatedly, both partners can see it. If the complaint is based mainly on one painful event, that becomes visible too. Precision lowers the temptation to argue about labels and increases the chance of discussing behavior.
Say what responsiveness would look like
Many relationship conversations fail because the request remains abstract. “Be more supportive” can mean listen without solving, ask follow-up questions, offer physical comfort, check back the next day, defend private time together, remember an important event, celebrate good news, or respond to a text when the issue is urgent. A partner cannot reliably meet a need that has never been translated into observable behavior.
This does not mean the emotionally neglected partner is responsible for training another adult to care. It means that couples often need a shared language for care because intention and reception are not the same process.
Ask what is happening on the other side
A response pattern has two perspectives. One spouse may report neglect while the other reports overwhelm, fear of criticism, uncertainty about what to say, resentment, depression, exhaustion, or a belief that giving space is respectful. Listening to that perspective does not cancel the first person's experience. It helps identify the mechanism that needs to change.
Protect difficult conversations from preventable interference
Some neglect-like interactions are partly attention problems. A vulnerable conversation begun while one person is driving, working, scrolling, parenting, or falling asleep has a lower chance of receiving full engagement. Couples can improve the odds by asking for consent and timing: “I need ten minutes of your full attention tonight. When can we do that?” Protected attention is not romantic theater; it changes the conditions under which responsiveness is possible.
Build responsiveness through small repeatable moments
When a relationship has become emotionally thin, one dramatic conversation is rarely enough. Reconnection is more often built through repeated small experiences in which disclosure receives a different response: a follow-up question, a remembered concern, a check-in after a hard day, a moment of undistracted interest, an apology that names the injury, or affectionate contact that fits the partner's preference.
For a broader evidence-based repair framework, see How to Reconnect With Your Spouse and Rebuild Emotional Intimacy.
Consider couple therapy when the cycle is stable and hard to interrupt
Couple therapy is a treatment domain in its own right, so this article does not attempt to compare branded therapy models. The broader evidence supports couple and systemic interventions for relationship distress, while the literature remains heterogeneous across approaches, populations, and study quality. A 2025 evidence review synthesized systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and controlled trials across adult-focused couple and systemic interventions, and a 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis reported overall benefit for couple interventions in marital distress while also identifying heterogeneity and publication-bias concerns. See Carr (2025) and Joseph et al. (2025).
Professional help becomes especially useful when partners cannot discuss the pattern without rapidly entering the same cycle, when one person no longer believes change is possible, or when depression, trauma, substance use, major life stress, or safety concerns are also present.
Can One Spouse Fix Emotional Neglect Alone?
One person can change a great deal about their own participation. They can make clearer requests, listen more accurately, stop using vulnerability as ammunition, reduce defensiveness, return after pauses, remember follow-up, and become more responsive. Those changes can alter the relational system.
But emotional connection is ultimately dyadic. A person cannot create mutual responsiveness unilaterally if the other spouse consistently refuses engagement. The relevant question is therefore not whether one partner can become perfect enough to rescue the marriage. It is whether both people can participate in a new pattern often enough for expectations to change.
Intimacy in Culture: Revolutionary Road
Richard Yates's novel Revolutionary Road, and Sam Mendes's film adaptation, offer a useful cultural image of a marriage in which private longing, identity, disappointment, and resentment increasingly fail to find a stable shared language. Frank and April Wheeler remain intensely entangled in one another's lives, yet emotional recognition repeatedly collapses into interpretation, defense, accusation, and incompatible stories about what their life together means.
The work is not evidence, and the characters are not clinical cases. Its psychological value lies elsewhere: it dramatizes how a marriage can contain proximity, history, dependence, sexuality, argument, ambition, and still produce the experience of not being known. Emotional neglect in real life is usually less theatrically concentrated. It may appear in ordinary kitchens, commutes, bedtimes, and distracted conversations where the central emotional fact is simply not taken up.
Research on responsiveness helps explain why the story feels recognizable. The decisive issue is not how many words spouses exchange. It is whether personally meaningful disclosure changes the partner's attention and behavior in a way that communicates understanding, validation, and care.
Marriage in the Artificial Era: When AI Becomes the Easier Witness
The Artificial Era adds a new route for unmet disclosure. A person who expects little responsiveness from a spouse can now turn immediately to a conversational AI system for reflection, validation, advice, message drafting, or emotional companionship. A 2026 systematic review of 21 studies found that adults were already using generative AI for nonjudgmental advice, emotional support, and mediation of couple communication. Users often experienced the systems as empathic and useful, while objective evaluations identified inconsistency, weak expert alignment, overreliance concerns, privacy risks, and safety limitations. See Levkovich and Alon (2026).
For emotional neglect, the important issue is where meaningful disclosure goes. If someone repeatedly tells an AI system what they no longer tell a spouse, the emotional migration may be a signal that the human relationship has become costly, unrewarding, or difficult to enter. Current research does not establish a simple causal direction: AI use may follow existing disconnection, contribute to new distance, help a person prepare for better human communication, or do several of these things at once.
The practical question is therefore not whether AI is a legitimate or illegitimate listener. It is whether AI use expands the person's capacity to return to human conversation when that is desired, or becomes a substitute that further reduces disclosure inside the marriage. In the Artificial Era, the witness to a person's inner life can be human, artificial, or distributed across both. Marriage psychology now has to study that allocation of disclosure directly.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are signs of emotional neglect in marriage?
Possible signs include repeatedly feeling unheard or emotionally alone, reducing disclosure because responses feel dismissive or absent, receiving practical solutions without emotional engagement, having meaningful concerns forgotten or rarely revisited, feeling that positive news receives little interest, or experiencing support only after repeated requests. None of these signs alone proves neglect; pattern, context, reciprocity, and repair matter.
Is emotional neglect in marriage a diagnosis?
No. It is descriptive relationship language, not a DSM or ICD diagnosis. Relationship science can study more specific processes underneath the experience, including perceived partner responsiveness, support, disclosure, listening, affection, and conflict patterns.
Can emotional neglect happen in a loving marriage?
Yes. Love, commitment, practical care, and emotional responsiveness are related but distinct. A spouse may be deeply committed and still be poor at recognizing or responding to emotional signals, especially under stress or inside long-established patterns.
Does feeling emotionally neglected mean my spouse is emotionally unavailable?
Not necessarily. Emotional unavailability is itself an everyday label rather than a diagnosis. A person may be unavailable in one domain, during one life period, or in response to one recurring conflict while remaining responsive elsewhere. Observable interaction is more informative than a global label.
Is emotional neglect abuse?
Emotional neglect and abuse are not interchangeable concepts. Abuse concerns patterns such as coercion, intimidation, threats, control, stalking, sexual violence, physical violence, or psychological aggression intended to harm or control. Some relationships can contain both neglect and abuse, but one should not be inferred automatically from the other.
Can a marriage recover from emotional neglect?
Many couples can change low-responsiveness patterns when both partners recognize the problem and repeatedly respond differently. Improvement depends less on one perfect conversation than on accumulated evidence that emotional signals will now be noticed, understood, and followed through. Entrenched cycles may benefit from qualified couple therapy.
What if my spouse says I am too sensitive?
Sensitivity is not a sufficient explanation for a recurring relational pattern. The more useful task is to identify the concrete interaction: what was communicated, what response occurred, what response was needed, and whether similar moments repeat. A partner may experience emotion intensely and still have a legitimate need for responsiveness; another partner may feel overwhelmed and still need a way to communicate that without dismissal.
Can technology make emotional neglect worse?
It can contribute when devices or digital interactions repeatedly interrupt attention or replace couple connection, but technology is usually part of a broader relational system rather than a single cause. In the Artificial Era, generative AI also creates new pathways for emotional disclosure, advice, and companionship, which can support or compete with human intimacy depending on how it is used.
Related Articles
References
Arican-Dinc, B., & Gable, S. L. (2023). Responsiveness in romantic partners' interactions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 53, 101652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101652
Carr, A. (2025). Couple therapy and systemic interventions for adult-focused problems: The evidence base. Journal of Family Therapy, 47(1), e12481. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12481
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2026). About intimate partner violence. https://www.cdc.gov/intimate-partner-violence/about/
Jolink, T. A., Chang, Y.-P., & Algoe, S. B. (2022). Perceived partner responsiveness forecasts behavioral intimacy as measured by affectionate touch. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(2), 203–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167221993349https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33736544/
Joseph, B., Joseph, V. K., & Rajan, S. K. (2025). Effectiveness of couple interventions in marital distress: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 54(1), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v54i1.17581
Köhler, A., Heine, C., Hagemeyer, B., & Dufner, M. (2024). How are provided and received social support related to relationship satisfaction and self-esteem? A comprehensive test of competing hypotheses. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 15(7). https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506241249816
Laurenceau, J.-P., Barrett, L. F., & Pietromonaco, P. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1238–1251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238
Levkovich, I., & Alon, L. (2026). Generative AI as a third voice in human couple relationships: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 23, 101255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2026.101255
Lorenzo, J. M., Barry, R. A., & Khalifian, C. E. (2018). More or less: Newlyweds' preferred and received social support, affect, and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000440
Murray, S. L. (2023). Regulating relationship risk: Partner responsiveness as a safety signal. Current Opinion in Psychology, 50, 101582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101582
Ogan, M. A., & Monk, J. K. (2025). Does stress promote or inhibit romantic partner support? A systematic review of competing hypotheses. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 17(3), 742–773. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12633
Ruan, Y., Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S., Hirsch, J. L., & Bink, B. D. (2020). Can I tell you how I feel? Perceived partner responsiveness encourages emotional expression. Emotion, 20(3), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000650