1 / 24

Stability of mental health among couples over 5 years: does one partner influence the other one?

Stability of mental health among couples over 5 years: does one partner influence the other one?. Stéphane Cullati a,b , Delphine Courvoisier a , Claudine Burton-Jeangros c a Division of clinical epidemiology, Geneva University Hospitals & University of Geneva

marisol-castro
Télécharger la présentation

Stability of mental health among couples over 5 years: does one partner influence the other one?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Stability of mental health among couples over 5 years: does one partner influence the other one? Stéphane Cullatia,b, Delphine Courvoisiera, Claudine Burton-Jeangrosc aDivision of clinical epidemiology, Geneva University Hospitals & University of Geneva bQuality of care Unit, Geneva University Hospitals cDepartment of Sociology, University of Geneva

  2. Introduction • Research on health outcomes has emphasized that individuals are dependent of their significant others, such as partner, children, parents, etc. (Monden 2007). For example: • social position on mortality, • psychological trait on health outcomes, • depression on cognitive functionning. • Partner mental health may have an impact on the mental health of the other member of the couple.

  3. Introduction • Examining the impact of the intraindividual variability of mental health on each partner has been little studied. • How to study the intraindividual variability across time? • Multi-level modeling • Correlations between standard deviations • But stable part is not excluded • The latent state trait models represent one solution to model the variable part, by excluding the stable part.

  4. Evolution of mental health among couples Questions: • Is mental health stable or variable over time among women and men living together? • Does mental health of one partner vary due to variation of mental health of the other one?

  5. Method • Population: adults, living in Switzerland, participating to the national Swiss Panel Households survey (data available at http://www.swisspanel.ch). • Selection criteria: • respondents living in couple, married or not • who answered to 5 waves between 2000 and 2004, without interruption (N=624): • Sample of 624 couples; women were 44.2 years old (SD=12.2) and men: 46.8 years old (SD=12.2) • Mental health was assessed by two indicators: depression, optimism (11-points Likert items, from 0 to 10)

  6. Model • To assess variability of mental health through time, we used latent state trait to distinguish between stable component and momentary variations of mental health for each partner: • Stable component was represented by 1 latent variable • Situational component by 5 occasion-specific latent variable • To assess relationship between mental health of both partner, we used a multiconstruct latent state trait (Schermelleh-Engel 2004).

  7. Y11 Y21 Y12 Y22 Y13 Y23 Y14 Y24 Y15 Y25 Yik, i = 2 indicators (Y1 depression, Y2 optimism) k = 5 occasions (waves) (Steyer et al. 1992; Steyer et al. 1999 )

  8. Y11 Y21 11 Y12 21 Y22 12 Y13 22 Y23 13 23 Y14 T1 14 Y24 24 Y15 Y25 15 25 Yik = ik +ikT

  9. Y11 Y21 11 Y12 21 Y22 12 Y13 22 Y23 13 23 Y14 T1 21 14 Y24 22 24 Y15 23 IST2 24 Y25 15 25 25 Yik = ik +ikT+iikISTi

  10. Y11 Y21 11 Y12 21 Y22 12 Y13 22 Y23 13 23 Y14 T1 21 14 Y24 22 24 Y15 23 IST2 24 Y25 15 25 25 Yik = ik +ikT+ iikISTi+ dikWk d11 W1 d21 d12 W2 d22 d13 W3 d23 d14 W4 d24 d15 W5 d25

  11. E25 E11 E21 E12 E22 E13 E23 E14 E24 E15 Y11 Y21 11 Y12 21 Y22 12 Y13 22 Y23 13 23 Y14 T1 21 14 Y24 22 24 Y15 23 IST2 24 Y25 15 25 25 Yik = ik +ikT+ iikISTi+ dikWk + Eik d11 W1 d21 d12 W2 d22 d13 W3 d23 d14 W4 d24 d15 W5 d25

  12. E25 E24 E14 E23 E13 E22 E12 E21 E11 E15 Y11 Y21 11 Y12 21 Y22 12 Y13 22 Y23 13 23 Y14 T1 21 14 Y24 22 24 Y15 23 IST2 24 Y25 15 25 25 d11 W1 d21 d12 W2 d22 d13 W3 d23 d14 W4 d24 d15 W5 d25

  13. E11 E21 E25 E15 E24 E14 E23 E22 E12 E11 E13 E25 E15 E24 E14 E23 E13 E22 E12 E21 Y11 Y11 Y21 Y21 11 11 d11 d11 Y12 Y12 W1 W1 21 21 d21 d21 Y22 Y22 12 12 Y13 Y13 d12 d12 22 22 W2 W2 Y23 Y23 d22 d22 13 13 23 23 Y14 Y14 d13 d13 W3 W3 T1 T1 21 21 14 14 Y24 Y24 d23 d23 22 22 24 24 Y15 Y15 d14 d14 23 23 W4 W4 IST2 IST2 24 24 Y25 Y25 d24 d24 15 15 25 25 25 25 d15 d15 W5 W5 d25 d25 Women Men

  14. Y11 Y11 Y21 Y21 Y12 Y12 Y22 Y22 Y13 Y13 Y23 Y23 Y14 Y14 Y24 Y24 Y15 Y15 Y25 Y25 0.26 M= 8.67 M=8.05 .58 .49 .25 .23 1.62 1.99 .35 .50 .22 .22 Men Women .35 .50 .22 .22 .35 .50 0.52 0.49 .22 .22 .35 .50

  15. Question 1: Is mental health stable or variable over time among women and men living together? • Men and women have a high level of mental health (8.67 and 8.05). Women have a more variable mental health than men. • Both men and women have a mostly stable mental health: about 75% of the variance of the observed variables depended on a stable trait of mental health and 25% were accounted by situational influences. • Autoregressive influence of one occasion-specific variable upon the next one were significantly different from zero, albeit low at .2 for both sexes.

  16. Question 2: Does mental health of one partner vary due to variation of mental health of the other one? • Stable mental health of one partner impact on the stable component of the other one. • Deviation of mental health in one partner does not impact on those of the other one neither during the same year, nor the next year.

  17. Discussion • A multi-construct latent state trait model was appropriate to examine 3 hypothesis: • reciprocal influences of the stable mental health, • reciprocal influences of the state mental health, • cross-lagged influences of the state mental health. • This model allowed solving whether the stable influences or the unstable influences were decisive on the partner. • Evolution of mental health of respondents is influenced by their own history and by the history of the stable part of their partner's mental health. • Change of mental health of one partner does not explain change of mental health of the other one.

  18. Discussion • Other longitudinal studies examined cognitive functionning and found an influence between partner among older (Gerstorf 2009) or ethnic subgroups (Hinton 2009) whereas our study examined the general population. • Further resarch is needed to examine change among subgroups (younger vs older, educated vs less educated).

  19. Discussion • Strengths: • measure of mental health includes positive and negative states of mood • precisely assess the reliability of the construct • significant number of waves • Limitations: • selection bias of the most stable respondents (the more healthy?) • acceptable reliability (.6) • time frame between each occasion is 1 year • high attrition of the Swiss Households Panel between 1999 and 2004.

  20. Cited references • Gerstorf, D., C. A. Hoppmann, K. J. Anstey and M. A. Luszcz. 2009. Dynamic links of cognitive functioning among married couples: longitudinal evidence from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Psychol Aging, 24 (2): 296-309. • Hinton, L., Y. Hagar, N. West, H. M. Gonzalez, D. Mungas, L. Beckett and M. N. Haan. 2009. Longitudinal influences of partner depression on cognitive functioning in latino spousal pairs. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord, 27 (6): 491-500. • Monden C., (2007). Partners in health ? Exploring resemblance in health between partners in married and cohabitaint couples. Sociology of Health and Illness. 29: 391-411. • Schermelleh-Engel, K., N. Keith, H. Moosbrugger and V. Hodapp. 2004. Decomposing Person and Occasion-Specific Effects: An Extension of Latent State-Trait (LSI) Theory to Hierarchical LST Models. Psychological Methods, 9 (2): 21-. • Steyer R., Ferring D., Schmitt M.J., (1992). States and Traits in Psychological Assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 8: 79-98. • Steyer R., Schmitt M.J., Eid M., (1999). Latent state-trait theory and research in personality and individual differences. European Journal of Personality. 13: 389-408.

More Related