Conclusion to the special issue: Relationships in the time of COVID-19: Examining the effects of the global pandemic on personal relationships

Summary of the special issue

The special issue comprises 29 articles reporting new research on the global pandemic’s effect on personal relationships. While the majority of the authors and samples were based in North America, the special issue had notable international representation with authors and samples from 28 countries spanning all continents except Antarctica. Authors from many academic disciplines, including Communication, Health Sciences, Family Studies and Human Development, Psychology, and Sociology contributed to the special issue. Romantic relationships between two heterosexual partners were studied most often in the special issue articles, but studies also focused on family relationships, friendships, and relationships between strangers. The most common research method used by scholars to investigate COVID-19 and personal relationships was online cross-sectional questionnaires, but studies included in the special issue also utilized diary methods, interviews, longitudinal questionnaires, and poetic inquiry.

Themes of the special issue

It would be impossible in this article to summarize all of the important findings presented in the special issue. Instead, we wish to highlight some emergent themes found across the articles that we believe inform not only about how the current global pandemic impacted personal relationships but may also provide insight into how future pandemics or other large-scale crises effect close relationships. In the future, relational scholars may employ these insights in the service of people in a variety of personal relationships.

Stress, turbulence, conflict, and coping. Perhaps the most universal relational experiences of the pandemic, especially in its early months, are challenges that emerged from lockdowns, working from home, home-schooling, and other disruptions to normal daily life. It would be fair to say that all articles in the special issue in some way address these experiences, but several studies applied existing theories of relational stress, coping, and support to understanding COVID-19 and personal relationships. Relational Turbulence Theory (RTT; Solomon et al., 2016) was utilized and received support in several special issue articles (Goodboy et al., 2021; Jones & Theiss, 2021; Worley & Mucci-Ferris, 2021). Goodboy et al. (2021) showed a direct relationship between the pandemic and increases in relational turbulence. Data reported by Goodboy et al. (2021), along with that of Jones and Theiss (2021) and Worley and Mucci-Ferris (2021), supported a central tenant of RTT theory that increases in partner interference are associated with problematic and negative relational outcomes. Conversely, facilitation and open communication between partners were associated with positive relational outcomes (Goodboy et al., 2021; Jones & Theiss, 2021; Worley & Mucci-Ferris, 2021).

Pandemic-related stressors and personal relationships were also examined using other theoretical foundations. Enestrom and Lyndon (2021) used the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model with Mediation (Ledermann et al., 2011) to show that shared reality between partners led to health-care workers feeling more supported and greater relational satisfaction. Several studies used various theories in studies that focused on dyadic coping. Lillie et al. (2021) applied the communication theory of resilience (Buzzanell, 2010, 2019) in a study that highlighted the impact of relational uncertainty as a mediator in the relationship between resilience communication processes, negative emotions, and dyadic coping. Generally, increases in resilience communication processes reduced relational uncertainty which in turn was associated with decreased negative emotion and increased dyadic coping (Lillie et al., 2021). Randall et al. (2021), based on the systematic transactional model of dyadic coping (Bodenmann et al., 2016), found that while there were some variations between samples from the 27 countries in their investigation, perceived partner dyadic coping moderated the association between COVID-19 related psychological distress and relationship quality. Taken together, the studies by Lillie et al. (2021) and Randall et al. (2021) show that dyadic coping, which may increase based on positive communication practices, are protective factors for couples stressed by COVID-19.

Ogan et al. (2021) also examined dyadic coping and found gender differences in the relationship between stress, dyadic coping, and relationship instability for different-sex couples. Specifically, Ogan et al. (2021) found that while both men and women experienced increased relational instability across the 6 months of the pandemic they studied, only for women was there a significant relationship showing perceived stress was negatively associated with perceptions of partner’s dyadic coping and that dyadic coping was negatively associated with relationship instability. Gender differences among the experiences of different-sex couples during the pandemic were also examined by Waddell et al. (2021). Waddell et al. (2021) found that during the pandemic for working different-sex couples with young children, women did more of the parenting and housework during the pandemic than did men while men did more paid work outside of the home than did women. Both men and women agreed it was unfair that women in these relationships did more housework and parenting, but this inequality was associated with increased relational problems and decreased relational satisfaction only for women (Waddell et al., 2021). The difficulties and complications associated with the domestic work of caring for loved ones during the pandemic, especially for women, were also examined by Faulkner (2021) using poetic inquiry to examine her experiences of caring for her elderly parents.

Two articles specifically examined conflict during the pandemic. Li and Samp (2021) studied same-sex couples and found that those that perceived greater daily adversity during the pandemic and felt a higher degree of threat of COVID-19 (i.e., fear that they and their loved one will get sick) engaged in more complaint avoidance with partners which in turn led to lower relationship satisfaction and decreased personal well-being. The negative effects of the pandemic on relationship satisfaction were higher for people of color and those with higher amounts of internalized homophobia (Li & Samp, 2021). Johnson et al. (2021) used Family Communication Patterns Theory (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2006) to examine family arguments about social distancing during the pandemic. Johnson et al. (2021) showed that for families who practiced open communication and tolerated differences of opinion when discussing disagreements about social distancing had positive outcomes for family relationships, whereas for families that do not engage in open discussion and believe that family members should be similar in views experienced the highest amount of relational harm resulting from arguments about social distancing. Li and Samp (2021) and Johnson et al. (2021) show how the pandemic influenced the ways that people chose to engage, or not engage, in conflict and the effects this had on them and their relationships.

Gresham et al. (2021) examined the relationships between COVID-19 related stressors and intimate partner violence (IPV), health, and health behaviors. Gresham et al. (2021) found that even when controlling for vulnerabilities associated with IPV victimization, COVID-19 related stressors, such as financial anxiety and social disconnection, were associated with greater IPV victimization during the pandemic. Further, higher rates of IPV victimization during the pandemic were associated with higher amounts of substance abuse (Gresham et al., 2021). Gresham et al. (2021) study underscores the need for increased IPV and substance abuse support during emergencies like the pandemic.

Loneliness, isolation, and mediated communication. Lockdowns, social distancing, and other restrictions during the pandemic challenged relationships in ways that were previously unexperienced by many. Several articles in the special issue focused specifically on loneliness and isolation experienced during the pandemic and its association with personal relationships. Ray (2021) showed that the pandemic is a lonely time for some, especially young adults and those who lived alone. Merolla et al. (2021) used a daily diary entry method to assess pandemic-related anxiety effected loneliness, relational difficulty, and communication quality. Merolla et al. (2021) found that pandemic-related anxiety was associated with greater loneliness and more negative relational and mental health outcomes.

Hesse et al. (2021) employed affection exchange theory (Floyd, 2006) to examine the effects of affection deprivation during the pandemic. Hesse et al. (2021) found that affections deprivation was associated with depression (especially for women), loneliness, and stress but not with overall life satisfaction and happiness. Burleson et al. (2021) examined the effects of refraining from social touch during the pandemic for those in romantic relationships and found that for those who relied on touch for affect regulation, decreased touch due to pandemic social distancing led to more psychological distress than for those who relied on touch for affect regulation less. Unexpectedly, Burleson et al. (2021) found that for those who cohabitated with their relational partner, affectionate touch increased during the pandemic and was associated with higher relational satisfaction. Another surprising finding was reported by Holmstrom et al. (2021) who found that participants in their examination of supportive communication during the pandemic, people, especially women as compared to men, reported receiving more support than desired despite being under a shelter-in-place order.

Communal level relational adjustments made by those facing pandemic-related isolation were also examined. Scheinfeld et al. (2021) examined how grieving changed during the pandemic and found that although people found ways to feel together while grieving apart, they also experienced challenges to grieve management including difficulties in not having nonverbal communication with others while grieving and organizing funeral rituals because of social distancing. Scheinfeld et al. (2021) described how the social isolation caused by the pandemic made coping with losing a loved one more difficult but also how communities of mourners adjusted grieving practices to try to overcome pandemic-related challenges. Stamps et al. (2021) described how Black individuals in the United States engaged in collectivist-oriented activities to foster community resilience during the pandemic, such as providing health and wellness information and volunteerism, as well as reimagining relational maintenance strategies when facing pandemic challenges. Stamps et al.’s (2021) findings have similarities with Smallen’s (2021) findings that within the context of the pandemic, people found interactions that involved openness to each other, affirmation of the self, emotional uplift, and meeting basic needs meaningful. Smallen (2021) and Stamps et al. (2021) demonstrated how the pandemic encouraged prosociality.

Given the sudden and involuntary nature of the social restrictions and social distancing caused by the pandemic, many people turned to social media and mediated communication for the first time or in new ways to try to stay connected in relationships. Several articles in the special issue examined social media and mediated communication and relationships during the pandemic. Choi and Choung (2021) compared how people were using interpersonal media (i.e., texting, video chatting) and masspersonal media (i.e., Facebook, Twitter) during the pandemic and found that people preferred interpersonal media for social connection and masspersonal media for entertainment and information seeking. Further, increased use of interpersonal media for social connection was associated with less loneliness during the pandemic (Choi & Choung, 2021). Juvonen et al. (2021) also examined how various communication technologies were used to connect, specifically with friends, during the pandemic. Juvonen et al. (2021) found greater satisfaction with the use of mediated communication was associated with less loneliness, but that frequency of use of media to connect had no influence loneliness. Bond (2021) found a positive connection between use of mediated communication and relationship stability among friends, but also examined parasocial relationships, which are relationships with fictional characters and celebrities, during the pandemic. Interestingly, Bond (2021) found that, during the pandemic, parasocial relationships became more meaningful especially for those who decreased face-to-face engagement and increased mediated communication with real-life friends.

In the special issue, two studies examined the relationships among adherence to social distancing mandates, mediated communication, and feelings. Curran and Seiter (2021) found that apprehension about using video chat related to increased worry about maintaining relationships during the pandemic which led to increased loneliness and less adherence to CDC social distancing and other COVID-19 mitigation guidelines. Shufford et al. (2021) examined adherence to social distancing as a predictor and found that greater social distancing adherence predicted greater frequency of using mediated communication which predicted more positive affect. Together, Curran and Seiter (2021) and Shufford et al. (2021) show that use of and comfort with mediated communication to connect in personal relationships related to how well people adhered to COVID-19 mitigation social distancing mandates.

Reflecting and reframing in relationships. Several articles in the special issue demonstrated that it was not just relationship scientists who were motivated to examine personal relationships during the pandemic, but that the general population was also spurred to reflect upon and reframe aspects of their relationships due to COVID-19’s impact. Alexopoulos et al. (2021) investigated changes in partner preferences in response to the pandemic and found that single people with greater concerns about COVID-19 became more selective in their partner preferences, including a perceived increase in the importance of family commitment and stability, even when they had a fear of being single.

Three special issue articles focused on the ways that couples reflected on and reframed their relationships during the pandemic. Couples reported that their relationships changed in terms of sharing responsibilities, communication, togetherness, quality time, and space because of the pandemic (Vowels et al., 2021). While couples in Vowels et al.’s (2021) study reported both positive and negative impacts of the pandemic on their relationships, the study describes strategies that couples used to increase their relational satisfaction during the pandemic. Bell (2021) also found that couples experienced both negative and positive impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, but overall couples in their study reported more positive pandemic relational impacts than negative. Specifically, among the positive impacts described by couples were the importance of focusing on and appreciating their relationship including taking advantage of increased time together (Bell, 2021). Nuru and Bruess (2021) examined the pandemic and couples’ wefulness, or process of relational consciousness, and found that couples engaged in ritualized (re)commitments as ways of dealing with the pandemic. Through these rituals, couples were able to cultivate relational consciousness, negotiate wefulness amongst challenge, accept life on life’s terms, and invite challenge as opportunity for growth during the pandemic. These articles offer examples of how couples strengthened their relationships even when struggling with the pandemic’s challenges.

Guest editor reflections

About halfway through this special issue project, we found ourselves being interviewed by editor-at-large for TIME magazine, Belinda Luscombe, who wanted to know what we learned about relationships during the pandemic (Luscombe, 2021). While we had a good deal of important findings from the special issue articles that had already been accepted to share with the readers of TIME, we also knew that with more special issue articles in the works we would be learning even more soon. Now the special issue is completed, and as discussed above, we have learned a great deal more about the pandemic and social and personal relationships. The research included in the special issue was conducted as the pandemic was unfolding and provides insights into the interaction between the global pandemic and personal relationships in real time. Yet, we are still unsure of how long the pandemic will last and how long it will continue to have effects on our social and personal relationships. Even though we are not at the end of the pandemic or relationship science related to the pandemic, we offer our reflections on what we learned about relationship science during the pandemic and offer suggestions for future research we hope will be applicable not just further examinations of the COVID-19 pandemic, but in relationship research in other future crises as well.

First, in the special issue, we saw that the lack of diversity and inclusion in relationship science samples discussed by Williamson et al. (in press) also applied to the special issue. While the special issue is an international collection of studies, the majority of people who participated in studies that make up the special issue were White, cis-gender, and heterosexual. Li and Samp’s (2021) findings that the negative effects of the pandemic on relationship satisfaction were higher for people of color and LGB people with higher amounts of internalized homophobia highlight the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on the relationships of those with marginalized identities and demonstrate the need to approach understanding the pandemic and relationships with an intersectional lens and include more diverse samples in our studies.

Second, the special issue highlighted the diversity of methodological approaches in relationship science. We were particularly stuck by two articles that, to us, demonstrate very rich but very different approaches to understanding relationships. On one hand, Randall et al. (2021) reported the results of a quantitative survey collected in 27 countries by a research team consisting of 96 researchers. On the other hand, Faulkner (2021) used an autoethnographic poetic inquiry approach. Despite these vast differences in methodology, both Randall et al. (2021) and Faulkner (2021) provide us with valuable insights that help us better understand relationships amid the global pandemic. We would like to encourage more of both approaches. We see great value in more international collaborations amongst relational researchers and in more critical and arts-based methodologies.

We were amazed at the speed and dexterity shown by relationship researchers as they quickly pivoted existing data collections and created new studies to investigate relationships and COVID-19. Our awe is only increased when we remember that these researchers were not only making significant research shifts but were also likely juggling changes in their teaching plans and formats and their own personal relationships. The pandemic redefined “me search” in that these researchers were examining the pandemic’s effects while being affected by the pandemic themselves. In fact, we think there is great value in future projects that might gather information from researchers about how they managed conducting relationship research during the pandemic so that we might all learn effective research, work–life balance, and personal well-being strategies from them.

Before we close, we would like to sincerely express our gratitude to each author who took the time to submit their research to this special issue, to every reviewer who added this “one more thing” to their incredibly full plate to join our special issue editorial board (see the list in this issue), to JSPR’s editor-in-chief Melissa Curran for encouraging us and always being within virtual shouting distance if we ever needed help, to JSPR’s two amazing editorial assistants Xiaomin Li and Rachael Perez, who were incredibly helpful with logistics and email replies, and finally to the Sage publication editorial team for their flexibility and willingness to champion this special issue (as well as ultimately expand it to four issues of the journal).

At the close of this special issue, it is over 17 months into one of the most devastating global health crises. When we will enter something resembling the world prior to COVID-19 remains unknown. As we have seen in this collection of research studies, this pandemic has had particularly notable effects on how to relate in our close relationships, especially early on, when the bulk of this research was collected. As the pandemic continues, more research on COVID-19 and relationships is needed to determine both long-term effects of the pandemic on relationships and to prepare for future crises that will cause challenges in our relational lives.