ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
"That's just typical!" A qualitative video review study on the ecological validity of couples' stress conversations in the lab.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: For research on dyadic coping-how partners in intimate relationships deal with stress together-video-recorded behavioral observations in a lab are considered to be the best way to study actual coping behavior interactions. To date, little is known about the ecological validity of these laboratory situations. The current study aimed to ask couples directly what they considered to be typical when looking back at a videotaped behavioral interaction sequence in the lab. Methods: A qualitative video recall approach was used in which interview data were collected. Results: Participants mostly viewed their partner's behavior as typical. However, the setting and the course of the conversation were viewed as less typical. There were gender and age differences with regards to the ecological validity of lab settings. Conclusions and implications: Results indicate that the ecological validity of dyadic coping in the laboratory is multidimensional. The lab setting seems comparable to situations where both partners have time and are not stressed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.