A dyadic exploration into the romantic relationship experiences of Canadians with histories of childhood adversity

Abstract

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are linked to long-term relational and sexual challenges, yet research rarely explores how individuals uniquely appraise these events or how ACEs affects couples. This thesis had two aims: (1) to describe how traumatic the ten commonly measured ACEs are perceived to be, and (2) to test how perceived partner responsiveness (PPR)—feeling understood and cared for by one’s partner—and event centrality—the degree to which a traumatic event is central to one’s identity—relate to sexual arousal and inhibition for couples (and compared differing dyadic ACEs configurations). Participants were 202 Canadian couples (404 individuals). Aim 1 showed variation in trauma appraisals: women rated parental mental illness as more traumatic, childfree participants viewed emotional and physical neglect as more traumatic, and emotional abuse was reported as the most traumatic, on average. In Aim 2, I compared mixed-adversity couples (one partner had ACEs) and dual-adversity couples (both had ACEs). In mixed-adversity couples, individuals with ACEs experienced greater sexual arousal when they felt supported by their partner (PPR); and greater event centrality was linked to both higher arousal and inhibition. In dual-adversity couples, PPR was linked to greater arousal in one’s romantic partner, and greater event centrality was associated with one’s own higher inhibition and their partner’s higher arousal. These findings underscore the need to study couples’ adversity through a dyadic lens—without dyadic data, critical information is lost related to the effects of the partner. Additionally, findings highlight the value of trauma-informed, couple-based approaches to sexual wellbeing and support more nuanced clinical care for couples with ACEs histories.