Protective Buffering by Service Members and Romantic Partners During Military Deployments: Associations with Mental and Relationship Health

Since the beginning of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, well over 2 million military service members (SMs) have deployed to combat zones. For SMs and romantic partners, deployments represent one of the most stressful situations in their lives, with one of the largest concerns being the wellbeing of the other partner. In order to shield each other from stressors occurring at home or in combat, both deployed SMs and at-home partners report engaging in protective buffering, or intentionally withholding information or concerns in an attempt to protect the other partner. Despite retrospective, qualitative studies that document the presence of protective buffering, no quantitative research has yet assessed whether protective buffering by SMs or by partners is effective or what other effects it may have on the couple.;This dissertation addresses the gap in two separate but related manuscripts. Both manuscripts utilize data from 54 military couples drawn from a larger study of Army couples. These couples were married and provided data before, during, and after a deployment of the male soldier, in the context of follow-up assessments within the larger study. Both members of the couple answered questionnaires regarding individual psychological functioning, relationship functioning, and deployment experiences. The first manuscript explores the frequency of protective buffering by SMs during deployment, pre-existing and logistical deployment factors that may be related to levels of protective buffering, and the associations of protective buffering with individual and relationship distress in both SMs and partners during and after deployment. More than half (56%) of SMs indicated that they engaged in protective buffering at least some of the time, with an average item response of 4.51 ( SD = 1.29) on a 1-7 scale. Of over 10 pre-deployment and deployment variables that were explored, only partners' psychological distress prior to deployment was significantly associated (negatively) with SMs' protective buffering. Repeated measures ANOVA of marital satisfaction and distress revealed that SMs surprisingly reported significantly higher marital satisfaction during deployment, relative to both pre- and post-deployment. SMs also had significantly lower distress post-deployment, as compared to pre-deployment and during deployment. On the other hand, there were no significant differences in partners' distress or marital satisfaction across the deployment cycle. To assess how distress and marital satisfaction varied based on SM protective buffering, multilevel models were run with time nested within individuals, and individuals nested within couples. Time variables were entered at Level 1, Role (SM or partner) at Level 2, and, given that protective buffering was only assessed in SMs but thought to affect both SMs and partners, buffering by SMs was entered at Level 3. Additionally, in order to account for the larger clinical trial from which the participants were selected, a group variable indicating whether or not the couple attended the marriage intervention was entered at level 3. Results indicate that SMs' protective buffering was significantly and negatively associated with partners' distress during deployment, in line with SMs' intent. On the other hand, the relationship between protective buffering and SMs' own distress was positive and significant both during and after deployment. Protective buffering was not significantly associated with partners' marital satisfaction, but was significantly and negatively associated with SMs' post-deployment marital satisfaction. Overall, protective buffering may have short term benefits for partner. However, the psychological and relationship distress for SMs suggest that protective buffering may be a detrimental strategy for deployed SMs. The second manuscript investigates protective buffering by non-deployed partners. Partners have consistently described feeling a responsibility not to burden or distract deployed SMs, fearing that family-related stress or conflict might result in a deployed SM being distracted during dangerous situations. Thus, I assessed the relationship between the level of protective buffering reported by the partner and the degree to which SMs reported that family stresses interfered with work functioning (i.e., family-to-work spillover) during deployment. Contrary to hypothesis, the correlation between partner protective buffering and SMs' report of spillover was small and not significant. Subsequently, I explored the association of partners' protective buffering with both partners' and SMs' psychological distress and marital satisfaction, via hierarchical regressions (for the deployment time period only) and multigroup, cross-lagged autoregressive models (for all three time points). In both types of analyses, higher protective buffering by partners was related to higher partner distress and lower SM marital satisfaction during deployment. Contrary to hypotheses, these effects did not continue post-deployment. In sum, protective buffering was not associated with lower spillover in SMs, but was associated with higher distress in partners and lower satisfaction in SMs during deployment. Notably, the significant relationships of protective buffering with partner distress and SM marital satisfaction were cross-sectional. Thus, protective buffering may be causing the negative outcomes, or partners who are distressed or sense lower satisfaction in their deployed partner may be more likely to buffer.