Search

Increasing interdependence in an intimate relationship requires engaging in behaviors that risk rejection, such as expressing affection and asking for support. Who takes such risks and who avoids them? Although several theoretical perspectives suggest that self-esteem plays a crucial role in shaping such behaviors, they can be used to make competing predictions regarding the direction of this effect. Six studies reconcile these contrasting predictions by demonstrating that the effects of self-esteem on behaviors that risk rejection to increase interdependence depend on relational seif-construal—that is, the extent to which people define themselves by their close relationships. In Studies 1 and 2, participants were given the opportunity to disclose negative personal information (Study 1) and feelings of intimacy (Study 2) to their dating partners. In Study 3, married couples reported the extent to which they confided in one another. In Study 4, we manipulated self-esteem and relational self-construal, and participants reported their willingness to engage in behaviors that increase interdependence. In Studies 5 and 6, we manipulated the salience of interpersonal risk, and participants reported their willingness to engage in behaviors that risk rejection to increase interdependence. In all 6 studies, self-esteem was positively associated with behaviors that can increase interdependence among people low in relational self-construal but negatively associated with those behaviors among people high in relational self-construal. Accordingly, theoretical descriptions of the role of self-esteem in relationships will be most complete to the extent that they consider the degree to which people define themselves by their close relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Should intimates respond to their interpersonal mistakes with self-criticism or with self-compassion? Although it is reasonable to expect self-compassion to benefit relationships by promoting self-esteem, it is also reasonable to expect self-compassion to hurt relationships by removing intimates' motivation to correct their interpersonal mistakes. Two correlational studies. I experiment, and I longitudinal study demonstrated that whether self-compassion helps or hurts relationships depends on the presence versus absence of dispositional sources of the motivation to correct interpersonal mistakes. Among men, the implications of self-compassion were moderated by conscientiousness. Among men high in conscientiousness, self-compassion was associated with greater motivation to correct interpersonal mistakes (Studies I and 3), observations of more constructive problem-solving behaviors (Study 2), reports of more accommodation (Study 3), and fewer declines in marital satisfaction that were mediated by decreases in interpersonal problem severity (Study 4); among men low in conscientiousness, self-compassion was associated with these outcomes in the opposite direction, Among women, in contrast, likely because women are inherently more motivated than men to preserve their relationships for cultural and/or biological reasons, self-compassion was never harmful to the relationship. Instead, women's self-compassion was positively associated with the motivation to correct their interpersonal mistakes (Study 1) and changes in relationship satisfaction (Study 4), regardless of conscientiousness. Accordingly, theoretical descriptions of the implications of self-promoting thoughts for relationships may be most complete to the extent that they consider the presence versus absence of other sources of the motivation to correct interpersonal mistakes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Suppressing the expression of negative emotions tends to undermine individuals' and their partners' wellbeing. However, sometimes expressive suppression may be relatively innocuous given that individuals commonly withhold negative emotions in order to maintain close relationships, and this may be especially the case when expressive suppression is enacted by people who exhibit amplified expressions of negative emotions, such as those high in attachment anxiety. The current research examined when and for whom expressive suppression may be more or less costly by testing whether the curvilinear effect of individuals' expressive suppression on individuals' and partners' outcomes is moderated by individuals' attachment anxiety. Our results across 3 dyadic studies revealed a linear effect of expressive suppression when predicting individuals' outcomes: greater expressive suppression had costs for individuals (lower relationship satisfaction, reported responsiveness and discussion success, and greater discussion threat). Furthermore, in 4 of the 5 models, a moderated curvilinear effect of expressive suppression emerged when predicting partners' outcomes. For individuals low in attachment anxiety, low levels of expressive suppression did not incur costs for their partners' relationship satisfaction, perceptions of individuals' responsiveness, discussion success, and discussion threat. Once expressive suppression surpassed moderate levels, however, greater expressive suppression had a detrimental effect on partners' outcomes. In contrast, for individuals high in attachment anxiety, the negative effect of moderate-to-high levels of expressive suppression on partners' outcomes was attenuated. These novel results demonstrate how considering curvilinear methods can uncover when and for whom expressive suppression may be more or less costly in intimate relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]