Search

A model of mutual responsiveness in adult romantic relationships is proposed. Behaving responsively in conflict-of-interest situations requires one partner to resist the temptation to be selfish and the other partner to resist the temptation to protect against exploitation. Managing risk and the attendant temptations of self-interest require the interpersonal mind to function in ways that coordinate trust and commitment across partners. The authors describe a system of procedural or "if...then" rules that foster mutuality in responsiveness by informing and motivating trust and commitment. The authors further argue that tuning rule accessibility and enactment to match the situations encountered in a specific relationship shapes its personality. By imposing a procedural structure on the interdependent mind, the proposed model of mutual responsiveness reframes interdependence theory and generates important research questions for the future. (Contains 5 footnotes, 3 tables, and 2 figures.)

A model of risk regulation is proposed to explain how people balance the goal of seeking closeness to a romantic partner against the opposing goal of minimizing the likelihood and pain of rejection. The central premise is that confidence in a partner's positive regard and caring allows people to risk seeking dependence and connectedness. The risk regulation system consists of 3 interconnected "if-then" contingency rules, 1 cognitive, 1 affective, and 1 behavioral. The authors describe how general perceptions of a partner's regard structure the sensitivity of these 3 "if-then" rules in risky relationship situations. The authors then describe the consequences of such situated "if-then" rules for relationship well-being and conclude by integrating other theoretical perspectives and outlining future research directions.

A model of mutual responsiveness in adult romantic relationships is proposed. Behaving responsively in conflict-of-interest situations requires one partner to resist the temptation to be selfish and the other partner to resist the temptation to protect against exploitation. Managing risk and the attendant temptations of self-interest require the interpersonal mind to function in ways that coordinate trust and commitment across partners. The authors describe a system of procedural or 'if ... then' rules that foster mutuality in responsiveness by informing and motivating trust and commitment. The authors further argue that tuning rule accessibility and enactment to match the situations encountered in a specific relationship shapes its personality. By imposing a procedural structure on the interdependent mind, the proposed model of mutual responsiveness reframes interdependence theory and generates important research questions for the future. Keywords: responsiveness, interdependence, risk, commitment, trust DOI: 10.1037/a0017015

People's expectations of acceptance often come to create the acceptance or rejection they anticipate. The authors tested the hypothesis that interpersonal warmth is the behavioral key to this acceptance prophecy: If people expect acceptance, they will behave warmly, which in turn will lead other people to accept them; if they expect rejection, they will behave coldly, which will lead to less acceptance. A correlational study and an experiment supported this model. Study 1 confirmed that participants' warm and friendly behavior was a robust mediator of the acceptance prophecy compared to four plausible alternative explanations. Study 2 demonstrated that situational cues that reduced the risk of rejection also increased socially pessimistic participants' warmth and thus improved their social outcomes. Keywords: self-fulfilling prophecy; social expectations; acceptance; self-esteem; warmth

A model of the commitment-insurance system is proposed to examine how low and high self-esteem people cope with the costs interdependence imposes on autonomous goal pursuits. In this system, autonomy costs automatically activate compensatory cognitive processes that attach greater value to the partner. Greater partner valuing compels greater responsiveness to the partner's needs. Two experiments and a daily diary study of newlyweds supported the model. Autonomy costs automatically activate more positive implicit evaluations of the partner. On explicit measures of positive illusions, high self-esteem people continue to compensate for costs. However, cost-primed low self-esteem people correct and override their positive implicit sentiments when they have the opportunity to do so. Such corrections put the marriages of low self-esteem people at risk: Failing to compensate for costs predicted declines in satisfaction over a l-year period. Keywords: commitment, relationships, costs, positive illusions, interdependence

Four studies examine the hypothesis that goals adopted by high and low self-esteem people (HSEs and LSEs) to manage risk in romantic relationships may reflect global shifts in approach motivation and subsequently affect risk taking in nonsocial domains. In Studies 1 and 2, threats to participants' romantic relationships heightened HSEs' self-reported general approach motivation while lowering LSEs' approach motivation. In Studies 2 through 4, HSEs exhibited riskier decision making (i.e., a greater tendency to pursue rewards and ignore risks) in nonsocial domains following a relationship threat manipulation whereas LSEs made more conservative decisions. These results suggest that the romantic risk regulation may be inherently linked to a broader approach and avoidance system and that specific risk regulation behaviors may be driven by global motivational shifts to a greater degree than previously theorized. Keywords: risk regulation; approach and avoidance; self-esteem; risk taking

A model of the trust-insurance system is proposed to examine how people with low and high self-esteem cope with the interdependence dilemma posed by feeling inferior to a romantic partner. Feeling inferior automatically activates 'if-then' contingencies that link inferiority to the exchange script (i.e., partner qualities are evenly traded) and exchange script anxieties to reparative efforts to secure a partner's dependence. A daily diary study of newlyweds and 5 experiments supported the model. Induced upward social comparisons to the partner activated exchange anxieties for low, but not high, self-esteem people. When implicitly primed, the exchange script heightened worries about being inferior and motivated behavioral efforts to increase the partner's dependence regardless of self-esteem. When consciously deliberated, the exchange script elicited dependence promotion only for low self-esteem people. Keywords: trust, exchange, relationships

A model of risk regulation is proposed to explain how low and high self-esteem people balance the tension between self-protection and connectedness goals in romantic relationships. This model assumes that interpersonal risk automatically activates connectedness and self-protection goals. The activation of these competing goals then triggers an executive control system that resolves this goal conflict. One correlational study and 8 experiments manipulating risk, goal strength, and executive strength and then measuring implicit and explicit goal activation and execution strongly supported the model. For people high in self-esteem, risk triggers a control system that directs them toward the situations of dependence within their relationship that can fulfill connectedness goals. For people low in self-esteem, however, the activation of connectedness goals triggers a control system that prioritizes self-protection goals and directs them away from situations where they need to trust or depend on their partner. Keywords: relationships, risk, connectedness, self-protection

The authors draw upon social, personality, and health psychology to propose and test a self-and-socialbonds model of health. The model contends that lower self-esteem predicts health problems and that poor-quality social bonds explain this association. In Study 1, lower self-esteem prospectively predicted reports of health problems 2 months later, and this association was explained by subjective reports of poor social bonds. Study 2 replicated the results of Study 1 but used a longitudinal design with 6 waves of data collection, assessed self-reports of concrete bealth-related behaviors (i.e., number of visits to the doctor and classes missed due to illness), and measured both subjective and objective indicators of quality of social bonds (i.e., interpersonal stress and number of friends). In addition, Study 2 showed that poor-quality social bonds predicted acute drops in self-esteem over time, which in turn predicted acute decreases in quality of social bonds and, consequently, acute increases in health problems. In both studies, alternative explanations to the model were tested. Keywords: self-esteem, health, social relationships

The authors draw on sociometer theory to propose that self-esteem is attuned to traits that garner others' acceptance, and the traits that garner acceptance depend on one's social role. Attunement of self-esteem refers to the linkage, or connection, between self-esteem and specific traits, which may be observed most clearly in the association between self-esteem and specific self-evaluations. In most roles, appearance and popularity determine acceptance, so self-esteem is most attuned to those traits. At the same time, interdependent social roles emphasize the value of communal qualities, so occupants of those roles have self-esteem that is more attuned to communal qualities than is the general norm. To avoid the biases of people's personal theories, the authors assessed attunement of self-esteem to particular traits indirectly via the correlation between self-esteem and self-ratings, cognitive accessibility measures, and an experiment involving social decision making. As hypothesized, self-esteem was generally more attuned to appearances than to communal qualities, but interdependent social roles predicted heightened attunement of self-esteem to qualities like kindness and understanding. Keywords: self-esteem, sociometer theory, interpersonal relationships, self-concept

Although people with low serf-esteem (LSEs) doubt their value to their romantic partners, they tend to resist positive feedback from their partners. This resistance undermines their relationships and has been difficult to overcome in past research. The authors investigated whether LSEs could be induced to take their partners' kind words to heart by manipulating how abstractly they described a recent compliment. In 3 studies, LSEs felt more positively about the compliments, about themselves, and about their relationships--as positively as people with high self-esteem (HSEs) felt--when they were encouraged to describe the meaning and significance of the compliments. The effects of this abstract meaning manipulation were still evident 2 weeks later. Thus, when prompted, LSEs can reframe affirmations from their partners to be as meaningful as HSEs generally believe them to be and, consequently, can feel just as secure and satisfied with their romantic relationships. Keywords: romantic relationships, relationship security, self-esteem, positive feedback, memory

A model of risk regulation is proposed to explain how people balance the goal of seeking closeness to a romantic partner against the opposing goal of minimizing the likelihood and pain of rejection. The central premise is that confidence in a partner's positive regard and caring allows people to risk seeking dependence and connectedness. The risk regulation system consists of 3 interconnected 'if-then' contingency rules, 1 cognitive, 1 affective, and 1 behavioral. The authors describe how general perceptions of a partner's regard structure the sensitivity of these 3 'if-then' rules in risky relationship situations. The authors then describe the consequences of such situated 'if-then' rules for relationship well-being and conclude by integrating other theoretical perspectives and outlining future research directions. Keywords: relationships, rejection, perceived regard, risk, belongingness

The authors argue that felt insecurity in a partner's positive regard and caring stems from a specifically dyadic perception--the perception that a partner is out of one's league. A cross-sectional sample of dating couples revealed that people with low self-esteem feel inferior to their partner and that such feelings of relative inferiority undermine felt security in the partner's regard. Three experiments examined the consequences of reducing such perceived discrepancies by pointing to either strengths in the self or flaws in the partner. Low, but not high. self-esteem participants reacted to new strengths in the self or faults in the partner by reporting greater felt security in their specific partner's positive regard and commitment and more positive, general feelings about their own interpersonal worth. Thus, putting the partner more within the psychological grasp of low self-esteem people may effectively increase felt security in the partner's regard.

Four studies demonstrated that fears of rejection prompt individuals to exhibit a signal amplification bias, whereby they perceive that their overtures communicate more romantic interest to potential partners than is actually the case. The link between rejection anxieties and the bias was evident regardless of whether fears of rejection were assessed in terms of chronic attachment anxiety or were induced by reflection on a previous rejection experience. Mediation analyses suggested that the bias stems in part from an expected-augmenting process, whereby persons with strong fears of rejection incorrectly assume that the recipient of their overtures will take their inhibitions into account when interpreting their behavior. Implications for understanding the link between attachment anxiety and loneliness and for designing social skills interventions are discussed.

Three experiments examined how needs for acceptance might constrain low versus high self-esteem people's capacity to protect their relationships in the face of difficulties. The authors led participants to believe that their partner perceived a problem in their relationship. They then measured perceptions of the partner's acceptance, partner enhancement, and closeness. Low but not high self-esteem participants read too much into problems, seeing them as a sign that their partner's affections and commitment might be waning. They then derogated their partner and reduced closeness. Being less sensitive to rejection, however, high self-esteem participants affirmed their partner in the face of threat. Ironically, chronic needs for acceptance may result in low self-esteem people seeing signs of rejection where none exist, needlessly weakening attachments.

This article examines the effects of discussing a transgression between romantic partners. The authors, randomly assigning partners into roles of perpetrators or victim, conclude the perpetrators perceived their actions as justifiable, felt greater improvement in the relationship, and were more optimistic about the future than were their victims

The authors argue that people are happiest in their relationships when they believe they have found a kindred spirit, someone who understands them and shares their experiences. As reality may not always be that accommodating, however, intimates may find this sense of confidence by egocentrically assuming that their partners are mirrors of themselves. Both members of dating and married couples completed measures of satisfaction and felt understanding. They also described their own and their partners' traits, values, and day-to-day feelings. The results revealed that people in satisfying and stable relationships assimilated their partners to themselves, perceiving similarities that were not evident in reality. Such egocentrism predicted greater feelings of being understood, and feeling understood mediated the link between egocentrism and satisfaction in marriage.

An analysis is presented on people's unwillingness to reveal prosocial motivation in contributing to charitable causes. Research indicates that an attractive incentive, which can be used to disguise altruistic giving as self-interest, is more effective to prompt action than solely appealing to altruistic goals even if individuals agree with those goals.