Search

The emotional experiences you have with a romantic partner shape how satisfied you are in your relationship. Engaging in attempts to make a romantic partner feel better is linked with better relationship outcomes. However, it is not yet clear which specific processes people use to regulate their partners' emotions, nor which processes are most strongly linked with relationship satisfaction. In the current study of 277 individuals (55% female), we tested the extent to which eight extrinsic emotion regulation processes (expressive suppression, downward social comparison, humor, distraction, direct action, reappraisal, receptive listening, and valuing) predict relationship satisfaction. Six of the eight processes showed significant positive correlations with relationship satisfaction, with the strongest associations for valuing (r = .43), humor (r = .33), and receptive listening (r = .27). Relative weights were significant only for valuing, humor, and receptive listening, suggesting that these are the most important predictors of relationship satisfaction. Results are discussed in terms of the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic regulation processes and the potential importance of motives for regulation., Author(s): Sarah A. Walker [sup.1] , Rebecca T. Pinkus [sup.1] , Sally Olderbak [sup.2] , Carolyn MacCann [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (1) https://ror.org/0384j8v12, grid.1013.3, 0000 0004 1936 834X, School of Psychology, [...]

In light of consistently observed correlations among Big Five ratings, the authors developed and tested a model that combined E. L. Thorndike's (1920) general evaluative bias (halo) model and J. M. Digman's (1997) higher order personality factors (alpha and beta) model. With 4 multitrait-multimethod analyses, Study 1 revealed moderate convergent validity for alpha and beta across raters, whereas halo was mainly a unique factor for each rater. In Study 2, the authors showed that the halo factor was highly correlated with a validated measure of evaluative biases in self-ratings. Study 3 showed that halo is more strongly correlated with self-ratings of self-esteem than self-ratings of the Big Five, which suggests that halo is not a mere rating bias but actually reflects overly positive self-evaluations. Finally, Study 4 demonstrated that the halo bias in Big Five ratings is stable over short retest intervals. Taken together, the results suggest that the halo-alpa-beta model integrates the main findings in structural analyses of Big Five correlations. Accordingly, halo bias in self-ratings is a reliable and stable bias in individuals' perceptions of their own attributes. Implications of the present findings for the assessment of Big Five personality traits in monomethod studies are discussed. Keywords: Big Five, personality structure, higher order factors, evaluative bias, halo DOI: 10.1037/a0017159

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

The authors examined the frequency, direction, and impact of social comparisons between romantic partners. Comparisons were expected to occur on a daily basis, owing to regular interactions between partners. To the extent that one empathizes and shares outcomes with one's partner, one might respond more positively to upward than to downward comparisons. Study I a was an experience-sampling study in which participants reported comparisons made to their spouse over 2 weeks. Study 1b examined reactions to the most significant comparisons made during the experience-sampling study. Participants reported making comparisons to their romantic partner more than once a day on average and experienced more positive responses to upward than to downward comparisons. Study 2 demonstrated that participants empathized and shared outcomes with their partner to a greater extent than with a friend. Study 3 confirmed that participants responded more positively to upward than to downward comparisons even for domains high in self-relevance and even when the comparison had negative self-evaluative implications. These results suggest that, owing to higher levels of empathy and shared fate with partners, comparisons function differently in romantic than in other relationships. Keywords: social comparison, romantic relationships, couples, self-evaluation, affective responses