Search

There are massive literatures on initial attraction and established relationships. But few studies capture early relationship development: the interstitial period in which people experience rising and falling romantic interest for partners who could—but often do not—become sexual or dating partners. In this study, 208 single participants reported on 1,065 potential romantic partners across 7,179 data points over 7 months. In stage 1, we used random forests (a type of machine learning) to estimate how well different classes of variables (e.g., individual differences vs. target-specific constructs) predicted participants' romantic interest in these potential partners. We also tested (and found only modest support for) the perceiver × target moderation account of compatibility : the meta-theoretical perspective that some types of perceivers experience greater romantic interest for some types of targets. In stage 2, we used multilevel modeling to depict predictors retained by the random-forests models; robust (positive) main effects emerged for many variables, including sociosexuality, sex drive, perceptions of the partner's positive attributes (e.g., attractive and exciting), attachment features (e.g., proximity seeking), and perceived interest. Finally, we found no support for ideal partner preference-matching effects on romantic interest. The discussion highlights the need for new models to explain the origin of romantic compatibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research introduces the construct of couple identity clarity —the extent to which an individual, as one of two partners in a romantic relationship, believes that the two of them know who they are as a couple. Cross-sectional (Studies 1–2), experimental (Study 3), and longitudinal (Study 4) studies supported the hypothesis that couple identity clarity is associated with higher commitment. Moreover, higher couple identity clarity, although related to actual agreement between partners on their identity as a couple, predicted commitment above and beyond agreement (Study 2)—as well as predicted reduced likelihood of relationship dissolution over a 9-month period (Study 4). Exploratory analyses revealed that successful conflict resolution may enhance couple identity clarity, in turn predicting commitment (Study 4). These studies highlight the importance of people's understanding of who they are as a couple and how this understanding shapes relationship persistence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People often pursue self-change, and having a romantic partner who supports these changes increases relationship satisfaction. However, most existing research focuses only on the experience of the person who is changing. What predicts whether people support their partner's change? People with low self-concept clarity resist self-change, so we hypothesized that they would be unsupportive of their partner's changes. People with low self-concept clarity did not support their partner's change (Study 1a), because they thought they would have to change, too (Study 1b). Low self-concept clarity predicted failing to support a partner's change, but not vice versa (Studies 2 and 3), and only for larger changes (Study 3). Not supporting a partner's change predicted decreases in relationship quality for both members of the couple (Studies 2 and 3). This research underscores the role of partners in self-change, suggesting that failing to support a partner's change may stem from self-concept confusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]