The 80 partners from 40 romantic relationships were independently interviewed using the RIT procedure with regard to the turning points of their respective relationships; 26 types of turning points were found, which reduced to 14 supratypes. These supra-types differed in their association with relational commitment, with some events strongly positive, some strongly negative. and others relatively modest in reported change in commitment. About half of the turning points involved explicit metacommunication between the relationship parties, but the likelihood of relationship talk varied by turningpoint type. About halfof the 759 identified turningpoints were agreed upon by relationshippartners, but agreement differed depending on turning point type. Neither partner agreement nor the presence of explicit metacommunicarion was related to the respondent's current satisfaction with the relationship. However, theproportion of total turningpoints that were negative correlated negatively with current satisfaction. Two turning point events, Exclusivity and Disengagement. individually differentiated more from less satisfied relationship parties.Almost 25 years ago, Bolton (1961) argued the centrality of the"turning point" as a unit of analysis in understanding developmental processes in romantic relationships. However, to date only a handful of studies have examined relational turning points, and a basic descriptive profile is still lacking of what events are associated with relational change. As Hinde (1981) has observed, adescriptive base is crucially important if the study
Three fundamental contradictions were examined in the stages of development identified retrospectively by 106 romantic relationship parties: autonomy-connection, openness-closedness, and predictability-novelty. The contradictions were reported to be present in approximately three-quarters of all identified stages. The openness closedness contradiction was more likely than the other two contradictions to be reported during the initial stage of development; autonomy connection and predictability-novelty contradictions were reported with increased frequency in subsequent developmental stages. Relationship parties reported that they managed the contradictions with six basic types of responses. These response forms were not reported with equal frequency across the contradictions and the stages of development. Current relationship satisfaction did not correlate significantly with the reported presence of the contradictions but did correlate with the ways in which the contradictions were managed.
This study is placed within a dialectic framework, illustrating the contradictory needs that exist for relationship openness and closedness. It explores one type of closedness in close relationships - the `taboo topic'. Ninety ethnographic interviews solicited informant accounts of topics which were `off limits' in the context of an opposite-sex relationship in which they were involved. Results indicated that there were six primary types of `taboo topics': the state of the relationship, extra-relationship activity, relationship norms, prior relationships with opposite-sex parties, conflict-inducing topics, and negatively-valenced self-disclosures. Of these topic categories, the state of the relationship was the most pervasive as a `taboo'. In an analysis of the reasons why topics were `taboo', it was apparent that the informants held a negative vision of relationship talk as destructive, inefficient, futile and risky. Extra-relationship activity, relationship norms, prior relationships, and conflict-inducing topics were avoided largely because of the negative relational metacommunication implicit in those topic categories. The findings are discussed in terms of metacommunication and uncertainty reduction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.