A longitudinal study of friends with benefits relationships

Machia, Laura V.; Proulx, Morgan; Ioerger, Michael; Lehmiller, Justin J.

doi:10.1111/pere.12307

Cited by 15 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…People pursue potential partners who do not meet their stated dating standards Eastwick et al (2011); Slotter and Gardner (2012); Joel et al (2014) People "yes" a relatively large portion of options in speed-dating contexts, including those who do not conform to stated preferences Kurzban and Weeden (2007); Joel, Eastwick, & Finkel (2017) People evaluate brand-new potential romantic partners in a positively biased way Berscheid et al (1976) Relationships that begin as casual sexual encounters frequently transition into committed relationships Machia et al (2020); Owen and Fincham (2012); Timmermans and Courtois (2018) When presented with many dating options, people take a satisficing approach of rejecting the worst options rather than selecting the best options Jonason et al (2015); Long and Campbell (2015) Potential mechanisms…”

Section: Behavioral Evidence Citationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

We’re Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships

Joel

MacDonald

2021

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dating is widely thought of as a test phase for romantic relationships, during which new romantic partners carefully evaluate each other for long-term fit. However, this cultural narrative assumes that people are well equipped to reject poorly suited partners. In this article, we argue that humans are biased toward pro-relationship decisions—decisions that favor the initiation, advancement, and maintenance of romantic relationships. We first review evidence for a progression bias in the context of relationship initiation, investment, and breakup decisions. We next consider possible theoretical underpinnings—both evolutionary and cultural—that may explain why getting into a relationship is often easier than getting out of one, and why being in a less desirable relationship is often preferred over being in no relationship at all. We discuss potential boundary conditions that the phenomenon may have, as well as its implications for existing theoretical models of mate selection and relationship development.

show abstract

Section: Behavioral Evidence Citationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

We’re Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships

Joel

MacDonald

2021

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies (primarily in the sexuality and adolescent health literatures) examine college hookups, "friends-with-benefits," and related phenomena (e.g., Calzo, 2013;Harden, 2014;Fiedler et al, 2013;Garcia et al, 2012;Jonason et al, 2010;Lehmiller et al, 2014;Owen & Fincham, 2012;Wesche et al, 2018). But these studies do not typically track people's relationships with the same hookup partners over multiple time points (for an exception, see Machia et al, 2020). One set of studies managed to plot ~700 romantic interest trajectories, beginning with the participants' initial encounter with the partner and continuing through the end of the relationship (Eastwick et al, , 2019b.…”

Section: Theoretical Conceptualizations and Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Romantic Interest during Early Relationship Development: A Preregistered Investigation using Machine Learning

Eastwick¹,

Joel²,

Molden³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are massive literatures on initial romantic attraction and established, “official” relationships. But there is a gap in our knowledge about early relationship development: the interstitial stretch of time in which people experience rising and falling romantic interest for partners who have the potential to—but often do not—become sexual or dating partners. In the current study, 208 single participants reported on 1,065 potential romantic partners across 7,179 data points over seven months. In stage 1 of the analyses, we used machine learning (specifically, Random Forests) to extract estimates of the extent to which different classes of predictors (e.g., individual differences vs. target-specific constructs) accounted for participants’ romantic interest in these potential partners (12% vs. 36%, respectively). Also, the machine learning analyses offered little support for perceiver × target moderation accounts of compatibility: the meta-theoretical perspective that some types of perceivers are likely to experience greater romantic interest for some types of targets. In stage 2, we used traditional multilevel-modeling approaches to depict growth-curve analyses for each predictor retained by the machine learning models; robust (positive) main effects emerged for many variables, including sociosexuality, gender, the potential partner’s positive attributes (e.g., attractive, exciting), attachment features (e.g., proximity seeking, separation distress), and perceived interest. We also directly tested (and found no support for) ideal partner preference-matching effects on romantic interest, which is one popular perceiver × target moderation account of compatibility. We close by discussing the need for new models and perspectives to explain how people assess romantic compatibility.

show abstract

“…Casual relationships that include both emotional closeness and sexual gratification such as friends-with-benefits (FWB) may be particularly likely to transition into committed partnerships. For example, in a longitudinal examination of 192 FWB relationships, 25% of the sample hoped for their FWB relationship to develop into a romantic relationship at Time 1, and 15% of the sample were indeed dating their former FWB 11 months later (Machia et al, 2020). In another sample of 764 participants in exclusive dating relationships, 20% indicated that their dating relationship had begun as a FWB relationship (Owen & Fincham, 2012).…”

Section: A Bias Toward Pursuit Over Rejection In Initial Dating Contextsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stated romantic standards are not good predictors of romantic interest Kurzban & Weeden, 2007), and people struggle to reject suitors who explicitly do not meet their stated dating standards (Eastwick et al, 2011;Joel et al, 2014;Slotter & Gardner, 2012). Further, even relationships that are initially perceived as or intended to be casual frequently transition into committed romantic relationships (Machia et al, 2020;Owen & Fincham, 2012;Timmermans & Courtois, 2018).…”

Section: A Bias Toward Pursuit Over Rejection In Initial Dating Contextsmentioning

confidence: 99%

We're not that choosy: Emerging evidence of a progression bias in romantic relationships

Joel¹,

MacDonald²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dating is widely thought of as a test phase for romantic relationships, during which new romantic partners carefully evaluate each other for long-term fit. However, this cultural narrative assumes that people are well-equipped to reject poorly suited partners. In this paper, we argue that humans are biased toward pro-relationship decisions: decisions that favor the initiation, advancement, and maintenance of romantic relationships. We first review evidence for a progression bias in the context of relationship initiation, investment, and breakup decisions. We next consider possible theoretical underpinnings—both evolutionary and cultural—that may explain why getting into a relationship is often easier than getting out of one, and why being in a less desirable relationship is often preferred over being in no relationship at all. We discuss potential boundary conditions that the phenomenon may have, as well as its implications for existing theoretical models of mate selection and relationship development.

show abstract

A longitudinal study of friends with benefits relationships

Cited by 15 publications

References 25 publications

We’re Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships

We’re Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships

Predicting Romantic Interest during Early Relationship Development: A Preregistered Investigation using Machine Learning

We're not that choosy: Emerging evidence of a progression bias in romantic relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About