Accuracy and bias in the perception of the partner in a close relationship.

Kenny, David A.; Acitelli, Linda K.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.439

Cited by 383 publications

(557 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

523

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present case, the path from a spouse's forgiveness dimension (Resentment-Avoidance or Benevolence) at Time 1 (T1) to his/her own rating of the relationship at Time 2 (T2) is the actor path, and the path from a spouse's forgiveness dimension at T1 to his/her partner's rating of the relationship at T2 is the partner path (see Figure 1). Eight APIMs, in which the two MOFS dimensions at T1 were alternatively entered as predictors and the two relationship and well-being measures at T2 were alternatively entered as outcomes, were tested via SEM (e.g., Kenny & Acitelli, 2001). A powerful feature of SEM is that it allows one to compare and statistically evaluate whether actor and partner effects are different across husbands and wives.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring offence-specific forgiveness in marriage: The Marital Offence-Specific Forgiveness Scale (MOFS).

Paleari

Regalia

Fincham

2009

Psychological Assessment

166

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three studies involving 328 married couples were conducted to validate the Marital Offence-Specific Forgiveness Scale, a new measure assessing offence-specific forgiveness for marital transgressions. The studies examined the dimensionality; internal consistency; and discriminant, concurrent, and predictive validity of the new measure. The final scale comprised 2 distinct correlated dimensions, 1 positive (Benevolence) and 1 negative (Resentment-Avoidance), both of which had adequate internal consistency. The 2 dimensions discriminated marital forgiveness from affective empathy, rumination, attributions, and marital quality. Convergent validity of the new scale was indicated by significant relationships between its underlying dimensions and a host of predicted sociocognitive, relationship, trait, and well-being correlates of forgiveness. Providing evidence for predictive validity, forgiveness dimensions accounted for variability in relationship variables over a 6-month period.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring offence-specific forgiveness in marriage: The Marital Offence-Specific Forgiveness Scale (MOFS).

Paleari

Regalia

Fincham

2009

Psychological Assessment

166

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On its face, this assumption is sensible, given that patients and their surrogates are typically in close, longterm relationships and may share similar views on important issues, such as end-of-life care. Assumed similarity may pose no problem, and indeed may even be desirable, when the surrogate and patient do have the same preferences for care Hoch 1987;Kenny and Acitelli 2001). Although relationship closeness does confer an advantage in terms of knowledge of one's partner's general preferences and characteristics, spouses may become overconfident, and thus erroneously believe they are experts on one another (Kenny and Acitelli 2001).…”

Section: Social Psychological Perspectives On Surrogate Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Assumed similarity may pose no problem, and indeed may even be desirable, when the surrogate and patient do have the same preferences for care Hoch 1987;Kenny and Acitelli 2001). Although relationship closeness does confer an advantage in terms of knowledge of one's partner's general preferences and characteristics, spouses may become overconfident, and thus erroneously believe they are experts on one another (Kenny and Acitelli 2001). Theories of cognitive consistency further suggest that closeness produces a strong motivation to hold positive beliefs about one's partner (e.g., that he/she is a good person, that he/she is like the self), and to assume shared beliefs in addition to shared affection (Heider 1958).…”

Section: Social Psychological Perspectives On Surrogate Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our sample, cross-tabulations showed that in the pain scenario, 70.8% of couples had the same preference for self, and in the cognitive impairment scenario, 87.1% wanted the same treatment. In these cases, assumed similarity may pose no problem, and indeed may even be desirable Hoch 1987;Kenny and Acitelli 2001). While this issue is quite interesting, in this paper we are primarily concerned with cases in which surrogates make errors, as these are the cases that are potentially problematic from the standpoint of patients, families, and health care providers.…”

Section: Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do Older Adults Know Their Spouses' End-of-Life Treatment Preferences?

Moorman¹,

Hauser²,

Carr³

2009

ICPSR Data Holdings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When terminally ill patients become mentally incapacitated, the patient's surrogate often makes treatment decisions in collaboration with health care providers. We examine how surrogates' errors in reporting their spouse's preferences are affected by their gender, status as durable power of attorney for health care (DPAHC), whether the surrogate and spouse held discussions about end-of-life preferences, and the spouse's health status. We apply structural equation models to data from 2,750 married couples in their mid 60s who participated in the 2004 wave of the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. Surrogates reported their spouse's preferences incorrectly 13 and 26 percent of the time in end-of-life scenarios involving cognitive impairment and physical pain, respectively. Surrogates projected their own preferences onto the spouse. Similar patterns emerged regardless of surrogate gender, surrogate status as DPAHC, marital discussions about end-of-life, or spousal health status. We discuss implications for the process of surrogate decision-making and for future research.As recently as 1960, nearly all physicians were opposed to telling their patients that they had terminal cancer, because they believed that the knowledge would have shattering psychological effects (Oken 1961). Subsequent psychosocial research showed that the awareness that one is dying does not emotionally harm a patient (Kübler-Ross 1969). Physician attitudes evolved such that the standard for care is now full disclosure and collaboration among patients, health care providers, and surrogate decision-makers in cases where the patient is unable to convey his or her own treatment preferences (Brody 1997;Novack et al. 1979;Snyder and Leffler 2005). Changes in physician attitudes have occurred alongside policy changes: In 1990, Congress passed the Patient Self-Determination Act (PSDA) to ensure that dying people have a greater say in their care. Under this law, federally funded health care providers are required to give patients information that helps them to execute a living will and to legally appoint a surrogate, known as a durable power of attorney for health care (DPAHC), to oversee their care in the event of decisional incapacitation.A concern of patients and health care providers is that surrogates accurately convey the patient's wishes. An effective surrogate, according to bioethicists, is someone who can apply the standard of substituted judgment (President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research 1983). Substituted judgment occurs when the surrogate makes the medical decision that the patient would have made if he or she (Shalowitz, Garrett-Mayer, and Wendler 2006). Surrogates often presume (erroneously) that the patient's preferences are identical to their own: Surrogates' own preferences account for more of the variance in their decisions than do the patients' actual preferences (Bar-Tal, Barnoy, and Zisser 2005;Fagerlin et al. 2001;Pruchno et al. 2005). Study AimsOur primary goal ...

show abstract

“…Research on target or meta-accuracy has been based on both survey and questionnaire approaches (e.g., Cook and Douglas, 1998;Hoch, 1987;Kenny and Acitelli, 2001) and laboratory experiments (Kenny, 1994;Funder, 1999). Research on nonverbal sensitivity (e.g., Ambady et al, 2000;Noller, 2001;Johnstone and Scherer, 2000;Keltner and Ekman, 2000) and empathic accuracy (e.g., Ickes, 2001;Levenson and Ruef, 1992;Neyer et al, 1999) was almost exclusively done in the laboratory, using sophisticated experimental designs.…”

Section: Approaches Towards Investigating the Accuracy Of Person Percmentioning

confidence: 99%

How is My Partner Feeling in Different Daily-Life Settings? Accuracy of Spouses' Judgements about Their Partner's Feelings at Work and at Home

Wilhelm

Perrez

2004

Social Indicators Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. How accurately do spouses know their partner's feelings when the partner is not physically present, but in a specific setting (at work, or at home)? This question addresses a special kind of empathic inference that relies mainly on content knowledge and projection rather than perception. We answered this question using a computer assisted diary approach. A total of 190 husbands and wives out of 95 couples simultaneously recorded how they were feeling and what they thought their partner was feeling, six times each day during an ordinary week.They also recorded where they were, who they were with, and where they thought their partner was. This enabled us to assess measures of accuracy and assumed similarity under natural conditions in spouses' daily lives. Results showed that the spouses' judgements of the absent partner's feelings relied on their own feelings (assumed similarity). Despite this they were often quite accurate, even when assumed similarity was controlled. In general, our findings indicate that spouses have a basic knowledge about their partner's feelings when they are apart. However, the specific situation, the items being judged, and the gender of the spouses also need to be taken into account.

show abstract

Accuracy and bias in the perception of the partner in a close relationship.

Cited by 383 publications

References 46 publications

Measuring offence-specific forgiveness in marriage: The Marital Offence-Specific Forgiveness Scale (MOFS).

Measuring offence-specific forgiveness in marriage: The Marital Offence-Specific Forgiveness Scale (MOFS).

Do Older Adults Know Their Spouses' End-of-Life Treatment Preferences?

How is My Partner Feeling in Different Daily-Life Settings? Accuracy of Spouses' Judgements about Their Partner's Feelings at Work and at Home

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About