Assessment of relationship thinking in dating relationships

Cate, Rodney M.; Koval, James E.; Lloyd, Sally A.; Wilson, Gregory L.

doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00079.x

Cited by 58 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(50 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, their dependence on well-functioning relationships leads women to think more about their marriages, to contemplate and reminisce more about their relationships, and to demonstrate more detailed memories of marital disagreements than their husbands (Cate et al 1995;Nolen-Hoeksema and Jackson 2001;Ross and Holmberg 1990). The increased frequency and accuracy with which women recall marital conflict also may contribute to a prolonged physiological response and greater potential damage over time (Baum et al 1993;Brosschot et al 2006).…”

Section: The Interpersonal Orientation Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 95%

Toward an Understanding of Gender Differences in the Impact of Marital Conflict on Health

Wanic

Kulik

2011

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper addresses the consistent finding that men derive more benefit from marriage in terms of both morbidity and mortality compared to women in U. S. society. Based on the evidence that spousal conflict adversely influences physiology and health, with greater negative impact on wives compared to husbands, we propose that the stronger impact of relationship negativity contributes to the decreased marriage benefit for women. Evidence bearing on two explanations for this differential impact of conflict is reviewed. The relationalinterdependence view, proposed by Kiecolt-Glaser and Newton (2001), holds that women are more affected by marital conflict because of their more relationally interdependent self-representations. An alternative view, which we call the subordination-reactivity hypothesis, suggests that women experience greater physiological and psychological reactivity to marital discord because they typically occupy subordinate (lower status and less powerful) positions relative to their husbands. A review of the evidence on the physiological effects of social status is combined with that of the relationship between gender and status, both within society at large and interpersonal relationships specifically, to support the subordination-reactivity hypothesis. Specifically, there is evidence that low social status negatively impacts health and that women generally occupy subordinate status. The relational-interdependence view is re-evaluated and its intersection with the subordination-reactivity hypothesis is explored. Finally, implications and future directions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: The Interpersonal Orientation Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 95%

Toward an Understanding of Gender Differences in the Impact of Marital Conflict on Health

Wanic

Kulik

2011

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study examines those differences predicted by the respective theoretical perspectives of Rusbult (1980), Cate et al (1995), and Hale (1984,1987). The following hypotheses are offered:…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Relationship thinking schema develop in three general areas: positive affect thinking, partner thinking, and relational network thinking (Acitelli, 1992;Bradbury & Fincham, 1989;Cate et al, 1995;Martin, 1992;Surra & Bohnam, 1991). Positive affect thinking focuses on positive emotions that are experienced with the partner, such as fun, love, and sentimental memories.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…When relationships develop partners commonly question how the relationship will operate in that social system. Network thinking, however, is considered neither enhancing nor distressing, but relationally neutral (Cate et al, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The social cognitive model suggests that thinking about a relationship, observing it, gathering information, evaluating interactions, reflecting, and speculating on future interactions are important aspects of relationships, particularly for dating partners contemplating marriage (Cate et al, 1995). People develop mental schema based on relational interactions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The role of relational interdependence, relationship thinking, and relational communication in three stages of romantic relationships

Umphrey¹,

Sherblom

2001

Communication Research Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relational interdependence, relationship thinking, and relational communication are theorized to distinguish among the stages of dating relationships. This study analyzes their comparative ability to distinguish dating relationship stages and suggests some of their relatedness. Results indicate that relational interdependence (indexed in the perception of relationship alternatives, satisfaction, investment, and commitment) distinguishes among each stage of the dating relationships. Relationship thinking (measured in positive affect thinking and partner thinking) and relational communication (measured in trust and composure) also distinguish among relational stages, but differences in relational interdependence appear to predate and predicate the positive development of relationship thinking and relational communication.

show abstract

Resetting relationship trajectories: A reconceptualization of the relationship repair process

Olekalns,

Caza

2024

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryNegative events within and outside of work can disrupt coworkers' relationships, triggering a re‐evaluation of relationship quality. The subjective experience of these events – which we term relationship threats – harms relationships, resulting in long‐lasting negative interpersonal and organizational consequences. Coworkers' responses to a relationship threat determine whether relationships are repaired or whether the threat leads to a loss of commitment, lowered satisfaction, and increased negative affect. Because of the critical role that relationships play in organizational life, it is vital that we have a comprehensive understanding of the repair process. To date, researchers have focused on one of three repair processes: trust repair. In reconceptualizing relationship repair, we flesh out the remaining two processes: relationship work and sensemaking. Our reconceptualization balances the restorative actions that mitigate in‐the‐moment harm with those that sustain these benefits over time. We expand our understanding of relationship repair by highlighting the role that narrative foundations play in determining a relationships' vulnerabilities and determining effective repair processes. We highlight the importance of considering relationship threats as events embedded within a relationship's history; identify narrative foundations as a bridging mechanism between disrupted relationships and their repair; and expand our conceptualization of the processes that repair relationships.

show abstract

Assessment of relationship thinking in dating relationships

Cited by 58 publications

References 46 publications

Toward an Understanding of Gender Differences in the Impact of Marital Conflict on Health

Toward an Understanding of Gender Differences in the Impact of Marital Conflict on Health

The role of relational interdependence, relationship thinking, and relational communication in three stages of romantic relationships

Resetting relationship trajectories: A reconceptualization of the relationship repair process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About