Courtship types: Variations in interdependence between partners and social networks.

Abstract

The connections between variant paths to marital commitment and the degree of joint activity between partners were examined. Newlywed partners were interviewed in order to obtain graphs of changes in commitment to marriage throughout courtship. Data on the performance of affectional, instrumental, and leisure activities with the partner and others also were gathered for different premarital stages of involvement and for marriage. On the basis of diversity in the graphs, four courtship groups were identified: accelerated, accelerated-arrested, intermediate, and prolonged. Stage comparisons showed that partners become more active with each other but less with social others as courtships progress. This pattern held for the two accelerated types, although partners in the accelerated-arrested lype withdrew more and sooner from network activities. Couples in the prolonged group reported increased companionship to a lesser extent and remained more active with the network. The intermediate type was marked by more network activity and less companionship during courtship and marriage. The implication that increasing interdependence plays a differential role in the evolution of the types to marriage is discussed.According to contemporary thought about the development of heterosexual relationships, there are differences across couples in the ways and means by which commitment between partners changes over time (Huston, Surra, Fitzgerald, & Gate, 1981;Levinger, 1980). Levinger, for example, noted that some partners who break up may pass through a period of oscillating closeness before deterioration of the relationship while others may experience a stage of static involvement before dissolution. In discussing why partners in

Friendship and Romantic Relationship Qualities in Emerging Adulthood: Differential Associations with Identity Development and Achieved Adulthood Criteria

“…Although peers remain frequent companions throughout adolescence (Richards et al 1998), the presence of a romantic relationship has been associated with spending less time with friends (Zimmer-Gembeck 1999). Similarly, ample research supports variations of the Dyadic Withdrawal Hypothesis in early adulthood (see Johnson and Leslie 1982;Milardo et al 1983;Surra 1985).…”

Turning Points in the Development of Blended Families

“…In the context of courtship, four basic trajectories have been identified (Cate et al, 1986;Surra, 1985): (i) an accelerated type in which a pair moves quickly and smoothly to marital commitment; (ii) an accelerated-arrested type, in which a pair moves quickly to a high level of commitment and then loses momentum; (iii) an intermediate type, characterized by a somewhat turbulent and slow ascent to high commitment levels; and (iv) a prolonged type, in which courtship pairs progress in a relatively turbulent and slow manner toward commitment. Of course, the several trajectories of courtship development may differ significantly in form from the developmental paths that might characterize blended families.…”

“…Put simply, turning points are the sites of developmental change in relationships. Considerable research has been conducted on developmental turning points within the context of romantic and premarital pairs (Baxter & Bullis, 1986;Bullis, Clark, & Sline, 1993;Cate, Huston, & Nesselroade, 1986;Huston, Surra, Fitzgerald, & Cate, 1981;Surra, 1985Surra, , 1987Surra & Hughes, 1997). Taken collectively, this body of work has emphasized a variety of topics related to turning points, including the types of events that constitute turning points, the valence of various event types, the attributed causes of turning point change, the sequenced patterning of turning points, and the correlation of turning points with such outcome indicators as relational commitment and satisfaction.…”

Communicatively remembering turning points of relational development in heterosexual romantic relationships

“…Although a romantic relationship's past can be represented any number of ways, several scholars over the past two decades have looked to the "turning point" as their focus (e.g., Baxter & Bullis, 1986;Bullis, Clark, & Sline, 1993;Graham, 1997;Surra, 1985Surra, ,1987Surra, Arizzi, & Asmussen, 1988;Surra & Hughes, 1997). Originally conceived by Bolton (1961), a "turning point" refers to a transformative event that alters the relationship in some way.…”