Evidence for a distinct forgiveness prototype: Convergent and discriminant validity

Friesen, Myron D.; Fletcher, Garth J. O.

doi:10.1037/e633942013-457

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(120 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rosch’s work revolutionized the way that social scientists think about and study concepts, particularly those that have defied classical definition in the past. By now, there is considerable evidence that many concepts, including many relationship-relevant concepts, are organized as prototypes (e.g., emotion (Fehr & Russell, 1984; Shaver, Schwartz, Kirson, & O’Connor, 1987), love (Aron & Westbay, 1996; Fehr, 1988; Fehr & Russell, 1991; Fitness & Fletcher, 1993), commitment (Fehr, 1988), anger (Fehr & Baldwin, 1996; Russell & Fehr, 1994), jealousy (Fitness & Fletcher, 1993; Sharpsteen, 1993); forgiveness (Friesen & Fletcher, 2007; Kearns & Fincham, 2004), and respect (Frei & Shaver, 2002)).…”

Section: The Prototype Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

A prototype analysis of relational boredom

Harasymchuk

Fehr

2012

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Boredom has been described as a major obstacle to maintaining lasting love (Aron & Aron (1986). However, empirical research on this important challenge to relationship maintenance has been hampered by the lack of an agreed-upon definition of the construct. We tested the hypothesis that relational boredom is amenable to a prototype conceptualization. In study 1, participants provided prototypicality ratings for the features of relational boredom. Features such as ''lack of interest in partner'' and ''no longer exciting'' were considered prototypical of the construct, whereas features such as ''nothing in common'' and ''too similar'' were considered nonprototypical. We confirmed this prototype structure in the remaining studies. In study 2, when information that a couple was experiencing boredom was given, participants were more likely to infer that prototypical, than nonprototypical, features characterized the relationship. In study 3, the prototypical features were verified more quickly than the nonprototypical features in a reaction time task. In study 4, when a relationship was described in terms of prototypical, rather than nonprototypical, features of boredom, participants inferred greater boredom in the relationship. Moreover, these inferences were drawn more strongly for boredom than another negative relational state, namely conflict. Implications of these findings for theorizing and research on relational boredom are discussed.

show abstract

Section: The Prototype Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

A prototype analysis of relational boredom

Harasymchuk

Fehr

2012

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A script analysis entails a bottom up examination which can be a useful first step when exploring an understudied construct or dimension. An advantage of this approach is that it provides substantial coverage of the construct that might not be fully captured with standard selfreport questionnaires, nor with top-down approaches more generally (Fehr, 1988;Frei & Shaver, 2002;Friesen & Fletcher, 2007;Gregg, Hart, Sedikides, & Kumashiro, 2008). Researchers who employ bottom-up approaches generally do not define their target concepts a priori because the purpose of these approaches is to gain insight into how a construct is defined or conceptualized through an analysis of lay conceptions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

A Script Analysis of Relational Boredom: Causes, Feelings, and Coping Strategies

Harasymchuk¹,

Fehr²

2010

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this research was to examine relational boredom using a script approach. dating individuals (N = 99; Study 1) and married individuals from the community (N = 62; Study 2) generated causes of boredom in their relationship, associated feelings, and coping strategies. Boredom was seen as caused by a lack of novelty and stimulation and was associated with negative affect (particularly low pleasure, low arousal affect). People reported using active relationallyfocused strategies to cope with boredom. Boredom scripts varied somewhat as a function of individual differences in boredom proneness and relationship satisfaction, but not gender. The findings are discussed in terms of aron and aron's (1986) self-expansion model and gable and reis's (2001) model of appetitive relationship processes.

show abstract

Evidence for a distinct forgiveness prototype: Convergent and discriminant validity

Cited by 2 publications

References 65 publications

A prototype analysis of relational boredom

A prototype analysis of relational boredom

A Script Analysis of Relational Boredom: Causes, Feelings, and Coping Strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About