“I’ll call you…” Communication frequency as a regulator of satisfaction and commitment across committed and casual sexual relationship types

Abstract

Casual sexual relationships (CSRs) are common among young adults. Although it is a widely discussed topic in the popular media, little empirical work has examined the expectations related to communication within these relationships. Moreover, few studies have made comparative examinations across various relationship types. Through two studies, we first identified the differences in communication, satisfaction, and commitment across relationship types. Then we examined communication frequency as a regulator of satisfaction and commitment across relationship types. In Study 1, participants responded to a hypothetical relationship scenario depicting either a committed relationship (CR), friends with benefits (FWB), or a booty call/fuck buddy relationship (BC/FB); they indicated how committed and satisfied they would feel as well as how frequently they would communicate with the partner. Participants in Study 2 reported on these variables in their most recently terminated relationship. Overall, we found the highest frequencies of commitment and communication in CRs; BCs/FBs and other similar CSRs had the lowest. FWBs often fell between the other two categories. Satisfaction did not differ reliably across relationship types. A serial mediational analysis revealed that the more a relationship was considered to be a CR, the more partners communicated, which was associated with more satisfaction and, in turn, commitment. Our findings highlight the distinctions between expectations within FWB relationships, compared to other relationships types, suggesting that they fall somewhere between CRs and other CSRs on commitment and relational expectations. In addition, the results support the idea that individuals intentionally regulate their communication to maintain the expected level of commitment within a relationship.

Netflix and Chill? What Sex Differences Can Tell Us About Mate Preferences in (Hypothetical) Booty-Call Relationships

“…Future research should seek to recruit a larger number of participants when conducting comparisons between relationship types. Nonetheless, the sample size for the current study (N ¼ 559) was substantially larger than previous research examining booty-call relationships (e.g., N ¼ 123 in Collins & Horn, 2018;N ¼ 61 in Jonason et al, 2009;N ¼ 123 in Jonason et al, 2011;N ¼ 192 in Wesche, Claxton, Lefkowitz, & van Dulman, 2017), and because our sample included a substantial proportion of nonstudents, we suggest that our results provide reasonable insight into this particular interpersonal behavior.…”

College students’ motivations for “hooking up”: Similarities and differences in motives by gender and partner type.

“…They may serve as a trial run of a more serious relationship with a particular partner or as a placeholder until a more attractive option comes along (Jonason, 2013), or as a way to signal one’s desire to shift into a committed relationship (Mongeau, Knight, Williams, Eden, & Shaw, 2013). These various potential motivations likely make it challenging to discern whether a friend with whom one hooks up is interested in developing a romantic relationship or becoming FWB, especially given that young adults involved in hook ups rarely communicate about relationship status or define the terms of their relationship (Lovejoy, 2015; Paul, 2006; Paul & Hayes, 2002) and may intentionally communicate less with casual partners to maintain a low level of commitment (Collins & Horn, 2019).…”

What Do Romanian Couples Talk About on a Daily Basis? A Mixed Method Approach

“…Finally, as previously stated, couple communication is very important for maintaining the satisfaction of one's relationship (Brassard et al, 2009;Feeney, & Karantzas, 2017). This association has been signifi cant in both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs (Lavner, Karney, & Bradbury, 2016), and some aspects of couple communication, such as its frequency and confl ict are associated with higher, respectively lower satisfaction (Collins, & Horn, 2019;Johnson, Horne, Hardy, & Anderson, 2018). Nevertheless, love talk (i.e.…”