Passion, connection, and destiny

Abstract

Romantic beliefs (e.g., love at first sight and soul mates) are common among young people, however, these beliefs are thought to create unrealistic expectations for romantic relationships. The current study assessed the romantic beliefs, romantic expectations, and relationship outcomes (satisfaction and commitment) of 270 young adults (aged 18–28 years) who were involved in dating relationships. Romantic beliefs were associated with greater satisfaction and commitment, whereas unmet romantic expectations were associated with lower satisfaction and commitment. Of note, the endorsement of romantic beliefs was not linked to unmet expectations. Thus, romantic beliefs do not appear to foster false or unobtainable expectations for romantic relationships, and the concerns regarding the endorsement of these beliefs may be misplaced. Individual differences (age, gender, and relationship experience) did not predict romantic beliefs or expectations. The results are discussed with regard to implications for promoting relationship commitment and satisfaction.

Great expectations

“…Thus, according to interdependence theory, unmet expectations are associated with lower relationship satisfaction and commitment, although unmet expectations based on an ideal relationship are hypothesized to be a stronger predictor of satisfaction as compared to unmet expectations based on an alternative to the relationship, and unmet expectations based on an alternative to the relationship are hypothesized to be a stronger predictor of commitment as compared to unmet expectations based on an ideal relationship. There has been consistent support for these dynamics (Buunk, Oldersma, & de Dreu, 2001;Ciccocioppo et al, 2011;Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017).…”

“…We assessed four types of romantic expectations in our own earlier study of young adults in dating relationships: connection (i.e., intense feelings of affinity, communion, and understanding), destiny (i.e., perceiving a relationship as predestined and able to withstand all obstacles), passion (i.e., overwhelming attraction, arousal, and desire to be in close physical proximity), and immediacy (i.e., romantic feelings emerging quickly and suddenly; Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017). Participants provided ratings of their current, ideal, and potential alternative relationships.…”

“…Consistent with interdependence theory, unmet expectations based on an ideal relationship would be negatively associated with satisfaction (Path A), and unmet expectations based on an alternative relationship would be negatively associated with commitment (Path G); 3. From previous research assessing outcomes and comparison level (Morrow & O'Sullivan, 1998;Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017), unmet expectations based on an ideal relationship would be negatively associated with satisfaction (Path A) and investment (Path F) and positively associated with quality of alternatives (Path C); 4. From research assessing outcomes and comparison level for alternatives (Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017), unmet expectations based on an alternative relationship would be negatively associated with satisfaction (Path E); and 5.…”

“…From previous research assessing outcomes and comparison level (Morrow & O'Sullivan, 1998;Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017), unmet expectations based on an ideal relationship would be negatively associated with satisfaction (Path A) and investment (Path F) and positively associated with quality of alternatives (Path C); 4. From research assessing outcomes and comparison level for alternatives (Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017), unmet expectations based on an alternative relationship would be negatively associated with satisfaction (Path E); and 5. Consistent with the investment model, unmet expectations based on an ideal relationship would be indirectly negatively associated with commitment via satisfaction (Path A !…”

“…Indeed, perceiving one's romantic relationship as falling below expectations is associated with lower relationship satisfaction and commitment across a wide range of relationship expectations (e.g., expectations for warmth/trustworthiness, vitality/attractiveness, status/ resources, nonsexual exclusivity, partner traits, division of labor; Campbell, Simpson, Kashy, & Fletcher, 2001;Choice & Lamke, 1999;Ciccocioppo, Frieze, & Votruba-Drzal, 2011;Fletcher & Simpson, 2000;Fletcher, Simpson, Thomas, & Giles, 1999;Simpson, 1987;Sternberg & Barnes, 1985). However, only a few scholars to date have studied the expectations thought to be created by romantic beliefs (i.e., expectations for relationships that are based on idealistic, unrealistic, or highly romanticized beliefs) (Burnette & Franiuk, 2010;Franiuk, Cohen, & Pomerantz, 2002;Franiuk, Pomerantz, & Cohen, 2004;Knee, Nanyakkara, Vietor, & Patrick, 2001, Vannier & O'Sullivan, 2017. Themes of idealism and predestination persist in our romantic scripts (Cobb, Larson, & Watson, 2003;Sprecher & Metts, 1989), and our media diet reinforces age-old beliefs that love can magically overcome all obstacles, we have one true love in life, and love at first sight is possible (Hefner & Wilson, 2013;Pardun, 2002;Tanner, Haddock, Zimmerman, & Lund, 2003).…”