Relationship-specific identification and spontaneous relationship maintenance processes.

Abstract

Attractive alternative partners pose a relational threat to people in romantic relationships. Given that people are often limited in their time and energy, having the capacity to effortlessly respond to such relational threats is extremely useful. In 4 studies, we explored how people's identity in terms of their romantic relationship—their relationship-specific identity—affects their relationship-protective behaviors. We predicted that once a relationship becomes a part of one's sense of self, relationship maintenance responses are exhibited in a relatively fluid, spontaneous manner. In Study 1, we assessed the convergent and divergent validity of relationship-specific identification, demonstrating how it is associated with other relationship constructs. In Study 2, we found that less identified participants mentioned their relationship less than those high in relationship-specific identification, but only when interacting with an attractive member of their preferred sex. In Study 3, using a dot-probe visual cuing task, we found that when primed with an attractive member of their preferred sex, those low in relationship-specific identification gazed longer at attractive preferred-sex others compared to those high in relationship-specific identification. In Study 4, we found that relationship-specific identification was associated with relationship survival 1–3 years after the initial assessment. The present results demonstrate that relationship-specific identification predicts relatively spontaneous, pro-relationship responses in the face of relational threat.

Daily Experiences and Relationship Well‐Being: The Paradoxical Effects of Relationship Identification

“…Recent research (Linardatos & Lydon, ) indicates that even those low in relational‐interdependent self‐construal might nevertheless view themselves as connected to their romantic relationship—what we refer to as relationship identification. An individual may not identify with his or her close relationships in general, but because of meaningful experiences within his or her romantic relationship, he or she may include this romantic relationship as an important part of his or her self (Overall, Fletcher, & Friesen, ).…”

Relationship Maintenance: A Review of Research on Romantic Relationships

“…Cross‐sectional findings show that derogation of alternatives is associated with higher levels of commitment (Etcheverry et al, ), love (Gonzaga, Haselton, Smurda, Davies, & Poore, ), a stronger relational identity (Linardatos & Lydon, ), secure attachment (Overall & Sibley, ), and self‐regulation (Ritter, Karremans, & van Schie, ). Moreover, meta‐analytic findings show that perception of high‐quality alternatives (e.g., failure to derogate alternatives) robustly predicts dissolution (Le et al, ).…”

A People-As-Means Approach to Interpersonal Relationships

“…This effect is especially pronounced for people who are strongly (vs. weakly) satisfied with or committed to their current partner (Cole, Trope, & Balcetis, 2016;Johnson & Rusbult, 1989;Lydon et al, 1999;Lydon, Fitzsimons, & Naidoo, 2003; see also Meyer, Berkman, Karremans, & Lieberman, 2011). Another series of studies has demonstrated that People as Means 9 people committed to their partner direct attention away from attractive alternatives (Linardatos & Lydon, 2011;Maner, Gailliot, & Miller, 2009).…”

“…For example, a person can limit his/her appeal or attractiveness to potential partners (Forest, Krueger, & Orehek, 2017;Frankenhuis & Karremans, 2012) and can avoid opportunities to help others progress toward their goals. Preventing alternatives from seeming instrumental can be executed by devaluing alternative partners Lydon et al, 2003;Lydon et al, 1999) and by directing attention away from alternatives (Linardatos & Lydon, 2011;Maner et al, 2009). …”