Transactive goal dynamics.

Fitzsimons, Gráinne M.; Finkel, Eli J.; vanDellen, Michelle R.

doi:10.1037/a0039654

Cited by 352 publications

(372 citation statements)

References 237 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

349

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As one's current partner decreases in perceived instrumentality, the likelihood of relationship dissolution increases (Fitzsimons, Finkel, & Vandellen, 2015;Weisfeld & Weisfeld, 2002). Infertility in relationships is associated with diminished relationship satisfaction (Leiblum, Aviv, & Hamer, 1998;Millheiser, et al, 2010) and is predictive of divorce (Kjaer et al, 2014).…”

Section: Principle 8 Means Substitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If the person had higher overall value, then the person should be more likely to permanently leave a current partner in favor of the alternative. Each of the notions above suggests that changing contexts, such as starting a new career or moving to a new city, should increase the likelihood of relationship dissolution (Fitzsimons et al, 2015). As person's goals change, a partner may no longer appear to be the best candidate.…”

Section: People As Means 27mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…People serving as means who want to be supportive and who are responsive to their partners should be better suited to shifting their efforts dynamically in a way that suits their partners' needs (cf. Fitzsimons et al, 2015;Lakey & Orehek, 2011). Future research could explore how these features predict sustained instrumentality.…”

Section: Relationship Initiation and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most recently, Transactive Goal Dynamics Theory (TGD; Fitzsimons, Finkel, & VanDellen, 2015) presented an innovative approach to understanding how relationship partners People as Means 32 form a single self-regulating system. TGD is focused on understanding the antecedents and consequences of partners exhibiting transactive density-a new TGD construct defined as "the extent to which dyads have numerous and strong links among member's goals, pursuits, and outcomes" (Fitzsimons et al, 2015, pp.…”

Section: Connections and Contrasts With Existing Relationship Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A People-As-Means Approach to Interpersonal Relationships

Orehek¹,

Forest²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpersonal relationships and goal pursuit are intimately interconnected. In the present paper, we present a people-as-means perspective on relationships. According to this perspective, people serve as means to goals-helping other people to reach their goals in a variety of ways, such as by contributing their time, lending their knowledge, skills, and resources, and providing emotional support and encouragement. Because people serve as means to goals, we propose that considering relationship processes in terms of the principles of goal pursuit can provide novel and important insights into the ways that people think, feel, and behave in these interpersonal contexts. We describe the principles of means-goals relations, review evidence for each principle involving people as means, and discuss implications of our approach for relationship formation, maintenance, and dissolution. for relationship processes? In the pages that follow, we present a people-as-means approach to interpersonal relationships, summarize evidence linking principles of goal pursuit to instances in which people are means, and discuss the novel insights gained from adopting a people-as meansperspective on relationships.

show abstract

Section: Principle 8 Means Substitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: People As Means 27mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Relationship Initiation and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Connections and Contrasts With Existing Relationship Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A People-As-Means Approach to Interpersonal Relationships

Orehek¹,

Forest²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People go to their partners, friends, and family Functional Intimacy 8 members to achieve instrumental goals (Fitzsimons & Fishbach, 2010 Indeed, instrumentality in close relationships improves the relationship because partners are satisfying more goals for each other (i.e., both functional and relationship goals, Fitzsimons, Finkel, & Vandellen, 2015).…”

Section: Reactions To Functional Intimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional intimacy: Needing—But not wanting—The touch of a stranger.

Schroeder¹,

Fishbach²,

Schein³

2017

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intimacy is often motivated by love, but sometimes it is merely functional. For example, disrobing and being touched at an airport security check serves the goal of catching a flight, not building a relationship. We propose that this functional intimacy induces discomfort, making people prefer greater social distance from their interaction partner. Supporting this prediction, participants who considered (Experiments 1 and 2) or experienced (Experiment 3) more physically intimate medical procedures preferred a health-provider who is less social. Increased psychological intimacy also led people to prefer social distance from cleaning-and healthproviders (Experiments 4-5), a preference revealed by nonverbal behavior (e.g., turning away and looking away, Experiments 6-7). These patterns of distancing are unique to functional (vs. romantic) intimacy (Experiment 7). Although creating social distance may be an effective strategy for coping with functional intimacy, it may have costs for service providers. 'normal-human-emotions-don't-exist zone'?" -Washington Post reader, 11/25/2010 Emotional closeness typically accompanies physical intimacy. Kisses and caresses go naturally with declarations of affection, but not all intimacy is tied to emotional connection.Some intimacy is purely functional, undertaken to pursue non-relational goals. When an airport security agent performs a full-body pat down or a physician performs an intimate medical procedure, the recipients of these procedures are not seeking love, but only to catch their flight or to stay healthy. On the one hand, security checks and medical procedures may be objectively valuable services that recipients want, but on the other hand, the physical and psychological intimacy inherent in these procedures is usually unwanted. As the Washington Post reader in the opening quotation suggests, submitting yourself to being "intimately groped" by strangers at airport security is at odds with normal human emotion. In these uncomfortable situations of functional intimacy-intimacy that serves a non-relational goal-we propose that individuals will socially distance themselves from their interaction partners. We test this hypothesis through seven experiments. Types of IntimacyPrior research explores how people react to different types of intimacy, with most focusing upon intimacy in relationships, that is, intimacy among two (or more) people interested in forming, building, or maintaining a relationship (for review see Mashek & Aron, 2008). In this context, individuals react to intimacy positively, both seeking and reciprocating intimacy to achieve their goal of relationship closeness. A second type is "imposed intimacy," whereby someone imposes unanticipated or unwarranted intimacy onto a recipient; examples include Functional Intimacy 4 sexual violations but also more mundane situations where individuals do not seek intimacy (e.g., crowded subway cars). In this context, the dominant response is to avoid the perpetrator of intimacy and behaviorally "compensate" ...

show abstract

Asymmetric goal contagion: Social power attenuates goal contagion among strangers

Jia

Koh

Tan

2018

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Goal contagion is an important interpersonal process. As people spontaneously infer and adopt others' goals, goals can be said to “flow” among individuals. We find that possessing power attenuates goal contagion, especially for high perspective takers. In a pilot study (N = 157), we first affirmed the interpersonal nature of goal contagion by establishing that high (vs. low) perspective takers were more likely to engage in goal contagion. We then tested the moderating role of power in two studies. In both neutral (Study 1, N = 179) and low power (Study 2, N = 304) conditions, we replicated the pattern in the pilot study. In the high power conditions, however, neither low nor high perspective takers engaged in goal contagion. Our findings suggest that goals flow asymmetrically from the powerful to the powerless, which may constitute an important means through which power hierarchy and group cohesion are maintained.

show abstract

Transactive goal dynamics.

Cited by 352 publications

References 237 publications

A People-As-Means Approach to Interpersonal Relationships

A People-As-Means Approach to Interpersonal Relationships

Functional intimacy: Needing—But not wanting—The touch of a stranger.

Asymmetric goal contagion: Social power attenuates goal contagion among strangers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About