Truth and Wishful Thinking: How Inter-Individual Differences in Communal Motives Manifest in Momentary Partner Perceptions

Abstract

Although rooted in reality, partner perceptions often reflect wishful thinking due toperceivers’ needs. Dispositional needs, or motives, can differ between persons; however, little is known about their differential associations with everyday partner perception. The present study used data from a four-week experience sampling study (N = up to 60,942 surveys from 510 individuals nested in 259 couples) to examine the effects of perceivers’ partner-related implicit and explicit communal motives on the perception of (a) global communal partner behavior and (b) specific communal and uncommunal partner behaviors. The results of truth and bias models of judgment and quasi-signal detection analyses indicate that strong implicit communal approach motives and strong explicit communal motives are associated with the tendency to overestimate the partner’s communal behavior. Additionally, strong implicit communal approach motives were associated with the tendency to avoid perceptions of uncommunal partner behavior. Neither implicit nor explicit communal motives had an effect on accuracy in the perception of particularly communal partner behavior. The results highlight the relevance of both implicit and explicit communal motives for momentary partner perceptions and emphasize the benefits of dyadic micro-longitudinal designs for a better understanding of the mechanisms through which individual differences manifest in couples’ everyday lives.

The development of personality—From metatraits to facets—Across adolescence and into adulthood in a sample of Mexican-origin youth.

“…Yet, despite this conceptual mapping of processes to domains, there are mixed findings for mean-level changes in extraversion and openness. The literature is roughly split on whether extraversion and openness increase (Klimstra et al, 2009; Lüdtke et al, 2011; Vaidya et al, 2008; Van Dijk et al, 2020) or decrease (Denissen et al, 2013; Jones et al, 2022; Milojev & Sibley, 2017; Pusch et al, 2019), or whether the domains do not change at all (Klimstra et al, 2018; Leikas & Salmela-Aro, 2015; Vollrath, 2000) from adolescence into the beginning of adulthood. Adding to the uncertainty about how these traits develop, the trajectories of extraversion and openness have been shown to differ between girls/women and boys/men, but the way in which they differ varies considerably across studies (Borghuis et al, 2017; Klimstra et al, 2009; Van den Akker et al, 2021).…”

The Development of Personality – from Metatraits to Facets – across Adolescence and into Adulthood in a Sample of Mexican-origin Youth

“…Yet, despite this conceptual mapping of processes to domains, there are mixed findings for mean-level changes in Extraversion and Openness. The literature is roughly split on whether Extraversion and Openness increase (Klimstra et al, 2009;Lüdtke et al, 2011;Robins et al, 2011;Vaidya et al, 2008;Van Dijk et al, 2020) or decrease (Denissen et al, 2013;Jones et al, 2022;Milojev & Sibley, 2017;Pusch et al, 2019), or whether the domains do not change at all (Klimstra et al, 2018;Leikas & Salmela-Aro, 2015;Vollrath, 2000) during emerging adulthood. This mismatch between empirical evidence and theory suggests a limit to our methods, theories, or both.…”