Two Distinct Emotional Experiences in Romantic Relationships: Effects of Perceptions Regarding Approach of Intimacy and Avoidance of Conflict

Laurenceau, Jean-Philippe; Troy, Adam B.; Carver, Charles S.

doi:10.1177/0146167205274447

Cited by 66 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Karney and Frye (2002) found that married partners base their judg-ments of satisfaction with their relationship more on perceptions of recent improvements than on the quality of the relationship at that particular time. Laurenceau, Troy, and Carver (2005) also found evidence consistent with the progress notion as applied to relationship goals.…”

Section: Perceptions Of Goal Progresssupporting

confidence: 68%

Linking Relationship Quality to Perceived Mutuality of Relationship Goals and Perceived Goal Progress

Avivi¹,

Laurenceau²,

Carver³

2009

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two goal-related variables were examined as predictors of relationship quality. One was the perception of mutuality of goals held for the relationship; the other was the perception of progress regarding those relationship goals. a mediation model was considered whereby relationship goal mutuality predicted quality via perception of goal progress. Study 1 examined cross-sectional associations among these variables in 245 dating participants. results of a path analysis (controlling for effects of relationship conflict) were consistent with the mediation model. Study 2 replicated these findings in a sample of 78 committed romantic couples, using an electronic diary methodology to gather data from both partners about relationship quality across multiple time points. Study 2 also extended the findings by examining a dyadic mediation model with both mediated actor effects and mediated partner effects. Findings suggest a central role for shared relationship goals and for perceptions of relationship goal progress in the context of romantic relationships.

show abstract

Section: Perceptions Of Goal Progresssupporting

confidence: 68%

Linking Relationship Quality to Perceived Mutuality of Relationship Goals and Perceived Goal Progress

Avivi¹,

Laurenceau²,

Carver³

2009

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For each hypothesis, we present effect sizes, which were computed using the following formula: r ¼ (t 2 /t 2 þ df) 1/2 (Howell, 2002;Hunter & Schmidt, 1990). This is an accepted strategy for reporting effect size information in multilevel data (e.g., Laurenceau, Troy, & Carver, 2005;McCullough, Tsang, & Emmons, 2004).…”

Section: Level 1: Within-person Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of non‐performance information on ratings of job performance: A policy‐capturing approach

Spence

Keeping

2009

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryResearchers have suggested that rater motives and the organizational context should be considered as sources of performance appraisal inaccuracies. A review of the performance appraisal literature revealed three primary non-performance factors that managers consider when rating employee performance: (a) Potential negative consequences of ratings, (b) organizational norms, and (c) the opportunity to advance self-interests. Using a policycapturing methodology, the current study investigated if these three non-performance factors, as well as individual rater differences (e.g., conscientiousness, agreeableness, and performance appraisal experience), influence performance ratings. A sample of 303 experienced managers rated the performance of a fictitious employee, featured in a series of hypothetical scenarios, in which the above information was manipulated. Using hierarchical linear modeling, the results revealed that each of the three non-performance related considerations accounted for variance incremental to objective employee performance. Managers' performance appraisal experience also predicted ratings, such that more experience was associated with lower ratings. These results provide support for the view that non-performance factors can be a substantive component of performance ratings.

show abstract

“…Hence, the partners' motivational dispositions to seek intimacy and communion are supposed to play an important role in the dyadic interplay of relationship regulation that finally leads to good or poor relationship quality and adjustment (e.g., Cantor & Malley, 1991;Read & Miller, 1989). Motivational needs and goals not only function as driving forces that energize strivings for closeness, but also determine an individual's capacity to draw joy and reward from experiences of dyadic closeness and communion (Laurenceau, Troy, & Carver, 2005;McAdams, 1992;McClelland, 1985).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

(In)Congruence of Implicit and Explicit Communal Motives Predicts the Quality and Stability of Couple Relationships

Hagemeyer

Neberich²,

Asendorpf

et al. 2013

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Previous research has shown that motive congruence, as observed in convergingly high or low scores on implicit and explicit motive measures, promotes well-being and health. Extending this individual perspective to the realm of couple relationships, the present investigation examined intra-and interpersonal effects of communal motive (in)congruence on relationship satisfaction and stability. Method: The implicit partner-related need for communion, the explicit desire for closeness, and relationship satisfaction were assessed in a sample of 547 heterosexual couples aged 18 to 73 years. In a one-year follow-up study, information on relationship stability was obtained, and relationship satisfaction was reassessed. The researchers tested cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of motive (in)congruence by dyadic moderation analyses. Results: Individuals scoring congruently high on both motives reported the highest relationship satisfaction in concurrence with motive assessment and 1 year later. In addition, motive incongruence predicted an increased risk of relationship breakup over 1 year. Conclusions:The results highlight the significance of both implicit and explicit motives for couple relationships. Motive incongruence was confirmed as a dispositional risk factor that so far has not been considered in couple research. Future research directions addressing potential mediators of the observed effects and potential moderators of motive (in)congruence are discussed.

show abstract

Two Distinct Emotional Experiences in Romantic Relationships: Effects of Perceptions Regarding Approach of Intimacy and Avoidance of Conflict

Cited by 66 publications

References 63 publications

Linking Relationship Quality to Perceived Mutuality of Relationship Goals and Perceived Goal Progress

Linking Relationship Quality to Perceived Mutuality of Relationship Goals and Perceived Goal Progress

The impact of non‐performance information on ratings of job performance: A policy‐capturing approach

(In)Congruence of Implicit and Explicit Communal Motives Predicts the Quality and Stability of Couple Relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About