Expressing Negativity Enhances Support From Romantic Partners, Even for Trivial Stressors.

Receiving high-quality support confers many benefits. Yet, little is known about how support-seekers can elicit high-quality support. In two experiments and a couples' interaction study, we examined how (and why) expressing negative thoughts and feelings affects romantic partners' support and considered whether this depends on the severity of the stressor the support-seeker is facing. In Study 1, romantically involved participants who read a high (vs. low)-negative expressivity support-seeking text message wrote higher-quality support responses in both serious and trivial stressor contexts. Study 2 conceptually replicated these effects with new stressors. In Study 3, support-seekers who expressed more (vs. less) negativity during a face-to-face conversation with their romantic partner about a recent stressor received support higher in regulatory effectiveness (an index of support quality). Mediation analyses in Studies 2 and 3 suggested that negativity may enhance support, even for trivial stressors, by increasing provider perceptions that support is needed.

Expressing the good in bad times: Examining whether and why positive expressivity in negative contexts affects romantic partners' responsive support provision.

Receiving high-quality, responsive support in times of distress is critical but difficult. In a theoretical review, we previously proposed a process model that explains why support-seekers' positive expressivity can elicit-but may sometimes suppress-supportive responses from partners (providers) within distress-related contexts. In the current work, we aimed to test direct and indirect pathways linking seeker's positive expressivity in negative disclosures to provider's support while addressing notable gaps in the existing literature. Studies considered seeker-expressed positivity as broad, unitary construct (Studies 1, 2, and 4) and explored different types of positivity (Studies 1, 3, and 4): partner-oriented positivity (e.g., gratitude), stressor-oriented positivity (e.g., optimism), and unspecified positivity (e.g., pleasant demeanor). In behavioral observation studies of romantic couples (Studies 1 and 4), seeker-expressed positivity in negative disclosures positively predicted provider responsiveness, even when controlling for seeker-expressed negativity and other plausible third variables. Online experiments with manipulations of seeker-expressed positivity (Studies 2 and 3) yielded causal evidence of positivity's direct support-eliciting effects. Considering positivity types, partner-oriented positivity and stressor-oriented positivity showed the most robust support-eliciting potential; unspecified positivity also appeared valuable in some contexts. Evidence for several of the model's indirect pathways emerged in correlational (Study 4) and experimental (Studies 2 and 3) work, providing insights into support-eliciting and support-suppressing mechanisms through which positivity operates. These findings underscore support-seekers' active role in obtaining support, highlight the value of positive expressivity for eliciting high-quality support, and lay the groundwork for further research on positive expressivity's effects in support-seeking contexts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Girls are good at STEM: Opening minds and providing evidence reduces boys' stereotyping of girls' STEM ability.

Girls and women face persistent negative stereotyping within STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics). This field intervention was designed to improve boys' perceptions of girls' STEM ability. Boys (N = 667; mostly White and East Asian) aged 9-15 years in Canadian STEM summer camps (2017-2019) had an intervention or control conversation with trained camp staff. The intervention was a multi-stage persuasive appeal: a values affirmation, an illustration of girls' ability in STEM, a personalized anecdote, and reflection. Control participants discussed general camp experiences. Boys who received the intervention (vs. control) had more positive perceptions of girls' STEM ability, d = 0.23, an effect stronger among younger boys. These findings highlight the importance of engaging elementary-school-aged boys to make STEM climates more inclusive.

In it together: Shared reality with instrumental others is linked to goal success.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on Sep 07 2023 (see record 2024-05962-001). In the original article, the abstract was revised. Specifically, there were errors in the the second and third sentences of the fifth paragraph of the Shared Reality section, fifth sentence of the Present Research section, An updated Figure 1 now appears in the erratum. NIO counterpart and and the specific note in Table 3, the first parenthetical text in the Procedure and Materials section in Study 2c, the phrase its NIO counterpart in the Discussion section of Study 2c, last sentence of the second paragraph of Study 3, third sentence in the third paragraph of Study 3, first sentence in the third paragraph of the Results section, the phrase their NIO counterparts in both the Self-Reported Goal Success and GPA sections of Study 4c, NIO counterpart and the specific note in Table 9, last phrase in the second paragraph in the Discussion section of Study 4, and the in-text citation of Footnote 9 in the Contribution to Understanding the Interpersonal Influences on Goal Success.] Why are some people more successful than others? In addition to individual factors (e.g. self-control), research has recently suggested that the quality of people's interpersonal relationships is crucial for success. Successful people do not just like and feel close to instrumental objects (e.g., study material, the gym), they also like and feel close to instrumental others (IOs; people who make goal success more likely). Yet instrumental people have one crucially distinct feature that instrumental objects do not: A mind of their own. We propose that while a growing body of work suggests that the sense of closeness to IOs (others who make goal success more likely) is crucial for goal success, prior work has not examined how the sense of the quality of people's relationships with IOs, and therefore goal success, likely depends on their ability to "merge minds" with them, experiencing both the goal and the world at large (i.e., shared reality) in the same way as one's IO contributes to goal success. Specifically, the present research (N = 1,326) explored (a) whether people experience shared reality-the perception of shared attitudes and judgments about the world-with IOs and (b) whether those who do so achieve greater goal success. Participants perceiving their romantic partner as instrumental for their goals experienced more shared reality with them (Study 1); participants also reported greater shared reality with IOs relative to noninstrumental others (NIO; Study 2). Higher shared reality with IOs was linked to more goal success initially, (Studies 2-4), 3-4 weeks later (Study 2c), and higher grade point averages (Study 4). These effects held when controlling for IO liking, closeness, epistemic trust, and NIO shared reality. Self-efficacy consistently mediated the effect of IO shared reality on goal success, indicating that IO shared reality may bolster people's epistemic confidence in their abilities. Overall, findings suggest that shared reality with IOs may play an important role in goal success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Self-esteem's impacts on intimacy-building: Pathways through self-disclosure and responsiveness.

Building intimate relationships is rewarding but entails risking rejection. Trait self-esteem-a person's overall self-evaluation-has important implications for how people behave in socially risky situations. Integrating established models of responsiveness and intimacy with theory and research on self-esteem, we present a model that highlights the ways in which self-esteem impacts intimacy-building. A review of relevant research reveals that compared to people with high self-esteem, people with low self-esteem exhibit interpersonal perceptions and behaviors that can hinder intimacy development-for example, disclosing less openly, and eliciting and perceiving less responsiveness from others. We identify important directions for future research and consider methods for encouraging intimacy-promoting processes among people with low self-esteem.

Interested and Instrumental: An Examination of Instrumentality Regulation With Potential Romantic Partners.

Instrumentality-the extent to which one facilitates another person's goal progress-has been described as the Rosetta Stone of attraction, and promotes closeness in ongoing relationships. Yet prior work has not examined whether people might regulate their instrumentality in contexts in which they desire (vs. do not desire) attraction or closeness with others. Four studies, employing imagined online scenario and in-lab experimental paradigms, examined whether people strive to be more instrumental to potential romantic partners (targets) under conditions that lead them to be more (vs. less) romantically interested in those targets. Single participants were more romantically interested in romantically available versus unavailable targets, which in turn, was associated with greater willingness to be instrumental. Results for romantically involved participants were less consistent. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Can Expressing Positivity Elicit Support for Negative Events? A Process Model and Review.

Garnering support for distressing experiences is highly important, yet notoriously challenging. We examine whether expressing positive thoughts and feelings when seeking support for negative events can help people elicit support, and we present a theoretical process model that explains why it might do so. The model includes three support-eliciting pathways through which expressing positivity could increase support: by strengthening providers' prorelational motives, increasing providers' positive mood, and enhancing providers' expected support effectiveness. It also includes a support-suppressing pathway through which expressing positivity could decrease support: by undermining providers' appraisals of support seekers' needs. After presenting the model and providing evidence for each indirect pathway, we review research regarding the direct pathway. We then consider various types of positivity, discuss possible moderators, and identify directions for future research. Our model highlights support seekers' underemphasized role in shaping support receipt and provides a novel perspective on positive expressivity's potential value in distress-related contexts.

Communicating Commitment: A Relationship-Protection Account of Dyadic Displays on Social Media.

People often make their romantic relationships visible to others through dyadic displays (DDs). Yet, their reasons for doing so are not well-understood. We proposed and tested a relationship-protection account of DD use, focusing on a social media environment. We predicted that relationship-protection motivation would predict DDs and that DDs would serve a relationship-protective function. In Study 1, a correlational study of romantically involved Facebook users, relationship-protection motivation positively predicted DD use on Facebook even when controlling for feelings of interconnectedness. Relationship-protection motivation also mediated effects of relationship satisfaction and commitment on DD use. In Study 2, participants perceived a target whose Facebook profile we experimentally manipulated to include DDs (vs. not) as more likely to be in a high-quality relationship and less receptive to romantic advances from others, with implications for participants' interest in affiliating with the target. Our findings support a relationship-protection account of DD use on social media.

People as Means to Multiple Goals: Implications for Interpersonal Relationships.

The present research examines the implications of having relationship partners who serve as means to multiple goals. Specifically, we test the hypotheses that (a) partners who serve more goals will be evaluated as more interpersonally close, supportive, and responsive than those who serve fewer goals, and (b) partners who serve more goals will be less common in social networks than those who serve fewer goals. Three studies ( N = 1,064) found consistent support for these hypotheses while examining relationships with all members of participants' active social network and their full range of goal pursuits. In addition, we found that the association between number of goals a partner serves and relationship evaluation is stronger for people who perceived their social networks as less (vs. more) instrumental on average, and among people who perceived their relationships as less close, less supportive, and less responsive, on average. Implications for close relationships are discussed.

A People-as-Means Approach to Interpersonal Relationships.

Interpersonal relationships and goal pursuit are intimately interconnected. In the present article, 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.

Turbulent Times, Rocky Relationships: Relational Consequences of Experiencing Physical Instability.

What influences how people feel about and behave toward their romantic partners? Extending beyond features of the partners, relationship experiences, and social context, the current research examines whether benign, relationship-irrelevant factors-such as one's somatic experiences-can influence relationship perceptions and interpersonal behavior. Drawing on the embodiment literature, we propose that experiencing physical instability can undermine perceptions of relationship stability. Participants who experienced physical instability by sitting at a wobbly workstation rather than a stable workstation (Study 1), standing on one foot rather than two (Study 2), or sitting on an inflatable seat cushion rather than a rigid one (Study 3) perceived their romantic relationships to be less likely to last. Results were consistent with risk-regulation theory: Perceptions of relational instability were associated with reporting lower relationship quality (Studies 1-3) and expressing less affection toward the partner (Studies 2 and 3). These findings indicate that benign physical experiences can influence perceptions of relationship stability, exerting downstream effects on consequential relationship processes.

Discount and disengage: How chronic negative expressivity undermines partner responsiveness to negative disclosures.

Partner responsiveness-the degree to which partners respond with caring, understanding, and validation to one another's disclosures (Reis, Clark, & Holmes, 2004; Reis & Shaver, 1988)--has been heralded as a "core, defining construct" in relationship science (Reis, 2007, p. 28). Yet little is known about the determinants of responsiveness in ongoing relationships. The present research elucidates one such set of processes, focusing in particular on responsiveness to negative disclosures. We predicted that the degree to which a partner behaves responsively to negative disclosures depends on the partner's perception of the discloser's typical expressive tendencies. Results of 5 studies employing both correlational and experimental methods supported the hypothesis that partners are less responsive to negative disclosures made by disclosers whom they perceive to have high negativity baselines-that is, to express negativity frequently--than to identical (Studies 1-4) or equally negative (Study 5) disclosures made by disclosers with lower negativity baselines. We also examined 2 routes through which negativity baselines might affect partner responsiveness: by shaping listener appraisals of the discloser's need for support and by making disengagement from those interactions seem justifiable to listeners. These findings fill an important gap in the responsiveness literature and highlight the utility of considering person-context factors in emotion interpretation and responsiveness processes.

Perceived regard explains self- esteem differences in expressivity.

Baumeister, Tice, and Hutton proposed that individuals with low self-esteem (LSEs) adopt a more cautious, self-protective self-presentational style than individuals with high self-esteem (HSEs). The authors predicted that LSEs' self-protectiveness leads them to be less expressive--less revealing of their thoughts and feelings--with others than HSEs, and that this self-esteem difference is mediated by their perceptions of the interaction partner's regard for them. Two correlational studies supported these predictions (Studies 1 and 2). Moreover, LSEs became more expressive when their perceived regard was experimentally heightened--when they imagined speaking to someone who was unconditionally accepting rather than judgmental (Study 3) and when their perceptions of regard were increased through Marigold, Holmes, and Ross's compliment-reframing task (Study 4). These findings suggest that LSEs' expressiveness can be heightened through interventions that reduce their concerns about social acceptance.

When social networking is not working: individuals with low self-esteem recognize but do not reap the benefits of self-disclosure on Facebook.

The popular media have publicized the idea that social networking Web sites (e.g., Facebook) may enrich the interpersonal lives of people who struggle to make social connections. The opportunity that such sites provide for self-disclosure-a necessary component in the development of intimacy--could be especially beneficial for people with low self-esteem, who are normally hesitant to self-disclose and who have difficulty maintaining satisfying relationships. We suspected that posting on Facebook would reduce the perceived riskiness of self-disclosure, thus encouraging people with low self-esteem to express themselves more openly. In three studies, we examined whether such individuals see Facebook as a safe and appealing medium for self-disclosure, and whether their actual Facebook posts enabled them to reap social rewards. We found that although people with low self-esteem considered Facebook an appealing venue for self-disclosure, the low positivity and high negativity of their disclosures elicited undesirable responses from other people.

The regulatory function of self-esteem: testing the epistemic and acceptance signaling systems.

The authors draw on sociometer theory (e.g., Leary, 2004) and self-verification theory (e.g., Swann, 1997) to propose an expanded model of the regulatory function of self-esteem. The model suggests that people not only possess an acceptance signaling system that indicates whether relational value is high or low but also possess an epistemic signaling system that indicates whether social feedback is consistent or inconsistent with chronic perceived relational value (i.e., global self-esteem). One correlational study and 5 experiments, with diverse operationalizations of social feedback, demonstrated that the epistemic signaling system responds to self-esteem consistent or inconsistent relational-value feedback with increases or deceases in epistemic certainty. Moreover, Studies 3-6 demonstrated that the acceptance and epistemic signaling systems respond uniquely to social feedback. Finally, Studies 5 and 6 provide evidence that the epistemic signaling system is part of a broader self-regulatory system: Self-esteem inconsistent feedback caused cognitive efforts to decrease the discrepancy between self-views and feedback and caused depleted self-regulatory capacity on a subsequent self-control task.