Sexual Desire Mediates the Relationship-Promoting Effects of Perceived Partner Mate Value.

Although sexual desire for one's partner is theorized to serve as a gut-level indicator of partner mate value that motivates investment in valued partners, there is scant empirical evidence to support this hypothesis. Five studies addressed this possibility, examining whether experiencing sexual desire encouraged the enactment of relationship-promoting behaviors and whether perceptions of partner mate value motivated this proposed process. In a pilot study and Study 1, participants relived an activity they experienced with their partner, which was either sexual or non-sexual. Then, participants rated their desire to engage in sex and other non-sexual relationship-promoting activities with their partner (pilot study) and their partner's responsiveness to personal disclosures. Participants' enacted responsiveness was also evaluated by judges (Study 1). Results showed that experiences of desire enhanced relationship-promoting tendencies. Using experimental, daily experiences, and longitudinal methods, Studies 2-4 extended these findings, indicating that both manipulated and perceived partner mate value predicted desire, which, in turn, was associated with engagement in relationship-promoting behaviors. These findings demonstrate that sexual desire functions as a mechanism encouraging investment in partners who are perceived to be worth pursuing and retaining.

Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies.

Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner's ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person's own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships.

The prosocial versus proself power holder: how power influences sacrifice in romantic relationships.

Romantic partners often have to sacrifice their interests to benefit their partner or to maintain the relationship. In the present work, we investigated whether relative power within the relationship plays an important role in determining the extent to which partners are likely to sacrifice. Drawing from both classic theories and recent research on power, we tested two competing predictions on the relationship between power and sacrifice in romantic relationships. We tested whether (a) power is negatively related to sacrifice and (b) power is positively related to sacrifice. Furthermore, we also explored whether the association between power and sacrifice is moderated by commitment and inclusion of the other in the self. To test our hypotheses, we used different methodologies, including questionnaires, diary studies, and videotaped interactions. Results across the five studies (N = 1,088) consistently supported the hypothesis that power is negatively related to tendencies to sacrifice in close relationships.

The many voices of Darwin's descendants: reply to Schmitt (2014).

This article elaborates on evolutionary perspectives relevant to the meta-analytic portion of our recent review (Eastwick, Luchies, Finkel, & Hunt, 2014). We suggested that if men and women evolved sex-differentiated ideals (i.e., mate preferences), then they should exhibit sex-differentiated desires (e.g., romantic attraction) and/or relational outcomes (e.g., relationship satisfaction) with respect to live opposite-sex targets. Our meta-analysis revealed no support for these sex-differentiated desires and relational outcomes in either established relationship or mate selection contexts. With respect to established relationships, Schmitt (2014) has objected to the idea that relationship quality (one of our primarily romantic evaluation dependent measures) has functional relevance. In doing so, he neglects myriad evolutionary perspectives on the adaptive importance of the pair-bond and the wealth of data suggesting that relationship quality predicts the dissolution of pair-bonds. With respect to mate selection, Schmitt (2014) has continued to suggest that sex-differentiated patterns should emerge in these contexts despite the fact that our meta-analysis included this literature and found no sex differences. Schmitt (2014) also generated several novel sex-differentiated predictions with respect to attractiveness and earning prospects, but neither the existing literature nor reanalyses of our meta-analytic data reveal any support for his "proper" function-related hypotheses. In short, there are diverse evolutionary perspectives relevant to mating, including our own synthesis; Schmitt's (2014) conceptual analysis is not the one-and-only evolutionary psychological view, and his alternative explanations for our meta-analytic data remain speculative.

Me After You: Partner Influence and Individual Effort Predict Rejection of Self-Aspects and Self-Concept Clarity After Relationship Dissolution.

Individuals in ongoing romantic relationships incorporate attributes from their partner into their own self-concepts. However, little research has investigated what happens to these attributes should the relationship end. Across three studies, the present research sought to examine factors that predicted whether individuals retain or reject attributes from their self-concept that they initially gained during a relationship. We predicted that individuals would be more likely to reject attributes from their self post-dissolution if their ex-partner was influential in them adding those attributes to the self in the first place. However, we expected this effect to be moderated such that individuals who exerted greater, versus lesser, effort in maintaining relevant attributes would retain them as part of the self, regardless of whether the attribute originated from the partner. In addition, in two of our three studies, we explored the roles of partner influence, effort, and attribute rejection on individuals' post-dissolution self-concept clarity.

Is a meta-analysis a foundation, or just another brick? Comment on Meltzer, McNulty, Jackson, and Karney (2014).

In a longitudinal data set of married couples, Meltzer, McNulty, Jackson, and Karney (2014) reported that partner physical attractiveness is more strongly associated with relationship satisfaction for men than for women. Although a recent meta-analysis (Eastwick, Luchies, Finkel, & Hunt, in press) provided no support for this sex difference across 97 samples and ∼30,000 participants, Meltzer et al. (2014) responded by outlining 7 criteria required for an appropriate test of the sex difference; these criteria eliminate all but 1 study from the meta-analysis. In this commentary, we raise 3 concerns about Meltzer et al.'s contribution. First, there is weak theoretical and empirical support for the criteria they used to dismiss the relevance of the meta-analysis studies. Second, if one adds Meltzer et al.'s data to the meta-analysis, all the sex differences remain extremely small and nonsignificant, even if one focuses only on studies that best conform to Meltzer et al.'s criteria (i.e., married samples, objective attractiveness measures). Third, a new data set meeting all 7 criteria fails to replicate the Meltzer et al. sex difference; in contrast, data revealed that physical attractiveness is, if anything, more strongly associated with the trajectory of relationship satisfaction for women than for men. As noted by Eastwick, Luchies, et al. (in press), in paradigms where participants evaluate partners they have (at a minimum) met face-to-face, the sex difference in the association of physical attractiveness with romantic evaluations is (a) extremely small on average and (b) unlinked to all cross-study characteristics identified to date.

The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: a review and meta-analysis.

A central element of interdependence theory is that people have standards against which they compare their current outcomes, and one ubiquitous standard in the mating domain is the preference for particular attributes in a partner (ideal partner preferences). This article reviews research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preferences and presents a new integrative model that highlights when and why ideals succeed or fail to predict relational outcomes. Section 1 examines predictive validity by reviewing research on sex differences in the preference for physical attractiveness and earning prospects. Men and women reliably differ in the extent to which these qualities affect their romantic evaluations of hypothetical targets. Yet a new meta-analysis spanning the attraction and relationships literatures (k = 97) revealed that physical attractiveness predicted romantic evaluations with a moderate-to-strong effect size (r = ∼.40) for both sexes, and earning prospects predicted romantic evaluations with a small effect size (r = ∼.10) for both sexes. Sex differences in the correlations were small (r difference = .03) and uniformly nonsignificant. Section 2 reviews research on individual differences in ideal partner preferences, drawing from several theoretical traditions to explain why ideals predict relational evaluations at different relationship stages. Furthermore, this literature also identifies alternative measures of ideal partner preferences that have stronger predictive validity in certain theoretically sensible contexts. Finally, a discussion highlights a new framework for conceptualizing the appeal of traits, the difference between live and hypothetical interactions, and the productive interplay between mating research and broader psychological theories.

A brief intervention to promote conflict reappraisal preserves marital quality over time.

Marital quality is a major contributor to happiness and health. Unfortunately, marital quality normatively declines over time. We tested whether a novel 21-min intervention designed to foster the reappraisal of marital conflicts could preserve marital quality in a sample of 120 couples enrolled in an intensive 2-year study. Half of the couples were randomly assigned to receive the reappraisal intervention in Year 2 (following no intervention in Year 1); half were not. Both groups exhibited declines in marital quality over Year 1. This decline continued in Year 2 among couples in the control condition, but it was eliminated among couples in the reappraisal condition. This effect of the reappraisal intervention on marital quality over time was mediated through reductions in conflict-related distress over time. This study illustrates the potential of brief, theory-based, social-psychological interventions to preserve the quality of intimate relationships over time.

Trust and biased memory of transgressions in romantic relationships.

Relative to people with low trust in their romantic partner, people with high trust tend to expect that their partner will act in accordance with their interests. Consequently, we suggest, they have the luxury of remembering the past in a way that prioritizes relationship dependence over self-protection. In particular, they tend to exhibit relationship-promoting memory biases regarding transgressions the partner had enacted in the past. In contrast, at the other end of the spectrum, people with low trust in their partner tend to be uncertain about whether their partner will act in accordance with their interests. Consequently, we suggest, they feel compelled to remember the past in a way that prioritizes self-protection over relationship dependence. In particular, they tend to exhibit self-protective memory biases regarding transgressions the partner had enacted in the past. Four longitudinal studies of participants involved in established dating relationships or fledgling romantic relationships demonstrated that the greater a person's trust in their partner, the more positively they tend to remember the number, severity, and consequentiality of their partner's past transgressions-controlling for their initial reports. Such trust-inspired memory bias was partner-specific; it was more reliably evident for recall of the partner's transgressions and forgiveness than for recall of one's own transgressions and forgiveness. Furthermore, neither trust-inspired memory bias nor its partner-specific nature was attributable to potential confounds such as relationship commitment, relationship satisfaction, self-esteem, or attachment orientations.

So far away from one's partner, yet so close to romantic alternatives: avoidant attachment, interest in alternatives, and infidelity.

Temptation pervades modern social life, including the temptation to engage in infidelity. The present investigation examines one factor that may put individuals at a greater risk of being unfaithful to their partner: dispositional avoidant attachment style. The authors hypothesize that avoidantly attached people may be less resistant to temptations for infidelity due to lower levels of commitment in romantic relationships. This hypothesis was confirmed in 8 studies. People with high, vs. low, levels of dispositional avoidant attachment had more permissive attitudes toward infidelity (Study 1), showed attentional bias toward attractive alternative partners (Study 2), expressed greater daily interest in meeting alternatives to their current relationship partner (Study 5), perceived alternatives to their current relationship partner more positively (Study 6), and engaged in more infidelity over time (Studies 3, 4, 7, and 8). This effect was mediated by lower levels of commitment (Studies 5-8). Thus, avoidant attachment predicted a broad spectrum of responses indicative of interest in alternatives and propensity to engage in infidelity, which were mediated by low levels of commitment.

The effects of self-regulatory strength, content, and strategies on close relationships.

This article reviews the growing literature on the effects of self-regulatory strength (how much self-regulatory ability people have), self-regulatory content (the goals toward which people self-regulate), and self-regulatory strategies (the manner in which people self-regulate) on close relationships. The extant literature indicates that close relationships benefit when relationship partners (a) have greater versus less self-regulatory strength, (b) prioritize relationship-promotion goals versus self-protection goals, (c) facilitate versus obstruct each other's personal goal pursuits, (d) enact positive relationship behaviors using approach versus avoidance strategies, and (e) pursue shared goals using complementary versus similar regulatory focus strategies. Future research could fruitfully (a) delve deeper into the influences of self-regulatory content and strategies on relationships and (b) integrate multiple lines of research examining the effects of self-regulation on relationships.

The doormat effect: when forgiving erodes self-respect and self-concept clarity.

We build on principles from interdependence theory and evolutionary psychology to propose that forgiving bolsters one's self-respect and self-concept clarity if the perpetrator has acted in a manner that signals that the victim will be safe and valued in a continued relationship with the perpetrator but that forgiving diminishes one's self-respect and self-concept clarity if the perpetrator has not. Study 1 employed a longitudinal design to demonstrate that the association of marital forgiveness with trajectories of self-respect over the first 5 years of marriage depends on the spouse's dispositional tendency to indicate that the partner will be safe and valued (i.e., agreeableness). Studies 2 and 3 employed experimental procedures to demonstrate that the effects of forgiveness on self-respect and self-concept clarity depend on the perpetrator's event-specific indication that the victim will be safe and valued (i.e., amends). Study 4 employed a longitudinal design to demonstrate that the association of forgiveness with subsequent self-respect and self-concept clarity similarly depends on the extent to which the perpetrator has made amends. These studies reveal that, under some circumstances, forgiveness negatively impacts the self.