The Dynamic Structure of Relationship Perceptions: Differential Importance as a Strategy of Relationship Maintenance

How do couples maintain relationship satisfaction despite specific negative perceptions of their relationships? One way to minimize the global implications of negative perceptions is to attribute differential importance to positive and negative features of the relationship. As those features change over time, satisfied intimates may alter their perceived importance, ensuring that positive features are always more closely associated with global satisfaction than negative ones. The current study examined the specific perceptions of 82 newly married couples at five assessments across their first 3 years of marriage. A tendency to view positive perceptions as more important than negative perceptions was associated with higher marital satisfaction. Moreover, a tendency to alter the importance of specific perceptions as those perceptions changed over time was associated with more stable global satisfaction. These findings highlight the interplay between the content and the structure of intimates' perceptions in determining relationship outcomes.

[1]  R. Gonzalez,et al.  Difference score correlations in relationship research: A conceptual primer , 1999 .

[2]  L. Acitelli,et al.  Gender and thought in relationships. , 1996 .

[3]  B. Karney,et al.  Memory Bias in Long-Term Close Relationships: Consistency or Improvement? , 2000 .

[4]  N. Frye,et al.  A Social-Cognitive Perspective on the Maintenance and Deterioration of Relationship Satisfaction , 2001 .

[5]  B. Karney,et al.  Attributions in Marriage: Integrating Specific and Global Evaluations of a Relationship , 2001 .

[6]  C. Rusbult,et al.  The impact of gender and sex-role orientation on responses to dissatisfaction in close relationships , 1986 .

[7]  W. Swann,et al.  From self-conceptions to self-worth: on the sources and structure of global self-esteem. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[9]  J. D. Campbell.  Similarity and uniqueness: the effects of attribute type, relevance, and individual differences in self-esteem and depression. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  A. Aron,et al.  Close Relationships as Including Other in the Self , 1991 .

[11]  L. Abramson,et al.  The dynamic self: how the content and structure of the self-concept change with mood. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  R. Weiss.  The developmental course of marital dysfunction , 1998 .

[13]  C. Rusbult,et al.  My Relationship is Better than- and Not as Bad as--Yours is: The Perception of Superiority in Close Relationships , 1995 .

[14]  J. Veroff,et al.  For Better or for Worse: Real-Ideal Discrepancies and the Marital Well-Being of Newlyweds , 1997 .

[15]  N. Epstein,et al.  Assessing relationship standards : The Inventory of Specific Relationship Standards , 1996 .

[16]  F D Fincham,et al.  Attributions in marriage: review and critique. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[17]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. , 1980 .

[18]  D. Spalding.  The Principles of Psychology , 1873, Nature.

[19]  C. Heavey,et al.  Gender and social structure in the demand/withdraw pattern of marital conflict. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  J. G. Holmes,et al.  The (mental) ties that bind: Cognitive structures that predict relationship resilience. , 1999 .

[21]  David Rogosa,et al.  A growth curve approach to the measurement of change. , 1982 .

[22]  Life events, relationship quality, and depression: an investigation of judgment discontinuity in vivo. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[23]  David Rogosa,et al.  Myths about longitudinal research. , 1988 .

[24]  B. Pelham.  Further evidence for a Jamesian model of self-worth: Reply to Marsh (1995). , 1995 .

[25]  R. Schank,et al.  Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story , 1995 .

[26]  J. Gottman,et al.  Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: behavior, physiology, and health. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[27]  N. Smith,et al.  The Development of Self-Image Bias , 1989 .

[28]  J. M. Kittross.  The measurement of meaning , 1959 .

[29]  M. Rosenberg.  Conceiving the self , 1979 .

[30]  C. Showers,et al.  Organization of knowledge about a relationship partner: Implications for liking and loving , 1999 .

[31]  L. R. Goldberg,et al.  Category breadth and hierarchical structure in personality: studies of asymmetries in judgments of trait implications. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  K. Schaie,et al.  Methodological issues in aging research , 1990 .

[33]  G. Fletcher,et al.  Cognition in Close Relationships , 1992 .

[34]  H. Locke,et al.  SHORT MARITAL ADJUSTMENT AND PREDICTION TESTS: THEIR RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY , 1959 .

[35]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: the mobilization-minimization hypothesis. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[36]  J. G. Holmes,et al.  Seeing virtues in faults: Negativity and the transformation of interpersonal narratives in close relationships. , 1993 .