Chapter 9. 9. Relationships with Romantic Partners

9.1 9. Relationships with Romantic Partners

image

Romantic love may not be essential to life, but it may be essential to joy

The temperature was 70°.1 Although he was only a few miles from his supply depot—and salvation in the form of food and gear—the weather was impassable. Suffering from frostbite and malnutrition, Antarctic explorer Sir Robert Falcon Scott knew two things for certain: he would soon die, and a recovery team would eventually find his body. So he penned a letter to his wife, Kathleen. “To my widow,” he began. What followed is one of the most moving testimonials to romantic love ever written.

1All information and quotes that follow are adapted from the Scott Polar Institute. Retrieved from http://news.admin.cam.ac.uk/news/2007/01/09/captainscott146sfinallettershomegoondisplay/.

Scott had led a British team trying to be the first to reach the South Pole. Arriving at their goal on January 17, 1912, they were stunned to find a tent erected on the site. Inside wasa note left by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen: he had beaten Scott’s team by a month. Defeated, Scott and his comrades began the 800-mile return trip, beset by snow blindness, hunger, and exhaustion. The weather worsened, and one by one his team members perished.

Huddled inside his shelter, Scott crafted a note to Kathleen that was at once passionate, practical, upbeat, and astonishingly selfless. Longing and sentiment poured from his pen: “You know I have loved you, you know my thoughts must have constantly dwelt on you. . . the worst aspect of this situation is the thought that I shall not see you again. . . .

Oh what a price to pay—to forfeit the sight of your dear dear face!” He grieved the lost chance to see his son mature, “ . . . what dreams I have had of his future.” But he praised Kathleen’s practicality, and entreated her “to take the whole thing very sensibly as I am sure you will. . . . Make the boy interested in natural history, if you can, it is better than games.”

Though suffering from frostbite, he remained relentlessly upbeat. “There is a painless end, so don’t worry—How much better it has been than lounging in comfort at home.” In the most striking passage of all, Scott granted Kathleen romantic liberty: “Cherish no sentimental rubbish about remarriage—when the right man comes to help you in life you ought to be your happy self again. I hope I shall be a good memory.”

Eight months later a recovery team reached Scott’s encampment. Searching the remnants of his tent, they found Scott’s personal journal and his letter to Kathleen. They then built a tomb of ice and snow over the bodies of Scott and his companions, and placed a cross on top to mark the site.

In the years that followed, Scott would be honored across Britain as a tragic hero. Dozens of monuments were raised, and memorial funds created to support the families of the fallen. In January of 2007, Scott’s letters and journal were donated for display at the University of Cambridge. But in the dim light of his tent in March 1912, with storms raging and death approaching, Sir Robert Falcon Scott was just another human being trying to capture in writing the multifaceted complexity of romantic love. To read his words is to be reminded that love is not singular, but plural: it is many things at once, including passion, practicality, commitment, respect, sentiment, and selflessness.

outline

  • chapter outline

  • 281

  • Defining Romantic Relationships

  • 288

  • Romantic Attraction

  • 293

  • Relationship Development and Deterioration

  • 299

  • Maintaining Romantic Relationships

  • 306

  • The Dark Side of Romantic Relationships

  • 317

  • The Hard Work of Successful Love

Throughout time and across cultures, people have fallen in love with one another. When each of us discovers love for ourselves, we honor that legacy, sharing in an experience that is both uniquely and universally human. We also find that romantic love is a multiplicity of elements, some of which seem contradictory. Our affairs may be all about passion, but they also bring with them the rewards (and costs) of companionship. Our love for others may be selfless and giving, yet we’re driven to build and sustain only those relationships that benefit us the most, and end those that don’t. Although romance may be sentimental and otherworldly, the maintenance of love is decidedly practical. Romantic relationships are hard work, entailing constant upkeep to survive the innumerable and unforeseen challenges that threaten them.

In this chapter, the first of four on relationships, you’ll learn:

  • The defining characteristics of romantic love and relationships
  • What drives you to feel attracted to some people and not to others
  • How communication changes as your romantic relationships come together . . . and fall apart
  • How to communicate in ways that keep your love alive
  • The dark side of romantic relationships and how to deal effectively with these challenges

9.2 Defining Romantic Relationships

Printed Page xxx

Defining Romantic Relationships

Romantic love may not be essential to life, but it may be essential to joy. Life without love would be for many people like a black-and-white movie—full of events and activities but without the color that gives vibrancy and provides a sense of celebration. Beyond the theories, beyond the research, romantic love is one of life’s compensations for drudgery, illness, and, perhaps in some small way, for mortality.2

2 The quote is excerpted from Hendrick and Hendrick (1992, p. 117).

—love researchers Clyde and Susan Hendrick

We often think of romantic relationships as exciting and filled with promise—a joyful fusion of closeness, communication, and sexual connection. When researchers Pamela Regan, Elizabeth Kocan, and Teresa Whitlock (1998) asked several hundred people to list the things they associated most with “being in love,” the most frequent responses were trust, honesty, happiness, bondedness, companionship, communication, caring, intimacy, shared laughter, and sexual desire. But apart from such associations, what exactly is romantic love? How does it differ from liking? How does interpersonal communication shape love relationships? The answers to these questions can help you build more satisfying romantic partnerships.

People experience different types of love

9.2.1 LIKING AND LOVING

Printed Page 282

LIKING AND LOVING

Most scholars agree that liking and loving are separate emotional states, with different causes and outcomes (Berscheid & Regan, 2005). Loving, in contrast, is a vastly deeper and more intense emotional experience and consists of three components: intimacy, caring, and attachment (Rubin, 1973).

  • Intimacy is a feeling of closeness and “union” between you and your partner (Mashek & Aron, 2004).
  • Caring is the concern you have for your partner’s welfare and the desire to keep him or her happy.
  • Attachment is a longing to be in your partner’s presence as much as possible.

The ideal combination for long-term success in romantic relationships occurs when partners both like and love each other.

9.2.2 DIFFERENT TYPES OF ROMANTIC LOVE

Printed Page

DIFFERENT TYPES OF ROMANTIC LOVE

Though most people recognize that loving differs from liking, many also believe that to be in love, one must feel constant and consuming sexual attraction toward a partner. In fact, many different types of romantic love exist, covering a broad range of emotions and relationship forms. At one end of the spectrum is passionate love, a state of intense emotional and physical longing for union with another (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1992). For example, in Helen Simonson’s best-selling novel Major Pettigrew’s Last Stand (2011), Ernest and Jasmina are lovers facing bitter opposition from friends and family because of their interethnic romance (he is English, she Pakistani). After sharing the night together at a secluded lodge, they awake and celebrate their passion.3

3Adapted from Simonson (2011).

image

People who are passionately in love experience an intense longing to be physically near one another. What other traits or experiences do you associate with passionate love?

In the early morning he stood by the empty lake and watched a lone bird, falcon or eagle, gliding high on the faintest of thermals. He raised his arms to the air, stretching with his fingertips, and wondered whether the bird’s heart was as full as his own. As he gazed, the French door was pushed open and she came out, carrying two mugs of tea, which steamed in the air. “You should have woken me,” she said, “I hope you weren’t fleeing the scene?” “I needed to do a little capering about,” he said. “Some beating of the chest and cheering—manly stuff.” “Oh, do show me,” she said, laughing, while he executed a few half-remembered dance steps, and kicked a large stone into the lake. “Do I get a turn?” she asked. She handed him a mug for each hand and then spun herself in wild pirouettes to the shore where she stomped her feet in the freezing waters. Then she came running back and kissed him while he spread his arms wide and tried to keep his balance. “Careful,” he said, feeling a splash of scalding tea on his wrist. “Passion is all very well, but it wouldn’t do to spill the tea.”

If you’ve been passionately in love before, these feelings likely are familiar: the desire to stretch for the sky, dance, laugh, and splash about, coupled with a strong desire to touch, hold, and kiss your partner. Studies of passionate love support the universality of these sentiments, and suggest that five things are true about the experience and expression of passion. First, people in the throes of passionate love often view their loved ones and relationships in an excessively idealistic light. For instance, many partners in passionate love relationships talk about how “perfect” they are for each other and how their relationship is the “best ever.”

Second, people from all cultures feel passionate love. Studies comparing members of individualistic versus collectivistic cultures have found no differences in the amount of passionate love experienced (Hatfield & Rapson, 1987). Although certain ethnicities, especially Latinos, often are stereotyped as more “passionate,” studies comparing Latino and non-Latino experiences of romantic love suggest no differences in intensity (Cerpas, 2002).

Third, no gender or age differences exist in people’s experience of passionate love. Men and women report experiencing this type of love with equal frequency and intensity, and studies using a “Juvenile Love Scale” (which excludes references to sexual feelings) have found that children as young as age 4 report passionate love toward others (Hatfield & Rapson, 1987). The latter finding is important to consider when talking with children about their romantic feelings. Although they lack the emotional maturity to fully understand the consequences of their relationship decisions, their feelings toward romantic interests are every bit as intense and turbulent as our adult emotions. So if your 6- or 7-year-old child or sibling reveals a crush on a schoolmate, treat the disclosure with respect and empathy, rather than teasing him or her.

Fourth, for adults, passionate love is integrally linked with sexuality and sexual desire (Berscheid & Regan, 2005). In one study, undergraduates were asked whether they thought there was a difference between “being in love” and “loving” another person (Ridge & Berscheid, 1989). Eighty-seven percent of respondents said that there was a difference and that sexual attraction was the critical distinguishing feature of being in love.

Finally, passionate love is negatively related to relationship duration. Like it or not, the longer you’re with a romantic partner, the less intense your passionate love will feel (Berscheid, 2002).

Although the “fire” of passionate love dominates media depictions of romance, not all people view being in love this way. At the other end of the romantic spectrum is companionate love: an intense form of liking defined by emotional investment and deeply intertwined lives (Berscheid & Walster, 1978). Many long-term romantic relationships evolve into companionate love. As Clyde and Susan Hendrick (1992) explain, “Sexual attraction, intense communication, and emotional turbulence early in a relationship give way to quiet intimacy, predictability, and shared attitudes, values, and life experiences later in the relationship” (p. 48).

Question

sWwcMmXQUs/rQhyFDdtU3qoJvHUHt8ZZ2TC44lszSe+TApaLeXUZkkb5wqwsPsjFoO5+5V+6ohcAR7jkNOKmfakKgNzpf+a3s0wg34Tu8MNCrMRDDqYcK8Fe+/MjYWKRyOWDH8envbmzzHYhsbe8f42Ru8rDIwNUWhz9Mup3b5/viPv/sB8pwlEA1FX79OUoMyY2ZJwrBAwVpepweu+VwNzf7Ky83TKR7cyqROGVkytUZ+PGwyrOFiQOsWj/8kMfAOwv5+qSxXFPhuyI5kCDdSwYTQtdb3ZzUU9IJ4ZBhewtx8zqxyeM1gOWh658ST373zB4dw==

Between the poles of passionate and companionate love lies a range of other types of romantic love. Sociologist John Alan Lee (1973) suggested six different forms that range from friendly to obsessive and gave them each a traditional Greek name: storge, agape, mania, pragma, ludus, and eros (see Table 9.1 for an explanation of each). As Lee noted, there is no “right” type of romantic love—different forms appeal to different people.

Despite similarities between men and women in their experiences of passionate love, substantial gender differences exist related to one of Lee’s love types—pragma, or “practical love.” Across numerous studies, women score higher than men on pragma (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1988, 1992), refuting the common stereotype that women are “starry-eyed” and “sentimental” about romantic love (Hill, Rubin, & Peplau, 1976). What’s more, although men are often stereotyped as being “cool” and “logical” about love (Hill et al., 1976), they are much more likely than women to perceive their romantic partners as “perfect” and believe that “love at first sight is possible,” that “true love can overcome any obstacles,” and that “there’s only one true love for each person” (Sprecher & Metts, 1999).

Table 9.1: table 9.1 Romantic Love Types
Type Description Attributes of Love
Storge Friendly lovers Stable, predictable, and rooted in friendship
Agape Forgiving lovers Patient, selfless, giving, and unconditional
Mania Obsessive lovers Intense, tumultuous, extreme, and all-consuming
Pragma Practical lovers Logical, rational, and founded in common sense
Ludus Game-playing lovers Uncommitted, fun, and played like a game
Eros Romantic lovers Sentimental, romantic, idealistic, and committed

9.2.3 KEY ELEMENTS OF ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

Printed Page 285`

KEY ELEMENTS OF ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

We know that loving differs from liking and that people experience different types of love. But what exactly does it mean to have a romantic relationship? A romantic relationship is a chosen interpersonal involvement forged through communication in which the participants perceive the bond as romantic. Six elements of romantic relationships underlie this definition.

Perception A romantic relationship exists whenever the two partners perceive that it does. As perceptions change, so too does the relationship. For example, a couple may consider their relationship “casual dating” but still define it as “romantic” (rather than friendly). Or, a long-term couple may feel more companionate than passionate but still consider themselves “in love.” If two partners’ perceptions of their relationship differ—for example, one person feels romantic and the other does not—they do not have a romantic relationship (Miller & Steinberg, 1975).

Diversity Romantic relationships exhibit remarkable diversity in the ages and genders of the partners, as well as in their ethnic and religious backgrounds and sexual orientations. Yet despite this diversity, most relationships function in a similar manner. For example, whether a romantic relationship is between lesbian, gay, or straight partners, the individuals involved place the same degree of importance on their relationship, devote similar amounts of time and energy to maintaining their bond, and demonstrate similar openness in their communication (Haas & Stafford, 2005). The exact same factors that determine marital success between men and women (such as honesty, loyalty, commitment, and dedication to maintenance) also predict stability and satisfaction within same-sex couples (Kurdek, 2005). As relationship scholar Sharon Brehm sums up, gay and lesbian couples “fall in love in the same way, feel the same passions, experience the same doubts, and feel the same commitments as straights” (Brehm, Miller, Perlman, & Campbell, 2002, p. 27).

Depictions of romantic love are often found in art, movies, literature, poetry, music, and other media, but they rarely detail the everyday interpersonal communication that makes successful relationships work.

Choice We enter into romantic relationships through choice, selecting not only with whom we initiate involvements but also whether and how we maintain these bonds. Thus, contrary to widespread belief, love doesn’t “strike us out of the blue” or “sweep us away.” Choice plays a role even in arranged marriages: the spouses’ families and social networks select an appropriate partner, and in many cases the betrothed retain at least some control over whether the choice is acceptable (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1992).

Commitment Romantic relationships often involve commitment: a strong psychological attachment to a partner and an intention to continue the relationship long into the future (Arriaga & Agnew, 2001). When you forge a commitment with a partner, positive outcomes often result. Commitment leads couples to work harder on maintaining their relationships, resulting in greater satisfaction (Rusbult, Arriaga, & Agnew, 2001). Commitment also reduces the likelihood that partners will cheat sexually when separated by geographic distance (Le, Korn, Crockett, & Loving, 2010).

Although men are stereotyped in the media as “commitment-phobic,” this stereotype is false. Both men and women view commitment as an important part of romantic relationships (Miller, Perlman, & Brehm, 2007). Several studies even suggest that men often place a higher value on commitment than do women. For example, when asked which they would choose, if forced to decide between a committed romance or an important job opportunity, more men than women chose the relationship (Mosher & Danoff-Burg, 2007). Men also score higher than women on measures of commitment in college dating relationships (Kurdek, 2008). These trends aren’t new. Throughout fifty years of research, men have consistently reported more of a desire for marriage than have women, and described “desire for a committed relationship” as more of a motivation for dating (Rubin, Peplau, & Hill, 1981).

Question

yo9SjDmQvrKRB5/MQY6y0AzJ1S7+gKHBjrsurlhGeVYCN0rhttfSnJKan/QzX5mq+z8E+tYlY/smRlF4claDATJ4xRi/aP0Slcvdw0a9IDOwsAKRuS7hIvuPxcZus4a8ePxszleiihpIDG3nnnl4z9mu7aimBwpoA7SVvtz0y+WVCCyw6ieR1VASQyJDQMJKek6Gh/EIl90bWfdK+KYmPJtsgf9nFu+KOlAyCspuBUt5CPQ7wv4eg+xLwcQeaI7TAlQoH8RgQUAn56FlST2JoKZCFGc0LSmGMb2pPINC792O49bZEiVEyt7LHrk4oeaz9NXdXbUBHADNiI75rEcQkbO/TBYFEiJVue6K83c0w61C1pjRnKF3t/50f7A0uBjs8pEQAaYOeAZH1HKTIpe4mw==

Tensions When we’re involved in intimate relationships, we often experience competing impulses, or tensions, between our selves and our feelings toward others, known as relational dialectics (Baxter, 1990). Relational dialectics take three common forms. The first is openness versus protection. As relationships become more intimate, we naturally exchange more personal information with our partners. Most of us enjoy the feeling of unity and mutual insight created through such sharing. But while we want to be open with our partners, we also want to keep certain aspects of our selves—such as our most private thoughts and feelings—protected. Too much openness provokes an uncomfortable sense that we’ve lost our privacy and must share everything with our lovers.

The second dialectic is autonomy versus connection. We elect to form romantic relationships largely out of a desire to bond with other human beings. Yet if we come to feel so connected to our partners that our individual identity seems to dissolve, we may choose to pull back and reclaim some of our autonomy.

The final dialectic is the clash between our need for stability and our need for excitement and change—known as novelty versus predictability. We all like the security that comes with knowing how our partners will behave, how we’ll behave, and how our relationships will unfold. Romances are more successful when the partners behave in predictable ways that reduce uncertainty (Berger & Bradac, 1982). However, predictability often spawns boredom. As we get to know our partners, the novelty and excitement of the relationship wears off, and things seem increasingly monotonous. Reconciling the desire for predictability with the need for novelty is one of the most profound emotional challenges facing partners in romantic relationships.

VideoCentral

Relational Dialectics

Watch this clip to answer the questions below.

When have you experienced the tension between being completely open and wishing to keep something private from someone? How did you deal with this tension? Is it ever ethical to keep something private in order to not hurt someone’s feelings? Why or why not?

9.3 Romantic Attraction

Printed Page 288

Romantic Attraction

Why we are attracted to some people and not others

On the hit TV show Glee, Artie excitedly wheels his chair to the sign-up sheet for the new school song-and-dance club.4 When he struggles to reach the list, Tina intervenes and helps him. An instant attraction is sparked. As they spend time together, they quickly learn that they share much more in common than music. Both are intensely intellectual and somewhat “offbeat” in their views. Both struggle with disabilities—Artie is paralyzed from the waist down, and Tina wrestles with a speech impediment. The degree to which they rise above their respective limitations spawns a strong foundation of shared respect. Their mutual attraction deepens and eventually culminates in a kiss—Artie’s first. But when Tina reveals that she was faking her disability, Artie is shattered, and he angrily breaks off their relationship.

4All information that follows is from www.fox.com/glee.

Every day, you meet and interact with new people while in class, standing in line at the local coffee shop, or participating in clubs like the one depicted on Glee. Yet few of these individuals make a lasting impression on you, and even fewer strike a chord of romantic attraction. What draws you to those special few? Many of the same factors that drew Artie and Tina together: proximity, physical attractiveness, similarity, reciprocal liking, and resources (Aron et al., 2008). These factors influence attraction for both men and women, in both same- and opposite-sex romances (Felmlee, Orzechowicz, & Fortes, 2010; Hyde, 2005).

On Glee, Artie and Tina’s instant attraction is disrupted when it is revealed that Tina isn’t as similar to Artie as it first seemed. Have you ever misled a romantic interest into thinking you shared a common concern or value? If so, did you eventually confess? What was the outcome?

9.3.1 PROXIMITY

Printed Page

PROXIMITY

The simple fact of physical proximity—being in one another’s presence frequently—exerts far more impact on romantic attraction than many people think. In general, you’ll feel more attracted to those with whom you have frequent contact and less attracted to those with whom you interact rarely, a phenomenon known as the mere exposure effect (Bornstein, 1989).

Proximity’s pronounced effect on attraction is one reason that mixed-race romantic relationships are much rarer than same-race pairings in the United States. Despite this nation’s enormous ethnic diversity, most Americans cluster into ethnically homogeneous groups, communities, and neighborhoods. This clustering reduces the likelihood that they will meet, regularly interact with, and eventually become attracted to individuals outside their own cultural group (Gaines, Chalfin, Kim, & Taing, 1998). Those who do form interethnic romances typically have living arrangements, work situations, or educational interests that place them in close proximity with diverse others, fostering attraction (Gaines et al., 1998).

Question

SXu8iRMmoDG5lKwMPCyraI4Bsgmw+tEoZg/V94Oyf0AXWf+NGYIsIkYPWxfFcav6fgBqM7nYPFku9WlOCYi5sXA/xaSZCvE6C/7pXbULTwI7BLDpVim1f8woJ5Rdop1syFWrWydyXWTDP02HQDssMyXn/QbitCbEl6t3YC4knMKQs8mdfUEFSF6vnkS8KiQUfGTUMPbVaduSn2aqf7SNhmU5EKX/Jp2HvOcq2nrqjKIqp8rV3ewzs2hOaZnU527Oy4gDDX5sRDO3Kn/3dCy5GRJorwu5KCz4+KSBUMOwsSMb1/QHrAyTLHPdnfEZFCSTXvgXVtLX3DgTwger/Cv2e3Cq6FvVA5Xe7GZWv3yD5HA=

You’re more likely to be attracted to people you’re around a lot, but the effect of proximity on attraction depends on your experience with the people. At least one study has found that people feel most negatively toward those whom they find bothersome and those whom they live nearest to.

Although people lust after gorgeous others, most of us end up in long-term relationships with those we perceive to be our equals in physical attractiveness.

9.3.2 PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS

Printed Page 290

PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS

It’s no secret that many people feel drawn to those they perceive as physically attractive. In part this is because we view beautiful people as competent communicators, intelligent, and well-adjusted, a phenomenon known as the matching (Feingold, 1988). Research documents that people don’t want to be paired with those they think are substantially “below” or “above” themselves in looks (White, 1980).

9.3.3 SIMILARITY

Printed Page 290

SIMILARITY

No doubt you’ve heard the contradictory clichés regarding similarity and attraction: “Opposites attract” versus “Birds of a feather flock together.” Which is correct? Scientific evidence suggests that we are attracted to those we perceive as similar to ourselves (Miller et al., 2007). This is known as the birds-of-a-feather effect. One explanation for this phenomenon is that people we view as similar to us are less likely to provoke uncertainty. In first encounters, they seem easier to predict and explain than people we perceive as dissimilar (Berger & Calabrese, 1975). Thus, we feel more comfortable with them.

Similarity means more than physical attractiveness; it means sharing parallel personalities, values, and likes and dislikes (Markey & Markey, 2007). Having fundamentally different personalities or widely disparate values erodes attraction between partners in the long run. At the same time, differences in mere tastes and preferences have no long-term negative impact on relationship health, as long as you and your partner are similar in other, more important ways. For example, I like heavier music (Motörhead, Mastodon, Pantera), and my wife hates it. But we have very similar personalities and values, so our attraction and our relationship endure.

Because differences in tastes and preferences don’t predict relationship success, you shouldn’t dismiss potential romantic partners because of their minor likes and dislikes. For example, imagine that you meet someone new who interests you. But in exploring his or her Facebook profile, you find that you have radically different tastes in music, TV, and movies. It would be premature to dismiss the possibility of a romance without first seeing whether you share similarities in personality and values.

9.3.4 RECIPROCAL LIKING

Printed Page 291

RECIPROCAL LIKING

Question

W9dveTLVJV0ecqqJNBJoWGDQ3cpOh1ypvwhCE55Pkkq1JhptrmnGDTUJCb4fHCZomkqhfwXiydyrHZ3dWvVNijWpi51iN5KKBHyWp5UUNZD/pENg+gODwhoVFIfFPsoOOLSmS+dd2GMe84rbVhGhEv3kOEdJXEHCJwWi+fB271W7Zd2GvRpsROssU2A5nwR2uCeBB2vO3lBqjEargeTKRahQDpG7KhcRiImpH/u6f5WY6exIxQ/NissQN/2CwnSRlQhYUAOxzSMnCRYDiC29x9k2luz9+U9v8XHAgQ8ZFNeV+9wFc5WSA4tgfNVd5JKbYAXtRc80D+JLgjTkGiDjtblautco6VlK

A fourth determinant of romantic attraction is one of the most obvious and often overlooked: whether the person we’re attracted to makes it clear, through communication and other actions, that the attraction is mutual, known as reciprocal liking (Aron et al., 2008). Reciprocal liking is a potent predictor of attraction; we tend to be attracted to people who are attracted to us. Studies examining people’s narrative descriptions of “falling in love” have found that reciprocal liking is the most commonly mentioned factor leading to love (Riela, Rodriguez, Aron, Xu, & Acevedo, 2010).

9.3.5 RESOURCES

Printed Page 291

RESOURCES

A final spark that kindles romantic attraction is the unique resources that another person offers. Resources include qualities such as sense of humor, intelligence, kindness, supportiveness, and whether the person seems fun, and these attributes are viewed as valuable by both straight persons and gays and lesbians (Felmlee et al., 2010). But what leads you to view a person’s resources as desirable?

Social exchange theory proposes that you’ll feel drawn to those you see as offering substantial benefits (things you like and want) with few associated costs (things demanded of you in return). Two factors drive whether you find someone initially attractive: whether you perceive them as offering the kind of rewards you think you deserve in a romantic relationship (affection, emotional support, money, sex, etc.), and whether you think that the rewards they can offer you are superior to those you can get elsewhere (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978). In simple terms, you’re attracted to people who can give you what you want, and who offer better rewards than others.

Once you’ve experienced attraction because of perceived rewards, the balance of benefits and costs exchanged by you and the other person, known as equity, determines whether a relationship will take root (Stafford, 2003). Romantic partners are happiest when the balance of giving and getting in their relationship is equal for both, and they’re least happy when inequity exists (Hatfield, Traupmann, Sprecher, Utne, & Hay, 1985).

What is inequity? People in relationships have a strong sense of proportional justice: the balance between benefits gained from the relationship versus contributions made to the relationship (Hatfield, 1983). Inequity occurs when the benefits or contributions provided by one person are greater than those provided by the other. People who get more rewards from their relationships for fewer costs than their partners are overbenefited; those who get fewer rewards from their relationships for more costs than their partners are underbenefited. Overbenefited individuals experience negative emotions such as guilt, while underbenefited partners experience emotions such as sadness and anger (Sprecher, 2001).

Approximately 50 percent of students surveyed think interracial dating is acceptable, but this masks substantial race and gender differences. While 81 percent of European American and 75 percent of African American men express willingness to date outside their ethnicity, the majority of European American and African American women report negative attitudes toward interracial dating.

Equity strongly determines the short- and long-term success of romantic relationships. One study found that only 23 percent of equitable romances broke up during a several-month period, whereas 54 percent of inequitable romantic relationships broke up (Sprecher, 2001).

9.3.6 TECHNOLOGY AND ROMANTIC ATTRACTION

Printed Page292

TECHNOLOGY AND ROMANTIC ATTRACTION

I pick my son Colin up from a school “activity night.” “How’d it go?” I ask. “Great!” he exclaims. “I met this really cool girl, and got her number.” “Are you going to call her?” I ask. Colin rolls his eyes at me. “I’m going to text her,” he says. Sure enough, the exchange of text messages begins during the ride home, and as soon as we get through the door, he sprints for the computer and begins exchanging IMs with her.

Today, the enormous range of communication technologies available has refined and enhanced the attraction process. You can establish virtual proximity to attractive others by befriending them on social networking sites (Facebook, Tumblr) and then exchanging daily (or even hourly) updates and posts. Similar to my son Colin, you can assess a prospective partner’s similarity to you and the rewards he or she could offer you by interacting with the person through text-messaging or simply by checking their personal Web pages and online profiles. You can assess physical attractiveness by viewing online photo albums and video clips. On dating sites such as Match.com, eHarmony, or even free sites such as Craigslist, you can enter a set of search parameters—desired age, profession, appearance, interests, sexual orientation—and immediately see a broad range of potential partners.

But despite the conveniences they offer, these technologies also evoke tensions. For one thing, you have to decide how honest to be in your online self-presentations (Ellison, Heino, & Gibbs, 2006). Because so many people now use online communication to gauge each other, you may feel great pressure to present yourself as highly attractive—even if that means providing a distorted self-description. In a survey of more than 5,000 online dating service users, misrepresentation of self was commonplace (Hall, Park, Song, & Cody, 2010). Men were more likely than women to exaggerate their education level and income, and women were more likely to lie about their weight. And both men and women over 50 routinely distorted their ages to appear younger. Correspondingly, people view others’ online dating profiles skeptically. Users liken profiles to “résumés”; that is, they are vehicles for marketing one’s “best self,” rather than accurate glimpses into one’s authentic identity (Heino, Ellison, & Gibbs, 2006). Just as people lie on their résumés, so too do online daters presume that others will lie in their profiles. As one online dating service user describes, “Everyone is so wonderful over the Internet. What the Internet doesn’t tell you is that, ‘I’m defensive, I talk about my problems all the time, I can’t manage my money’ ” (Heino et al., 2006, p. 435).

A challenge of online dating is transferring the romance from online to offline. Newer online dating services like HowAboutWe.com focus on just that by encouraging users to plan specific activities with one another. What challenges, if any, have you faced in this transition?

If your goal is to forge an offline romantic relationship, distorting your online self-description is ultimately self-defeating (Ellison et al., 2006). When you mislead someone online about your appearance or other personal attributes and then take your romance offline, your partner will discover the truth. Such unpleasant revelations are commonplace: one study found that 86 percent of people using online dating sites report having met others who they felt had misrepresented their physical attractiveness (Gibbs, Ellison, & Heino, 2006). When people feel misled, the outcome is often a damaged impression, negative emotion (such as resentment or anger), and an injured or even ruined relationship (McCornack & Levine, 1990). Clearly, the most ethical and practical thing you can do in your online self-descriptions is to accentuate your attractive attributes without resorting to distortion or dishonesty. If you feel you may be “crossing the line” into deception, have a trustworthy friend check your online description or personal profile and assess its authenticity.

9.4 Relationship Development and Deterioration

Printed Page 293

Relationship Development and Deterioration

How couples come together and separate

Romantic relationships come together and apart in as many different ways and at as many different speeds as there are partners who fall for each other (Surra & Hughes, 1997). Many relationships are of the “casual dating” variety—they flare quickly, sputter, and then fade. Others endure and evolve with deepening levels of commitment. But all romantic relationships undergo stages marked by distinctive patterns in partners’ communication, thoughts, and feelings. We know these transitions intuitively: “taking things to the next level,” “kicking it up a notch,” “taking a step back,” or “taking a break.” Communication scholar Mark Knapp (1984) modeled these patterns as ten stages: five of “coming together” and five of “coming apart.”

9.4.1 COMING TOGETHER

Printed Page 293

COMING TOGETHER

Knapp’s stages of coming together illustrate one possible flow of relationship development (see Figure 9.1). As you read through the stages, keep in mind that these suggest turning points in relationships and are not fixed rules for how involvements should or do progress. Your relationships may go through some, none, or all of these stages. They may skip stages, jump back or forward in order, or follow a completely different and unique trajectory.

Initiating During the initiating stage, you size up a person you’ve just met or noticed. You draw on all available visual information (physical attractiveness, body type, age, ethnicity, gender, clothing, posture) to determine whether you find him or her attractive. Your primary concern at this stage is to portray yourself in a positive light. You also ponder and present a greeting you deem appropriate. This greeting might be in person or online—more than 16 million people in the United States have used online dating sites to meet new partners (Heino, Ellison, & Gibbs, 2010).

Experimenting Once you’ve initiated an encounter with someone else (online or face-to-face), you enter the experimenting stage, during which you exchange demographic information (names, majors, where you grew up). You also engage in small talk—disclosing facts you and the other person consider relatively unimportant but that enable you to introduce yourselves in a safe and controlled fashion. As you share these details, you look for points of commonality on which you can base further interaction. Relationships at this stage are generally pleasant and “light.” This is the “casual dating” phase of romance. For better or worse, most involvements never progress beyond this stage. We go through life experimenting with many people but forming deeper connections with very few.

Intensifying Occasionally, you’ll progress beyond casual dating and find yourself experiencing strong feelings of attraction toward another person. When this happens, your verbal and nonverbal communication becomes increasingly intimate. During this intensifying stage, you and your partner begin to reveal previously withheld information, such as secrets about your past or important life dreams and goals. You may begin using informal forms of address or terms of endearment (“honey” versus “Joe”) and saying “we” more frequently. One particularly strong sign that your relationship is intensifying is the direct expression of commitment. You might do this verbally (“I think I’m falling for you”) or online by marking your profile as “in a relationship” rather than “single.” You may also spend more time in each other’s personal spaces, as well as begin physical expressions of affection, such as hand-holding, cuddling, or sexual activity.

Question

arGr2f08ufLt8+cdD3+nkn68Mz3THxcrcvcdEnMS1XuFECEGxWg+apU80fTmmGdpb9rVADcx1k+zonkM88G6+ZaQYmg3LsJZvoyewt1JSF65zpvWGgbXzIjJQnTC/80JUoE2BksSACXKQ9kMpYRvaEzD4a2D4CtCCx9SnZZuLNSa606eAsZK09fGvrZ48twyL2Q899Ib2FL82FlqNxle8+QmYJn7gSRSkaOndTOqzmbpJ/t8KHwiRR+9Yt7L38IbwYNruzP0LDv3TsLNfPqy30yxXKd3IKqokaFz4hjP1/KMgce5XKAI6+5jfqxOjA5eEyFsESvKzClDNTpqrbBofFe0zeetdau00LQ9vzg+sr5aMBvcmlqpFp9rIjFDGi4g57t9ImoYrX0U3W3SqgKLy+ohqsU=

Integrating During the integrating stage, your and your partner’s personalities seem to become one. This integration is reinforced through sexual activity and the exchange of belongings (items of clothing, music, photos, etc.). When you’ve integrated with a romantic partner, you cultivate attitudes, activities, and interests that clearly join you together as a couple—“our favorite movie,” “our song,” and “our favorite restaurant.” Friends, colleagues, and family members begin to treat you as a couple—for example, always inviting the two of you to parties or dinners. Not surprisingly, many people begin to struggle with the dialectical tension of connectedness versus autonomy at this stage. As a student of mine once told his partner when describing this stage, “I’m not me anymore, I’m us.”

Bonding The ultimate stage of coming together is bonding, a public ritual that announces to the world that you and your partner have made a commitment to one another. Bonding is something you’ll share with very few people—perhaps only one—during your lifetime. The most obvious example of bonding is marriage.

Bonding institutionalizes your relationship. Before this stage, the ground rules for your relationship and your communication within it remain a private matter, to be negotiated between you and your partner. In the bonding stage, you import into your relationship a set of laws and customs determined by governmental authorities and perhaps religious institutions. Although these laws and customs help to solidify your relationship, they can also make your relationship feel more rigid and structured.

VideoCentral

Integrating

Watch this clip to answer the questions below.

Question

lnbIqyFYJvme8ya9SDrmno7hjnL6gyO4pBy+BstSLosa/CIVoVACkA7Se68wFpyZYc6ySNjLlstM8e7k3P+I/SJavfdsMnVozvPYyufSH3y0Xtq9lX3sao+WgArygrtXeVnU7qGOQbe3i/F9bBL+jVUfz9XGhTXdG6peUM43WlFx7NZHp4xRnP6Hqp4E/C7o1vxF/zE5VLnlaQgP7ziRqdKiUGeXguU4PuQZSUWbaFGyYHP8+sJxdUmA1rbfzNE3o0b0D0+kP6k7hu8DuQ8037uCfD9yEjDBhlYED0RAiDY4AJ/o

Want to see more? Check out VideoCentral for clips illustrating experimenting and bonding.

There are many ways for couples to bond, but the key is that both partners agree and make a deep commitment to each other.

9.4.2 COMING APART

Printed Page 296

COMING APART

Coming together is often followed by coming apart. One study of college dating couples found that across a three-month period, 30 percent broke up (Parks & Adelman, 1983). Similar trends occur in the married adult population: the divorce rate has remained stable at around 40 percent since the early 1980s (Hurley, 2005; Kreider, 2005). This latter number may surprise you, because the news media, politicians, and even academics commonly quote the divorce rate as “50 percent.”5 But studies that have tracked couples across time have found that 6 out of 10 North American marriages survive until “death does them part” (Hurley, 2005). Nevertheless, the 40 percent figure translates into a million divorces each year.

5The “50 percent” claim came from a U.S. Census Bureau calculation that computed the divorce rate by dividing the number of marriages in a given year by the number of divorces. But this calculation is obviously flawed, because the people marrying that year are not usually the same people who are getting divorced.

In some relationships, breaking up is the right thing to do. Partners have grown apart, they’ve lost interest in one another, or perhaps one person has been abusive. In other relationships, coming apart is unfortunate. Perhaps the partners could have resolved their differences but didn’t make the effort. Thus, they needlessly suffer the pain of breaking up.

Like coming together, coming apart unfolds over stages marked by changes in thoughts, feelings, and communication (see Figure 9.2). But unlike coming together, these stages often entail emotional turmoil that makes them difficult to negotiate skillfully. Learning how to communicate supportively while a romantic relationship is dissolving is a challenging but important part of being a skilled interpersonal communicator.

Differentiating In all romantic relationships, partners share differences as well as similarities. But during the first stage of coming apart, differentiating, the beliefs, attitudes, and values that distinguish you from your partner come to dominate your thoughts and communication (“I can’t believe you think that!” or “We are so different!”).

Most healthy romances experience occasional periods of differentiating. These moments can involve unpleasant clashes and bickering over contrasting viewpoints, tastes, or goals. But you can move your relationship through this difficulty—and thus halt the coming-apart process—by openly discussing your points of difference and working together to resolve them. To do this, review the constructive conflict skills discussed in Chapter 8.

Differentiating

  • Identify when you and your romantic partner are differentiating.
  • Check your perception of the relationship, especially how you’ve punctuated encounters and the attributions you’ve made.
  • Call to mind the similarities that originally brought you and your partner together.
  • Discuss your concerns with your partner, emphasizing these similarities and your desire to continue the relationship.
  • Mutually explore solutions to the differences that have been troubling you.

Circumscribing If one or both of you respond to problematic differences by ignoring them and spending less time talking, you enter the circumscribing stage. You actively begin to restrict the quantity and quality of information you exchange with your partner. Instead of sharing information, you create “safe zones” in which you discuss only topics that won’t provoke conflict. Common remarks made during circumscribing include, “Don’t ask me about that” and “Let’s not talk about that anymore.”

Stagnating When circumscribing becomes so severe that almost no safe conversational topics remain, communication slows to a standstill, and your relationship enters the stagnating stage. You both presume that communicating is pointless because it will only lead to further problems. People in stagnant relationships often experience a sense of resignation; they feel “stuck” or “trapped.” However, they can remain in the relationship for months or even years. Why? Some believe that it’s better to leave things as they are rather than expend the effort necessary to break up or rebuild the relationship. Others simply don’t know how to repair the damage and revive their earlier bond.

Avoiding During the avoiding stage, one or both of you decide that you no longer can be around each other, and you begin distancing yourself physically. Some people communicate avoidance directly to their partner (“I don’t want to see you anymore”). Others do so indirectly—for example, by going out when the partner’s at home, screening cell-phone calls, ignoring texts, and changing their Facebook status from “in a relationship” to “single.”

Question

DuS9EtwsLgiwtEth7JicxSSkdXGHCiZ/4gOGixsZ7KNVaCfWTqYpAbm/jSG+x5+E3eo7Ph3KXm6iz/uXlCliTeH/KiiJ35WcE6HLui+PrYuk9BgZc88yQ3B/X1mza2Qfm9x9Jr6PwSO7lVKBAjR9CkT05kl50ysi2QrzZLMPD8D6AQXSGlxmuXroupp4ZXMog78o34SYWD7TMJL3jdnJlYx7HnAjHQJsnKwORmOm7c7v7+UCOi+HnYY4SOsCciYWVrlpqIU13bFkJE49Sg/FnlvFe2ZWuCw2Uf/2WjSfi68=

Terminating In ending a relationship, some people want to come together for a final encounter that gives a sense of closure and resolution. During the terminating stage, couples might discuss the past, present, and future of the relationship. They often exchange summary statements about the past—comments on “how our relationship was” that are either accusations (“No one has ever treated me so badly!”) or laments (“I’ll never be able to find someone as perfect as you”). Verbal and nonverbal behaviors indicating a lack of intimacy are readily apparent—including physical distance between the two individuals and reluctance to make eye contact. The partners may also discuss the future status of their relationship. Some couples may agree to end all contact going forward. Others may choose to maintain some level of physical intimacy even though the emotional side of the relationship is officially over. Still others may express interest in “being friends.”

Gender stereotypes dominate our thinking about men and women in romantic relationships, but research discredits many of these damaging presumptions. For example, although women in Western cultures are depicted as sentimental and men as rational, women actually are more likely than men to base their romantic relationship decisions on practical considerations.

Many people find terminating a relationship painful or awkward. It’s hard to tell someone else that you no longer want to be involved, and it is equally painful to hear it. Draw on your interpersonal communication skills to best negotiate your way through this dreaded moment. In particular, infuse your communication with empathy—offering empathic concern and perspective-taking (see Chapter 3). Realize that romantic breakups are a kind of death and that it’s normal to experience grief, even when breaking up is the right thing to do. Consequently, offer supportive communication (“I’m sorry things had to end this way” or “I know this is going to be painful for both of us”) and use grief management tactics (see Chapter 4). Conversations to terminate a relationship are never pleasant or easy. But the communication skills you’ve learned can help you minimize the pain and damage, enabling you and your former partner to move on to other relationships.

9.5 Maintaining Romantic Relationships

Printed Page 299

Maintaining Romantic Relationships

Strategies to sustain romances, even long-distance ones

In the movie Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Joel (Jim Carrey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) are lovers struggling to maintain a bittersweet romance (Bregman, Golin, Gondry, & Kaufman, 2004). Clementine, an outgoing, self-described “high-maintenance girl,” is the opposite of quiet, bookish Joel, who communicates more with his private journal than with her. Following a fight, Clementine impetuously visits a clinic that specializes in memory erasure and has Joel expunged from her mind. Despondent, Joel follows suit. But the two meet again and find themselves attracted. Eventually discovering the truth—that they aren’t strangers at all but longtime lovers—they face a momentous decision. Do they invest the time and energy necessary to maintain their romance a second time, knowing that they failed so terribly before that they chose to destroy their memories? Or do they end it before their history of relational disaster can repeat itself? They discuss their dilemma:

CLEMENTINE: I’m not a concept, Joel, I’m just a messed-up girl who’s looking for my own peace of mind. I’m not perfect.

JOEL: I can’t see anything that I don’t like about you.

CLEMENTINE: But you will!

JOEL: I can’t.

CLEMENTINE: But you will ! You know, you will think of things, and I’ll get bored with you and feel trapped because that’s what happens with me!

JOEL: OK.

CLEMENTINE: OK?

JOEL: OK.

In Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Joel and Clementine decide to take another shot at their relationship despite the risks.

Romantic relationships aren’t always about happiness and celebration. No matter how much you love your partner, you will still experience unpleasant moments such as feeling irked, bored, or trapped. In fact, on any given day, 44 percent of us are likely to be seriously annoyed by a close relationship partner (Kowalski, Walker, Wilkinson, Queen, & Sharpe, 2003). Though such experiences are normal, many people find them disturbing and wonder whether they should end the relationship. But Clementine’s and Joel’s choice in the conclusion of Eternal Sunshine—to accept the inevitable negatives as natural and move forward regardless—offers a message of hope. Wiping our mental slates clean and leaving our partners behind is not the only solution to romantic relationship challenges. Instead, we can choose to harness our interpersonal communication skills and invest the effort necessary to maintain our love.

To this point we’ve talked a good deal about the nature of love, and we’ve traced the stages through which many romances progress. Now let’s shift focus to a more practical concern: how can you use interpersonal communication to maintain a satisfying, healthy romantic relationship?

9.5.1 MAINTENANCE STRATEGIES

Printed Page

MAINTENANCE STRATEGIES

Many people believe that love just happens—that once it strikes, it endures. But a basic rule of romantic love is that maintenance is necessary to keep relationships from deteriorating (Stafford, 2003). Relational maintenance refers to using communication and supportive behaviors to sustain a desired relationship status and level of satisfaction (Stafford, Dainton, & Haas, 2000). Across several studies, communication scholar Laura Stafford has observed seven strategies that satisfied couples—no matter their ethnicity or sexual orientation—routinely use to maintain their romances (Stafford, 2010). (See Table 9.2 for an overview of these categories.)

VideoCentral bedfordstmartins.com/reflectrelate

Relational Maintenance

Watch this clip online to answer the questions below.

Maintaining a relationship after a conflict can be a challenging situation. How is the couple in the video handling the situation? What maintenance strategies are they using? What maintenance strategies do you think are especially important after a fight? How about on a daily basis?

Positivity Positivity includes communicating in a cheerful and optimistic fashion, doing unsolicited favors, and giving unexpected gifts. Partners involved in romantic relationships cite positivity as the most important maintenance tactic for ensuring happiness (Dainton & Stafford, 1993). This holds true for men and women in straight relationships (Stafford, 2010), and for same-sex partners in gay and lesbian romances (Haas & Stafford, 2005). You use positivity when:6

6All bulleted items that follow are adapted from the revised relationship maintenance behavior scale of Stafford (2010).

  • You try to make each interaction with your partner enjoyable.
  • You try to build your partner up by giving him or her compliments.
  • You try to be fun, upbeat, and romantic with your partner.

You undermine positivity when:

  • You constantly look for and complain about problems in your relationship without offering solutions.
  • You whine, pout, and sulk when you don’t get your way.
  • You criticize favors and gifts from your partner.

Assurances The second-most-powerful maintenance tactic in boosting relationship satisfaction is assurances: messages that emphasize how much a partner means to you, how important the relationship is, and that describe a secure future together. Assurances may be expressed directly, such as saying, “I love you” or “I can’t see myself ever being with anyone else but you.” You may also communicate assurances more indirectly, by emphasizing the value you place on your time together—for example, sending a text message saying, “I can’t wait to see you again” or “I’m really looking forward to tonight” (Rabby, 1997). You use assurances when:

  • You regularly tell your partner how devoted you are to your relationship.
  • You talk about future plans and events to be shared together (e.g., anniversaries, vacations, marriage, children).
  • You do and say things to demonstrate the depth of your feelings for your partner.

You undermine assurances when:

  • You flirt with others and talk about how attractive they are in front of your partner.
  • You tell your partner not to count on anything long-term.
  • You systematically avoid pledging love or fidelity to your partner.

Constant, daily maintenance is needed to keep romantic relationships alive and healthy.

Sharing Tasks The most frequently practiced form of maintenance is sharing tasks. This involves taking mutual responsibility for chores and negotiating an equitable division of labor. Although this may sound like something that only serious, cohabiting, or married couples face, sharing tasks is relevant for all couples, and includes responsibilities like providing transportation to work or campus, running errands, and making reservations for dinner. You share tasks when:

  • You try to pitch in equally on everyday responsibilities.
  • You ask your partner how you can help out.
  • You make an effort to handle tasks before your partner asks you to do them.

You undermine task sharing when:

  • You strategically avoid having to do your share of the work.
  • You never ask your partner how you can help out.
  • You expect your partner to run errands and do chores for you, without reciprocating.

Acceptance Part of what builds a strong sense of intimacy between romantic partners is the feeling that lovers accept us for who we really are, fully and completely, and forgive us our flaws. Acceptance involves communicating this affirmation and support. You convey acceptance when:

  • You forgive your partner when he or she makes mistakes.
  • You support your partner in his or her decisions.
  • You are patient with your partner when he or she is irritable or in a bad mood.

You undermine acceptance when:

  • You hold grievances and grudges against your partner.
  • You tell your partner that you wish he or she were different.
  • You critique your partner’s appearance, personality, beliefs, and values.

Self-Disclosure An essential part of maintaining intimacy is creating a climate of security and trust within your relationship. This allows both partners to feel that they can disclose fears and feelings without repercussion. To foster self-disclosure, each person must behave in ways that are predictable, trustworthy, and ethical. Over time, consistency in behavior evokes mutual respect and the perception that self-disclosure will be welcomed. You use self-disclosure when:

  • You tell your partner about your fears and vulnerabilities.
  • You share your feelings and emotions with your partner.
  • You encourage your partner to disclose his or her thoughts and feelings, and offer empathy in return.

You undermine self-disclosure when:

  • You disparage your partner’s perspective.
  • You routinely keep important information hidden from your partner.
  • You betray your partner by sharing confidential information about him or her with others.

When romantic partners take an interest in each other’s favorite activities, they support each other and deepen the level of intimacy in their relationship. How do you support your partner when you’re in a romantic relationship?

Table 9.2: table 9.2 Romantic Relationship Maintenance Strategies
Maintenance Strategy Suggested Actions
Positivity Be cheerful and optimistic in your communication.
Assurances Remind your partner of your devotion.
Sharing Tasks Help out with daily responsibilities.
Acceptance Be supportive and forgiving.
Self-Disclosure Share your thoughts, feelings, and fears.
Relationship Talks Make time to discuss your relationship and really listen.
Social Networks Involve yourself with your partner’s friends and family.

Relationship Talks Romantic maintenance includes occasionally sitting down and discussing the status of your relationship, how you each feel about it, and where you both see it going. Relationship talks allow you to gauge how invested you each are and whether you agree on future plans and goals. They also provide a convenient forum for expressing and resolving concerns, forestalling future conflict. You encourage relationship talks when you:

  • Set aside time in your schedule to chat about your relationship.
  • Openly and respectfully share your relationship concerns with your partner.
  • Encourage your partner to share his or her feelings about the relationship with you.

You undermine relationship talks when you:

  • React defensively and egocentrically whenever your partner shares relationship concerns.
  • Avoid or refuse to have relationship talks with your partner.
  • Actively ridicule the need to discuss the relationship.

Social Networks Romances are more likely to survive if important members of the couples’ social networks approve of the relationship (Felmlee, 2001). For example, communication scholars Malcolm Parks and Mara Adelman (1983)measured how much support romantically involved individuals received from their partners’ friends and family, what percentage of their partners’ network they had met, and how often they communicated with these people. Using these factors and others, Parks and Adelman were able to predict with 88 percent accuracy which relationships would survive. What were the strongest determinants of whether couples stayed together? Support from family and friends and regular communication with one’s partner.

Fostering healthy relationships with surrounding friends and family appears especially crucial for those involved in interethnic relationships (Baptiste, 1990), and for gay and lesbian couples. Approximately 67 percent of intereth-nic marriages end in divorce, compared with an overall divorce rate of 40 percent, the largest reasons being lack of network support and cultural disapproval (Gaines & Agnew, 2003). Gay and lesbian couples report having suppor-tive environments such as churches or clubs and being treated “the same” as straight couples by their friends and family as especially important for their relationship stability and satisfaction (Haas & Stafford, 1998). You foster supportive social networks when you:

  • Tell your partner how much you like his or her friends and family.
  • Invite your partner’s friends or family members to share activities with the two of you.
  • Willingly turn to family members of both partners for help and advice when needed.

You undermine social networks when you:

  • Make critical and disparaging remarks regarding your partner’s friends and family.
  • Intentionally avoid encounters with your partner’s friends and family.
  • Demand that your partner choose between spending time with you and spending it with friends and family.

9.5.2 MAINTAINING ROMANCE ACROSS DISTANCE

Printed Page

MAINTAINING ROMANCE ACROSS DISTANCE

A common challenge to maintaining romantic relationships is geographic separation. At any one time, nearly half of college students are involved in romances separated by geography, and 75 percent will experience a long-distance dating relationship while in school (Aylor, 2003).

People often think that long-distance relationships are doomed to fail. However, long-distance romantic relationships have actually been found to be more satisfying and stable than those that are geographically close (Stafford, 2010). On measures of love, positivity, agreement, and overall communication quality, geographically distant couples score higher than local partners (Stafford & Merolla, 2007). Why? Stafford (2010) offers several reasons. Couples separated by distance often constrain their communication to only that which is positive, steadfastly shying away from troublesome topics that provoke conflict. Geographically distant couples also idealize their partners more. When you’re not around your partner every day, it’s easy to cherish misconceptions about his or her “perfection.” And visits between partners are typically occasional, brief in duration, and passionate. This amplifies the feeling that all their time together is intense and positive—an unsustainable illusion when people see each other regularly (Sahlstein, 2004).

Technology and Maintenance

  • Send your partner a text or e-mail that has no purpose other than to compliment him or her.
  • Post a message on your partner’s Web page, saying how excited you are about seeing her or him soon.
  • During a high-stress day for your partner, send an e-mail or text that says, “Just thinking of you.”
  • Recall a friend or family member whom your partner has been concerned about, and send an e-mail or text to your partner inquiring about how the person is doing.
  • Think of a task your partner has been wanting you to do, complete it, then text-message your partner to let her or him know you took care of it.

The most difficult maintenance challenge long-distance couples face is not the separation, but their eventual reunion. Almost all couples separated by distance express a desire to be near each other again, and they anticipate that being together will result in dramatic relationship improvements (Stafford, Merolla, & Castle, 2006). But the reality is more complicated. Couples who are reunited following separation are twice as likely to break up, compared with those who remain long-distance (Stafford & Merolla, 2007). Rather than being “all bliss, all the time,” living locally presents a blend of rewards and costs (Stafford, Merolla, & Castle, 2006). On the plus side, couples get to spend more time together, savoring each other’s company and sharing in the “little” things they missed when apart. On the minus side, partners’ cherished illusions about each other are shattered. Reunited couples report realizing for the first time their lovers’ negative characteristics, such as laziness, sloppiness, immaturity, or failure to invest effort in the relationship. They describe a substantial reduction in autonomy, experienced as a loss of time and space for themselves, loss of interaction with friends and family, and irritation with having to be accountable to partners. Reunited couples also report increased conflict, as formerly “taboo” topics become regularly discussed and fought over.

In the movie Like Crazy, college students Jacob and Anna fall in love during their senior year. When immigration laws force Anna to return to her native England, they begin a long-distance relationship. Despite texting, e-mails, and phone calls, the relationship becomes strained. If you have ever been in a long-distance relationship, how did you use communication to ease the distance?

Despite the challenges, you can have a happy and enduring long-distance romance. Here are some suggestions to help maintain such relationships:

  1. While separated, use technology to regularly communicate with your partner. Using text, e-mail, IM, Facebook, and Skype has a significant impact on improving relationship health (Dainton & Aylor, 2002a).
  2. When communicating with your distant partner, follow the maintenance tactics discussed in the previous section. In particular, focus on the two most important for maintaining satisfaction—positivity and assurances—and keep your interactions upbeat, positive, and filled with discussions of shared future plans and dreams.
  3. When you permanently reunite, expect a significant period of adjustment, one that is marked by tension (as you rebalance autonomy versus connection), disappointment (as idealistic illusions of your partner are replaced by the reality), and conflict (as you begin talking about topics you shelved during the separation). Avoid expecting everything to be perfect, and use the strategies you’ve learned in our discussion of conflict (Chapter 8) to manage difficult dilemmas when they arise.

9.5.3 DECIDING WHETHER TO MAINTAIN

Printed Page 306

DECIDING WHETHER TO MAINTAIN

Of course, not all romantic involvements are worth the effort to maintain. In some cases, it may be healthier to end the involvement rather than communicate in ways designed to foster its survival. The decision of whether to maintain or dissolve a struggling romance is one of the most challenging interpersonal decisions we face.

As one way to work through this decision, familiarize yourself with the characteristics of couples whose relationships survive. Four factors—each of which we’ve discussed—appear to be most important in predicting survival of a romantic relationship. First is the degree to which the partners consider themselves “in love.” Couples are more likely to stay together if they think of themselves as in love, are considering marriage or a lifelong commitment, rate their relationship as high in closeness, or date each other exclusively (Hill et al., 1976). Second is equity. Romantic relationships are happiest and most stable when the balance of giving and getting is equal for both partners (Hatfield et al., 1985). Third is similarity. Highly similar couples are more likely to stay together than couples who are dissimilar (Hill et al., 1976). Fourth is network support. A romance is more likely to endure when the couple’s social networks approve of the relationship (Felmlee, 2001; Parks & Adelman, 1983). To determine how well your relationship meets these criteria, ask yourself the following questions:

  1. Are you still in love with your partner?
  2. Is your relationship equitable?
  3. Do you and your partner share values and personality traits?
  4. Do your family and friends support your relationship?

If you answer “yes” to these questions, your relationship may warrant investment in maintenance. But remember: deciding whether to maintain a struggling relationship or to let it go is a choice only you can make. Friends, family members, pop-culture relationship experts, and even textbooks can’t tell you when to keep or when to leave a romantic involvement. That being said, romantic relationships are in many ways practical endeavors. Your decision to maintain or end a struggling romance should be based on a long-term forecast of your relationship. Stacking your relationship up against those four criteria can give you insight into whether your relationship has a solid foundation on which to invest further effort.

9.6 The Dark Side of Romantic Relationships

Printed Page 306

The Dark Side of Romantic Relationships

Addressing issues related to romance

Think about the Robert Falcon Scott story that began this chapter. His letter to Kathleen reminds us of the high ideals that love can inspire: compassion, caring, generosity, selflessness. But romance has a dark side as well. As scholar Robin Kowalski pointedly puts it, “people in romantic relationships do a lot of mean and nasty things to one another” (Kowalski et al., 2003, p. 472). And when they do, the result is often unparalleled pain and despair. In this section, we explore some of the most troubling issues related to romance—betrayal, jealousy, intrusion, and violence—and discuss communication strategies for addressing them.

9.6.1 BETRAYAL

Printed Page

BETRAYAL

Betrayal is one of the most devastating experiences that can occur in a close involvement (Haden & Hojjat, 2006). Romantic betrayal is defined as an act that goes against expectations of a romantic relationship and, as a result, causes pain to a partner (Jones, Moore, Scratter, & Negel, 2001). Common examples include sexual infidelity (engaging in sexual activity with someone else), emotional infidelity (developing a strong romantic attachment to someone else), deception (intentional manipulation of information), and disloyalty (hurting your partner to benefit yourself). But any behavior that violates norms of loyalty and trustworthiness can be considered betrayal.

In romantic relationships, partners inevitably behave in ways that defy one another’s expectations and cause disappointment. But betrayal is different. Betrayal is intentional. As a result, it typically evokes two intense, negative reactions in betrayed partners. The first is an overwhelming sense of relational devaluation—the realization that our partners do not love and respect us as much as we thought they did (Leary, 2001). This sense of devaluation, which is triggered most by sexual infidelity and deception, is difficult to overcome and often leads us to abandon our relationships. The second is a profound sense of loss. In the wake of betrayal, we may feel that all the time and effort we invested in our partner and the relationship were a waste, and that intimacy, commitment, and trust have been permanently destroyed (Haden & Hojjat, 2006). Consequently, when you are betrayed by a lover, expect to feel grief over the loss of the relationship that was. (See Chapter 4 for more on grief management.)

Sexual Infidelity The most destructive form of romantic betrayal is sexual infidelity. A partner who cheats on you has broken a fundamental sacrament—the spoken or unspoken pledge to remain faithful. Not surprisingly, many people react to infidelity with a strong urge to leave their partner. One study found that more than 20 percent of American women and men would consider divorce if a spouse passionately kissed someone else, more than 30 percent would consider divorce if their spouse had a romantic date with another person, and more than 60 percent would consider divorce if their spouse had a serious (sexual) affair (Shackelford & Buss, 1997). Whether or not a sexual dalliance is planned matters little: cheaters’ original intentions have no impact on subsequent feelings of blame by their partners (Mongeau, Hale, & Alles, 1994).

Although both men and women view infidelity as treasonous, their perceptions diverge when they’re asked to compare sexual with emotional cheating. Infidelity researcher David Buss presented study respondents with the following dilemma (Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992). Imagine you discover that your partner has become interested in someone else. What would distress you more: your partner forming a deep emotional attachment to that person, or your partner enjoying passionate sex with that person? Sixty percent of men said that sex would upset them more, but 83 percent of women said they’d find the emotional attachment more distressing. The same pattern of results was found in samples of men and women from Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, Korea, and Japan (Buss et al., 1999; Buunk, Angleitner, Oubaid, & Buss, 1996; Wiederman & Kendall, 1999).

Question

H0LRZ+oKF6M+03rkASj8mRI7MLUiLR39nfNvJYXx7r75cfrO2OAxhVgh21tkPWBg321M8uGxg1qms4sv3sJgwJ4gLIbHQB7zIjyZeN9MUQHJ6O609Ty3hYKqnkMbK/VDvaIdM/eBJtSRLHbJMQB7cg0IrU8mCv8PBeHqCdF4AQJlgciV36lnTj2lHY1k4RHwUXDkbA8eSzo0y2duvDgwJmMYW3rtCl6s9TXpevL2/9mIcQ6cp748ZuOT/athIToB8oMrHScMlJHGZLZoKpqHAeJiLKZTJit8JiQaszXbs1/LXuCGMVI871mehrrDsyNwYVbG3zfWYNEKneFlYXjq1HijgO0Z6RYyd83s57cVRmzpN1Iw/tQmJwdOwfp4Y091sgk7AS0sBs7SI/Eq

Deception As defined in Chapter 6, deception involves misleading your partner by intentionally withholding information, presenting false information, or making your message unnecessarily irrelevant or ambiguous (McCornack, 1997). Despite media images depicting romantic partners catching each other in lies, most people discover lies indirectly through hearing about them from a third party or stumbling across damning evidence, such as a text message or e-mail (Park, Levine, McCornack, Morrison, & Ferrara, 2002). When partners discover a lie, the experience typically is emotionally intense and negative. One study looking at the emotional and relational aftermath of lies found that 16 percent of people who recalled having discovered a lie reported breaking up because of it (McCornack & Levine, 1990). That decision was usually determined by the severity of the lie. If the lie was “important” (for example, lying about relationship feelings), people were more likely to end their involvement (McCornack & Levine, 1990).

Dealing with Betrayal The truth about romantic betrayal is that no simple solution or skill set will remedy the sense of devaluation and loss that results. The strongest predictor of what happens afterward is the seriousness of the betrayal. If a betrayal permanently stains your perception of your partner, the relationship probably won’t survive. If you believe you can eventually overcome the pain, then your relationship has a chance.

People struggling to cope with betrayal commonly adopt one of four general communication approaches (Rusbult, 1987). You can actively confront the betrayal, seeking to understand the conditions that led to it and jointly working with your partner to change those causes. You can quietly stand by your partner, choosing to forgive and forget and trusting that, in time, your love will heal the pain you feel. You can stand by your partner but simmer with pain and rage, venting your anger by constantly reminding the person of his or her transgression or withholding sex or other rewards. Or you can simply end the relationship, believing that the emotional costs associated with the betrayal are too substantial to surmount.

Regardless of which approach you take, the hard truth is that, after a betrayal, your relationship will never be the same, and it will never be “better” than it previously was in terms of trust, intimacy, and satisfaction. You certainly can rebuild a strong and enduring relationship, but it will always be scarred. As my therapist friend Joe says, “You will never get over it. You just learn to live with it.”

9.6.2 self-QUIZ: How Often Do You Betray Romantic Partners?

How Often Do You Betray Romantic Partners?

Read each statement and rate how often you have done the activity: 1 (never), 2 (once), 3 (a few times), 4 (several times), 5 (many times). Get your score by adding up your answers.

Snubbing a romantic partner when you are with a group you want to impress

Gossiping about a romantic partner behind his or her back

Making a promise to a romantic partner with no intention of keeping it

Telling others information given to you in confidence by a romantic partner

Lying to a romantic partner

Failing to stand up for a romantic partner when he or she is being criticized or belittled by others





Note: Information in this Self-Quiz adapted for romantic relationships is from Jones and Burdette (1994).

Scoring: 6–14 = You’re an infrequent betrayer; 15–23 = You’re a moderate betrayer; 24–30 = You’re a frequent betrayer.

9.6.3 focus on CULTURE: Infidelity Internationally

Infidelity Internationally

In Japan it’s called “going off the path” and in Israel it’s “eating to the side” (Druckerman, 2007). But regardless of differences in lingo, the suffering that ensues from sexual betrayal is similar around the globe.

Wall Street Journal reporter Pamela Druckerman interviewed people in 10 different countries, gauging their infidelity attitudes and behaviors. She discovered vast cultural differences, and some similarities. For example, in Japan, intricate rules of discretion guide how one cheats, whereas in Finland, people are more open in discussing and engaging in adultery. In Russia, Druckerman was struck by its sheer prevalence. One marital therapist told her, “Affairs should be obligatory, because they make for stronger marriages,” and an issue of Russian Cosmopolitan provided instructional tips to women for how to hide their betrayals from their partners.

Druckerman’s observations mirror scientific research. A study of nonmarital sex involving 24 nations and 33,000 respondents found that the top three countries in infidelity acceptance were Russia, Bulgaria, and the Czech Republic (Widmer, Treas, & Newcomb, 1998). What countries were the most infidelity intolerant? The Philippines, Ireland, and the United States.

Despite cultural differences, however, Druckerman notes at least three betrayal universals (as cited in Corner, 2007). First, across cultures, people who cheat prefer partners who also are seriously involved, making the risks “evenly shared.” Second, cheaters typically describe themselves as “not the cheating type.” Third, regardless of cultural attitudes or prevalence, sexual betrayal almost always causes intense emotional pain and relationship distress. When asked the lessons learned from herstudy, Druckerman described, “I still very much believe in monogamy as the ideal, but I have become morerealistic—or fatalistic—about it. I now think it could easily happen to me. And, if it does, I won’t automatically assume my relationship is over.”

discussion questions

Question

G6iqOs+o2xdAn2kYeGCgHV/Cv/rAEZ8Eu9VC5VS3AEMxS3ibOD/1Y7Dxrv5OoQCaA4gQQLohb9P8EUOcAklR+a2WCpvEOAeJ88APj5fNuJUjqNjfxMWCCrX+vFM9wkPFuNqzWSQQK+Chh3oYNIQINU5xhLqtlXoTBs5suSQU0qZ7EfmJ5dpX6aWBWZI4w4NajUmeEzQhhHfANLYRswbRnA==

Question

F2tKx9iWg+HwviUUDlULvgv0HnDfLakQKanPQd1P6DYZfUCC97ejw7GMHRl+PN3xH4eSVipB28B43tBQmntgC79AorOayjmncgXDxkENWOo+wqDuhLU3CfMfOF3Yt/LUyMhDVjsdG6Htae6lYCB0/lZT0n0wIENCJNuWUN3CxYJBfkPwOBu0j9ax91NSyUjNkRRruk6QgF2XMjx4CRNR6UZ0fG3V6i7eDVa9uWrAKstzh/PFPrSQieqqmlDB2RsM9ka0cYJQRJgb88D+

9.6.4 RELATIONAL INTRUSION

Printed Page 311

RELATIONAL INTRUSION

Sometimes romantic partners try to control you or behave in ways that invade your privacy. In mild cases, they might check up on you—talking with your friends or family to verify your whereabouts. In more extreme instances, they might search your phone or read your e-mail without permission. Such behaviors are known as relational intrusion: the violation of one’s independence and privacy by a person who desires an intimate relationship (Cupach & Spitzberg, 1998). Intrusion happens in all cultures, is equally likely to be perpetrated by men or women, and occurs both in current relationships and in those in which the partners have broken up (Lavy, Mikulincer, Shaver, & Gillath, 2009).

Within intact romances, two forms of intrusion are common (Lavy et al., 2009). The first is monitoring and controlling. A partner may text you constantly to ensure that you are always accounted for and instruct you to be home by a certain time. He or she may follow you or hire a private investigator to conduct surveillance. People who have experienced this behavior describe it as: “My partner wants to know where I am and what I’m doing all the time,” and “My partner does not let me meet my family or friends without him being present” (Lavy et al., 2009, p. 995). The second form of intrusion is invasion of privacy. This includes nosing or snooping through your belongings, computer, and phone and asking overly personal and suspicious questions designed to “interrogate” you.

For romances that have ended, intrusion is symptomatic of a person’s inability to let go. Of people who report difficulty in dealing with breakups, 79 percent admit behaving intrusively (Dutton & Winstead, 2006). The most common forms of postrelationship intrusion are leaving gifts and messages for the ex-partner, expressing exaggerated levels of affection (such as public serenades or posting love poems), physically following the ex-partner around, and showing up uninvited at the ex-partner’s home or work. If done repeatedly, these latter behaviors may turn into stalking, which is a criminal offense.

For its recipients, relational intrusion is decidedly negative and threatening. If the relationship is intact, intrusion generates strong negative impressions, uncertainty, and relational turmoil (Lavy et al., 2009). As one victim describes, “He was acting so unfair; I no longer was sure about our relationship” (Lavy et al., 2009, p. 999). For people dealing with postrelationship intrusion, anger and fear are common responses, and the intrusion may spark a desire to seek revenge against or act violently toward the intruding partner (Lavy et al., 2009).

What makes intrusion tricky, however, is that perpetrators typically perceive their behaviors positively, as reflecting love, loyalty, or just the desire to stay in touch (Cupach & Spitzberg, 2004). Consequently, they tend to minimize or deny the harms created by their undesirable actions.

How can you best deal with intrusion? Realize first that intrusion is absolutely unacceptable and unethical. No one has the right to impose themselves on another in an unwanted fashion. If you’re on the receiving end of intrusion, talk with your partner or ex directly about his or her behavior, and firmly express your discontent and discomfort. Use “I” language, avoid “you” language, and make it clear that your privacy is being violated and that the intrusive behavior is unacceptable (“I feel really uncomfortable receiving this gift” or “I am really upset by this, and I feel that my privacy is being invaded”). Importantly, keep your language respectful and polite. Avoid lashing out verbally, especially if you’re angry, as it will only escalate the situation. If the person’s behavior persists, contact local authorities to see what can be done. If you find yourself engaging in intrusive behaviors, desist immediately. The fact that you view your actions as well-intentioned is irrelevant. If you are making a partner or ex feel uncomfortable, you are behaving unethically. If you don’t know how to stop, seek counseling from a licensed therapist.

9.6.5 DATING VIOLENCE

Printed Page 313

DATING VIOLENCE

Scott and I became friends in grad school, when we both served as instructors with a campus karate club. Scott was originally from Southern California, where he was a kickboxing champion.7 He was 6 foot 3, all muscle, and had a very long reach—something I learned the hard way when he caught me with an unexpected back-fist on my nose while sparring!

7Although the facts of this story are true, the names and demographic information have been changed to protect the identities of the parties involved.

Soon after our friendship began, Scott met Pam, and the two fell for each other hard and fast. But within a few weeks, Scott confessed to me several concerns: Pam was extremely jealous and constantly accused him of cheating. She called him names, swore at him, and ridiculed his sexual performance. She demanded that he no longer go out with his friends, and when he refused, she threatened to leave him. Visiting him one afternoon, I was stunned to see the glass frame of his black-belt certificate shattered. “Yeah,” he admitted, “Pam threw it at me the other night.” When she learned that Scott was confiding in me, Pam told him a series of lies to alienate him from me: I had “stolen money from him,” I had “hit on her,” I was “gay and wanted him to myself” (never mind that the last two were contradictory). But Scott stayed with her until she put him in the hospital with a broken nose and third-degree burns across his face. She had demanded that he quit karate, and when he refused, she had hit him in the face with a heated clothes iron. When I asked why he didn’t fight back, or at least defend himself (given his abundant skills), he looked at me in disbelief. “I can’t hit a girl, man. I’m not that kind of guy!”

Dating violence affects millions of people, and as Scott’s story shows, despite common beliefs, dating violence knows no demographic boundaries: men and women of all ages, sexual orientations, social classes, ethnicities, and religions experience violence in romantic relationships. According to the Centers for Disease Control, by the time students graduate from high school, 10 percent have experienced dating violence, defined as “being hit, slapped, or physically hurt, on purpose, by a boyfriend or girlfriend in the preceding 12 months” (Centers for Disease Control, 2008). Twenty-one percent of college students report having experienced such violence (National Center for Victims of Crimes, 2008). In addition to physical injuries (and in extreme cases, death), victims of dating violence are more likely than others to suffer from substance abuse, low self-esteem, suicidal thoughts, and eating disorders (Ackard & Neumark-Sztainer, 2002).

It’s easy, if you haven’t experienced a violent relationship, to think, “Well, the person should have seen it coming!” But this is false, for at least two reasons (Eisikovits & Buchbinder, 2000). First, violence doesn’t happen all at once—it typically escalates slowly over time. Also, it often doesn’t evolve into full-blown physical violence until relationships are firmly established—making victims all that much more vulnerable, because of their love and commitment. Second, potential abusers often mask their jealousy, violent anger, and excessive need for control in the early stages of a relationship, making it difficult to discern “warning signs” (see Table 9.3 for a detailed list). In Scott’s case, both of these reasons played a role in making him vulnerable. Pam seemed perfectly “normal” in the first few weeks of their relationship. She was funny, attractive, smart, and outgoing. By the time the first incidents occurred, he was already in love. And the destructiveness of her behaviors escalated slowly—starting with minor jealous tantrums, and only evolving into violence after many months. As a consequence, Scott didn’t perceive Pam’s abusiveness as particularly “severe,” until she put him in the hospital.

What should you do if you find yourself in a relationship with a violent partner? First and foremost, let go of the belief that you can “heal” your partner through love, or “save” him or her by providing emotional support. Relationship repair strategies will not prevent or cure dating violence. Your only option is to extricate yourself from the relationship. As you move toward ending the involvement, keep in mind that the most dangerous time comes immediately after you end the relationship, when the abuser is most angry. So, make sure you cut all ties to the abuser, change your phone numbers, and have ready a safety plan: a road map of action for departing the relationship that provides you with the utmost protection. For information on how to develop such a plan, or for help in dealing with an abusive relationship, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline, 1-800-799-SAFE, or visit www.thehotline.org.

Table 9.3: table 9.3 Five Common Warning Signs of an Abusive Partner
An abusive partner will . . .
(1) isolate you from others.
Examples: restricting your contact with friends and family, showing extreme paranoid jealousy regarding perceived romantic rivals, or telling you lies about friends and family
(2) use power to control you.
Examples: insisting they make all decisions about leisure activities, including sex; exploding into anger when you “disobey” them; demanding knowledge of your whereabouts; or displaying violence such as throwing or breaking objects
(3) frequently threaten you in various ways.
Examples: threatening to leave you or hurt themselves if you leave, threatening violence against past lovers or perceived romantic rivals, threatening to lie about you to others or file false charges against you, or threatening violence
(4) use emotionally abusive language.
Examples: criticizing your weight, appearance, intelligence, career, or sexual skill; calling you names; swearing at you; or ridiculing your pain when they’ve hurt you
(5) shift the blame to you.
Examples: blaming you for their jealousy, violence, and destructiveness, or tricking you into behaving badly so they can exploit your guilt
Source: Adapted from “Indicators of Abusive Relationships,” An Abuse, Rape, Domestic Violence, Aid and Resource Collection (AARDVARC). Retrieved from http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/symptoms.shtml.

9.7 making relationship choices: Dealing with a Jealous Partner

Printed Page 314

making relationship choices: Dealing with a Jealous Partner

BACKGROUND

All romantic relationships face challenges. But when a partner whom you love, and who is adored by friends and family, begins behaving erratically because of jealousy, your communication skills and relationship decision making are put to the test. To consider how you might deal with such a dilemma, read the case study and work through the five steps under Your Turn.

CASE STUDY

Your relationship with Taegan is the most passionate you’ve yet experienced, and you consider yourself “head-over-heels in love.” Taegan is extremely attractive, and you two share a powerful sexual connection. But sense of humor, intelligence, and charisma are Taegan’s most alluring qualities. Your family adores Taegan, and your best friend thinks Taegan is “a hottie.” Although your feelings developed quickly, you were surprised by how rapidly Taegan invested: within days of first meeting you, Taegan was insisting, “You and I are meant to be!”

Last week, however, a troubling incident occurred at a party. Taegan and you were having a great time until you decided to spend a few minutes catching up with your friend Chris, whom you hadn’t seen in a while. Although you’re not romantically interested in Chris, Chris is very attractive. Seeing you hug Chris good-bye, Taegan blew up, “Don’t think I don’t know what’s going on here!” It was so weird and unexpected that you actually thought Taegan was joking. But when you downplayed it with a teasing response, Taegan hissed, “Do you think I’m a fool? I know you’re cheating on me!” and stormed off. You were incredibly embarrassed, and apologized to Chris before leaving to find Taegan. Taegan refused to return your text messages for several hours, but when you two finally talked, Taegan offered a tearful apology: “I’m so sorry—it’s just that I love you so much; seeing you with Chris made me crazy.”

Today you get a call from Chris, asking, “Why did you de-friend me on Facebook?” “I didn’t,” you respond. “Well, you better check your account, because I’ve been removed from your friends list!” Puzzled, you sign on, only to find that several of your friends have been deleted, photos of you with your ex have been removed from your albums, and wall postings from Chris and others have been purged. Suspecting Taegan, you call, and Taegan says, “Yes, I changed your page. I watched you type in your password the other day, and used it to gain access. You know what a jealous person I am! You shouldn’t have had those photos and messages on your page in the first place!”

YOUR TURN

While working through the following steps, keep in mind the concepts, skills, and insights you’ve learned so far in this book, especially in this chapter. Also remember: there are no right answers, so think hard about the choice you make! (P.S. Need help? Review the Helpful Concepts listed below.)

  • step 1

Question

Ge+InpZKaWoxlqwnacFHiHxWmkjjgw20cAlxDR796YcG9+lk4zVrOh3SZ1IY599P6GwPQJ/6NEMLFfzmovyE9xGlCn5i1jmrme8CXzEiRaVKr85gCitBfp5nvbE1TZrWv9qvfmlO67KzzMG9oV/BKjIGil6XoKyChc+tWzzsxllnQfulMwT6g9LYAOcTQ5Pw0zSAzuVRac2n2lIQ4Z4hFlcP/n/2t+27dBEpzOz42cNQXYzWZ5NyxDf2qteiWSHq
  • step 2

Question

YS+kwa7bwCD3KyPbC/pMvraUKzo+gvJ8Kpog/m0vhVy9f/gqyuEpusFNi0CBaSprx/ZMS29QlkyiDpYG7lazssuCOgr3MC1bTzLGnv/QYS7keYjGUF8sC2toIUcmD0vmrv/rAS5gZs8YvPMZbc+WPp2VDT1uk4tW/WrOCnwrEHvCsDpqUnGHJSdaQhs1l7NFQEmgsk0N5FdOEO/lBdF3e8Nm/UER260u5qGVlkFcI82wSlb15ErPuVc9sjHh3WJNcLioQVRc48c696iX3lRV0jXvm2tIChBm96/f94LUY3m26uE4S+WZz9OQgg4AG28d5AdtasB9XZEIQnvTP1GoSyiDpgNuD8K7kHVA9mLT2zVkea0h2LtvuaVpYXjdOL8G
  • step 3

Question

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
  • step 4

Question

fAOf18FWUvoeyEa4r/YQlM05HvzT7Oiok5D+2VDG3BlVLUJ4NsUJTYzbd2b86d216sC4KRhCdPWPSR1/QU9e/cFBND2J+qbXDI57CABwjTzthwhaKMmtzIiCLpKkqUqubQKvD6HeWWkNXAgO/YUS0hh4ng2sxIC9aENnxHXC24Q7dQeTYhkortzFcOW9Um9L980Eiwnx0hCxWlGOb4pz6SfkAbv3x+hnjn9NiHs6eQ6fPD1RP+alIeoYAUf//K4ozoiGIpnS7NNBlOk6deC5XfszGeZYdckk+9fbew==
  • step 5

Question

lyKTjA+xO54gYQEyTKQV76Mf8q7aD6y1/qiZcpy0Tu8tsTco/tlUHT8eyQ4HfToqz2w5y6BlCa0TjuGjYfqPq/eK6SJ+b2UGhEn364Xu74+9h4npeyx8B9z7D44KEvRypV1ZZa8Jnm40/IMfJkGbMrGZZIS/irRl8gbeZCvRBHcFMkoGxw55n9Omyhn7eYL5hpB4Rqdr0yklNp68mNZ3XXiBwGU=

HELPFUL CONCEPTS

282–284 Deciding whether to maintain or end,

306 Jealousy,

310–311 Relational intrusion,

311–312 Dating violence,

313, 316

9.8 The Hard Work of Successful Love

Printed Page 313

The Hard Work of Successful Love

Love is not singular, but plural

Romantic relationships are most satisfying and stand a greater chance of surviving when you and your partner view your bond without illusions and embellishments. When you do this, when you look love square in the face, you’ll find that it isn’t one simple, clear, obvious thing. Instead, love is complex. Love is triumph and heartache. It is passion and peaceful companionship. It is joy and grief. And keeping love alive is hard work. Some days, your love for your partner will take your breath away. On others, everything they do will annoy you. Most days, it will fall somewhere in between.

The positive communication decisions you make with your partner have a profound effect on the overall happiness and health of your bond. While successful, satisfying love is something you must consciously work at, it is also one of life’s greatest joys.

Romantic relationships endure because partners choose to communicate in ways that maintain their relationship. It’s the everyday communication and effort that you and your partner invest that will most enable you to build a satisfying, intimate bond—and sustain it if that’s what you choose to do. Enduring couples succeed at love by working at it day in and day out—helping each other with studying or the dishes, cheering each other with kind words following disheartening days at school or work, nursing each other through illness, and even holding each other close as one partner lets go of life.

9.9 POSTSCRIPT

POSTSCRIPT

We began this chapter with the dying words of a doomed explorer. As Sir Robert Falcon Scott huddled inside his tent, awaiting death, he penned a last letter to his “widow.” Of all the possible things he could say during those final moments—the limitless selection of topics and words available to sum up his life—what did he choose to focus upon? Love.

When the impassable storms of your life rage around you, what shelter does love provide? If you had but a few hours to live, and were going to craft a final statement, what view of love would you elaborate?

Scott’s letter reminds us that love is not one thing, but many. To experience romantic love means to feel passion, practicality, commitment, respect, sentiment, and selflessness—all at the same time. Although no two people ever experience love in exactly the same way, we do share this in common: romantic love may not be essential to life, but it may be essential to joy.

9.10 chapter review

Printed Page 318

key terms

liking, 282

loving, 282

passionate love, 282

companionate love, 284

romantic relationship, 285

commitment, 287

relational dialectics, 287

mere exposure effect, 289

beautiful-is-good effect, 290

matching, 290

birds-of-a-feather effect, 290

reciprocal liking, 291

social exchange theory, 291

equity, 291

initiating, 294

experimenting, 294

intensifying, 294

integrating, 295

bonding, 295

differentiating, 297

circumscribing, 297

stagnating, 297

avoiding, 297

terminating, 297

relational maintenance, 300

romantic betrayal, 307

jealousy, 310

wedging, 311

relational intrusion, 311

You can watch brief, illustrative videos of these terms and test your understanding of the concepts online in VideoCentral: Interpersonal Communication at bedfordstmartins.com/reflectrelate.

key concepts

Defining Romantic Relationships

  • Although loving is sometimes thought of as an intense form of liking, the two are very different. You can like someone without loving him or her, and love someone without liking the person.
  • When people consider what it means to be in love, they frequently think of passionate love. Passionate love is experienced across cultures and ages and is distinct from companionate love, although many romantic relationships evolve from passionate to companionate love.
  • Between the poles of passionate and companionate love are six different love types, although there is not one “right” type of romantic love.
  • When both partners in a relationship perceive it as romantic, a romantic relationship exists. This relationship often involves commitment and relational dialectics.

Romantic Attraction

  • Attraction is strongly influenced by proximity: how frequently you see others and interact with them. This mere exposure effect is one reason for the comparative rarity of interethnic romances.
  • Most of us find physically appealing people more attractive than physically unappealing people, and we often attribute a host of positive characteristics to them—the beautiful-is-good effect. At the same time, we tend to engage in matching when it comes to forming long-term romantic relationships.
  • Perceived similarity (in interests, beliefs, and values) plays a powerful role in driving attraction, and in general, the birds-of-a-feather effect holds true.
  • We tend to be attracted to those we know are attracted to us, a concept known as reciprocal liking.
  • Social exchange theory suggests that attraction to others is driven in part by the resources they can offer you. People perceived as offering many benefits and few costs are seen as desirable. For relationships to survive, however, equity must exist in the balance of rewards and costs exchanged between partners.

Relationship Development and Deterioration

  • Romantic relationships develop in stages. When coming together, couples commonly go through initiating and experimenting.
  • Some couples move beyond experimenting to intensifying and integrating. Few relationships progress to bonding.
  • As relationships come apart, differentiating leads partners to believe that their differences are insurmountable. If they fail to constructively deal with differentiating, they may begin circumscribing or even stagnating.
  • Many relationships end by avoiding, although couples who feel they need more “closure” may conduct a terminating discussion.

Maintaining Romantic Relationships

  • Couples who endure typically use several relational maintenance tactics. The most common strategies include treating each other in a positive fashion, providing frequent assurances regarding relationship commitment, and sharing tasks.
  • Long-distance romantic relationships can create unique maintenance issues. To help maintain long-distance relationships, use multiple forms of technology to communicate, follow the same maintenance tactics as couples who are geographically close, and allow for an adjustment period when both partners are permanently reunited.

The Dark Side of Romantic Relationships

  • Perhaps the gravest threat to relationship survival is romantic betrayal. Two of the most damaging forms of betrayal are sexual infidelity and deception. These cause profound damage because they create a sense of relational devaluation and a sense of loss.
  • Some relationships are challenged by jealousy. Online, jealousy can be caused by wedging, when someone deliberately interferes in a relationship.
  • If a romantic partner uses behaviors that try to control you or invade your privacy, it is called relational intrusion. This can create turmoil ifthe relationship is still intact and anger or fear if the relationship is over.
  • Despite common beliefs, dating violence affects both men and women of all ages and ethnicities. If you experience such abuse, reach out for professional help.

key skills

  • Want to know which type of love characterizes your relationship? Check out the Self-Quiz on page 285.
  • Why does similarity generate attraction? Discover the answer on pages 290–291.
  • Curious about how your online profile will influence an offline relationship? Learn about the tensions technology can create on pages 292–293.
  • How can you communicate in ways that will overcome differentiating? Find the answers on pages 296–297; then complete the Skills Practice on page 297.
  • What can you do to best deal with a terminating encounter? Review the material on pages 297–298.
  • Trying to maintain your romance? Review the tips for using positivity, assurances, sharing tasks, acceptance, self-disclosure, relationship talks, and social networks described on pages 300–304. Then do the Skills Practice on page 305 to discover how to integrate these strategies into your online communication with your partner.
  • Dealing with a long-distance relationship? See the suggestions for maintenance on pages 304–305.
  • Trying to figure out whether your relationship has a bright enough future to invest further effort in maintaining it? Answer the four questions on page 306 to help you decide.
  • Wondering if you tend to betray your romantic partners? Take the Self-Quiz on page 307 to determine your betrayal potential.
  • Need to control or reduce your jealousy? Check out the strategies on pages 310–311; then complete the Skills Practice on page 311.
  • How can you best deal with relational intrusion? Review the discussion on pages 311–312.
  • Not sure how to communicate with a partner displaying jealous tendencies? Try the Making Relationship Choices exercise on pages 314–315.