ff i _____ ... StAQES of
RElAtionships:
How RElAtionships RrE
FormEd, MAintAinEd,
And EndEd n this chapter, we take a look at the whole life span of a
relationship. We start with a review of some of the kinds
of love we examined in Chapter 3 and discuss how
researchers understand the temporal course of those
kinds of love.
Next we jump right into practice and take a closer look at
a new way in which people are finding their mates: speed dating. Then we consider the effects of cohabitation on couples and
what happens as these couples move on to marriage. We also 111 CHAPTER STAQES Of RELATIOOSHIPS discuss mechanisms that help or hinder couples in the maintenance of their relationships. Finally, we examine the usual means
of ending relationships: breakup and sometimes divorce. DIFFEREnT HinDS OF LOVE RnD
THEIR DEVELOPmEnT
As you may remember, we discussed different kinds of love in
Chapter 3. Obviously, the trajectories of different kinds of love
may be quite different as well. Let us examine some of those
kinds of love in more detail and find out what researchers have
to say about their likely course through time.
Consider these three scenarios:
Larry and Ann have known each other for what seems like
ages. They first met when they were on their university's
rowing teams and were exercising together. Soon thereafter, the activities of Larry and Ann went beyond their
rowing squadrons: They found themselves going to the
movies together and helping each other study for exams.
They never got romantically involved but have been close
friends for years. Larry was Ann's best man at her wedding,
and Ann helped Larry through a tough time in his relationship with his longtime girlfriend, which ultimately
ended in their separation. They now live in different parts
of the country but keep in touch by e-mail and occasional
phone calls.
Missy and Joe have been married for 7 years. They fell madly
in love with each other when Missy interned at a local newspaper, where Joe worked as a reporter. Within a few months
they were married, and for their honeymoon they took a
3-month trip around the world. Since then they have had
two children, and Missy is currently a stay-at-home mom. 112 The passion they once felt for each other has mostly dissipated, but the two feel it has made way for a solid relationship that gets them through thick and thin.
Alicia met Maria during a spaghetti dinner organized by the
local church. Although Alicia is substantially younger than
Maria, the two immediately felt like they were on the same
wavelength. Soon thereafter Maria had a stroke, and she has
been in the hospital for several weeks. She has no relatives
who live close by, and Alicia is filling the role of family by
visiting Maria every day and coordinating her medical examinations as well as following up on Maria's needs with her
doctor and with the hospital staff.
Can you guess what ~inds of love these scenarios describe?
Have one more look at each of them and think about the kind of
love you read about in Chapter 3 that fits best.
The first scenario describes companionate love-a friendship between two people who share interests and also share many
aspects of their lives with each other. The second scenario is obviously about romantic love. That one wasn't too hard to figure out,
was it? As you may also have noticed, the passion Missy and Joe
once felt for each other has declined and has made way for a more
stable, if less fiery, relationship. The third scenario is about compassionate love. Compassionate love also has been called "pure
love," "selfless love," and "altruistic love," as well as many other
things. It features prominently in. religion as well as in literature
about love, and often can be found in caregiving relationships.
Companionate love is a kind of love that typically develops
relatively slowly. Think about your own friends. You probably did
not become best friends with them within a day or even a week
after you met. Instead, that friendship grew over time. Friendships are relatively stable and often endure over a long period,
if not a lifetime. In Larry and Ann's case, you can see how their
friendship grew over a long period, during which they shared 113 ----------- -- ____ ,_ ____ _ J
Y!
~' CHAPTER STAQES Of RELATIOllSHIPS ! ! !... both good and bad times together. All these shared experiences
brought them closer together. And we can expect that they will
enjoy their friendship for a long time to come, barring any significant events leading to a breakup (Berscheid, 2010). But things
are not so rosy for relationships in generaL
A longitudinal study by Hatfield, Pillemer, O'Brien, and Le
{2008) revealed that, within the first year of marriage, not only
romantic love but also companionate love declines. Thus, we
need additional studies to find out if companionate love is really
as stable and enduring as has been presumed. It is commonly
believed that passionate love in long-term relationships may
subside and develop into companionate love (Walster & Walster,
1981). However, there is evidence that companionate love is
important in a romantic relationship from the beginning, and
not just later on (Berscheid, 2010).
Now that we are talking about romantic love, let us consider
what happens to romantic love over the long term. If you hypothesize romantic love to be a combination of affection and sexual
passion, then it is reasonable to assume that if one of those two
components starts to fade, romantic love as a whole will be affected
(Berscheid, 2010). Ellen Berscheid (see Kelly et aL, 2002) suggested
that people in relationships have expectations regarding how their
partners will behave and how their well-being will be impacted by
a partner's behavior. If your partner does something that enhances
your well-being, you feel good; and if the partner's actions decrease
your well-being, you won't feel very good about your partner.
In the beginning of a relationship, you are more likely to
experience surprises in response to your partner's behavior.
Again, if the partner does something that makes you feel good
or supports you, you will experience positive emotions; if the
results of your partner's actions make you feel bad or interfere
with your goals, you will experience negative emotions. The longer people are in a relationship, however, the more predictable
the relationship becomes. These days partners' actions are rarely 114 a surprise; people come to expect their partners to behave in
certain ways, usually in ways that will enhance their well-being.
Positive actions by a partner are no longer surprising and so no
longer lead to unexpected feelings of happiness and bliss. Unexpected negative actions, however, still can surprise and can seriously endanger the relationship. That said, partners in long-term
relationships mostly behave in expected ways, so intense emotions generally decrease as time goes on. Sexual intercourse also
declines as relationships grow older.
As mentioned above, Hatfield and colleagues (2008) found
that romantic love significantly declines during the first year of
marriage. We can see some signs of this in Missy and Joe's relationship, where the initial passion has faded somewhat but has
been replaced by what can be described as a solid friendship that
makes their life together predictable and helps them navigate
everyday affairs with greater ease as a result of the absence of the
extreme highs and lows of passionate emotions.
Finally; let us consider the temporal course of compassionate love. It can develop quite quickly, as was the case with Alicia
and Maria's relationship. A person can take an interest in someone
else's fate within a short time and take actions immediately. A very
important factor in the development of communal love is whether
one person feel~ s,he qn,trust the qther to (a) accept any support offered ~~t~i-,?!~t~~PR-;f~.t~U~~€1. Communal love is also
part of a long-term relationship such as marriage, but conflicts
and just the stress of everyday life can wear partners out and make
them start keeping count of who did what for whom and when.
If this happens, marital satisfaction usually decreases (Grote &
Clark, 2001 ). There is not much research at this time with respect
to the longevity of compassionate love and its development over
time. The course a relationship takes may also depend on whether
the altruistic acts of an individual are needed only on a short-term
basis or whether, for example, a partner has gotten sick and will
need intensive care for a long time or even the rest of his or her life. 115 ;t. '; CHRPTER STR(jES Of RELRTIOOSHIPS· EHCURSIOn: A new WAY TO FinD A
ffiATE-SPEED DATinq
The ways in which we come to know potential partners have
changed significantly in recent decades. In the past, people were
often limited to selecting potential partners from the pool of
people who lived in their town or area. They chose their partners
from the people they went to school with, or the ones they met
through work or hobbies. Nowadays young people can connect
with many more people with a fraction of the effort that was
once required. They have at their disposal a multitude of media
to connect with others literally around the world. Think of the
Internet in general, Facebook, dating services and websites, speed
dating events, and the affordability of long-distance phone calls.
Chances are you know someone who is engaged in a successful long-distance relationship that is facilitated by Skype, phone
calls, and e-mails. And you probably also know people who have
met their partners online, right? a system, and if a person they are interested in also entered their
corresponding number, they can access their respective contact
data so they can get in touch with each other. Depending on the
event, you can meet between 15 and 30 potential partners in a
single evening. In North America, the mean age of adults participating in speed-dating events is 33.1 years, with a standard
deviation of 5.3 years (Kurzban & Weeden, 2005), meaning that
about two thirds of all participants are between roughly 28 and One relatively new option for finding a potential partner is
speed dating. For those of you who are not familiar with speed
dating, here's a short summary of how it works. At speed-dating
events, you meet with a relatively large number of people one
by one for a short time each, just long enough to gain a first
impression and decide if you are interested in the potential partner. Usually, people are seated around tables across from each
other, men on one side and women on the other. Everyone is
assigned a number. After a conversation period of three or four
minutes with one person, a bell rings and the men move down
one seat so that everyone has a new partner. The whole procedure
is repeated over and over until every man has met every woman.
The participants are given score sheets on which they can write
down the numbers of the people they would like to get to know
further. After the event, they can enter their chosen numbers into 38 years of age.
One recent study investigated the results of speed dating in
Germany (Asendorpf, Penke, & Back, 2011). Each event had an
average of 22 participants. In all, 190 men and 192 women were
involved in the study. After the event was over, a participant was
chosen on average by 3.9 others. Remember, you only get the
contact data for a person if he or she chose you in return. Each
person had on average 1.3 reciprocated choices. About 60% of
the participants achieved at least one match.
Let us first look at the features of the participants who were
most popular at the speed dating event. Because no one has much
time for conversation with any given person in such an event,
you probably won't be surprised to hear that both the men's
and women's popularity was based mainly on their physical
attractiveness-in particular, the attractiveness of their face and
voice as well as their weight and height. In fact, men seemed to
use physical cues almost exclusively to choose the women in
whom they were interested. Women used a number of other criteria as well to make their choices; they were interested in a man's
willingness to have sex outside of a committed relationship
(sociosexuality) as well as a man's income, education, and openness to experiences. What's interesting is that the cues women
used in addition to physical attractiveness are all features that,
as studies have shown, can be judged accurately even if you meet
with someone only for a short time (see, e.g., Boothroyd, Jones,
Burt, DeBruine, & Perret, 2008; Kraus & Keltner, 2009). 116 117 r:
CHAPT€R STfl(j€5 OF R€LfiT!OOSHIPS Unexpectedly, the more open men were to sex outside a committed partnership, the more popular they were with the women
(although both men and women in speed-dating events generally are looking for long-term partnerships). It is possible that
men who are more sexually oriented tend to have finely honed
their flirting skills with women. In any case, shyness had a negative effect on a man's popularity; whereas shyness did not really
make a difference to a woman's popularity.
As one might expect, the more popular a person was, the
more picky she was in her choices. This makes sense because
popular people have a greater number of potential partners who
are interested in them, so they have a larger pool to pick from and
hence can afford to be pickier. As the age of a woman increases,
however, she tends to get less picky. It has become commonplace for young people to move in
together as a couple even if they have no plans to marry (yet). The
number of young couples living together has grown significantly
over recent decades, with about 7.6 million adults living together in 2011 (up from 440,000 in 1960, www.census.govfpopulation/
wwwfsocdemo/hh-famfcps20ll.html). Many couples who go
on to marry have cohabited (Manning & Smock, 2002); in fact,
about 50% of all married couples today cohabited before getting married (Bumpass & Lu, 2000). But most couples who live
together out of wedlock do not stay together for very long: More
than half of such couples dissolve their relationship within a year
after moving in together, and about 90% do so within 5 years
(Lichter, Qian, & Mellott, 2006).
Consider the situation of Jessica and Tim. They have been
living together for about 2 years. They met at college but did
not get involved with each other until after graduation. At that
time both of them took new jobs in New York City, and they met
from time to time since they were both new to the city and didn't
know many other people. They were also both from small towns,
and each could relate to the challenges the other was experiencing in moving to a big city. Soon they were a couple, and they
got along so well that they decided to move in together-both
because they liked being with each other so much and because
it would obviously save them a lot of money having to rent only
one apartment instead of two. Things have gone well for them,
and they're still deeply in love with each other-so much so, in
fact, that Tim recently proposed to Jessica. Do you think that
their having lived together happily for 2 years is a good predictor
of the stability and happiness they will enjoy in their relationship once they're married?
Many people think that living together with a partner before
marriage is a good way of trying out their relationship to see
whether or not it will work in the long run once they get married, but research actually casts doubt on this view. Many studies
have found that cohabitation is negatively correlated with marital satisfaction and stability (e.g., Jose, O'Leary, & Moyer, 2010;
Stanley; Rhoades, & Markman, 2006). Jose and colleagues (2010) 118 119 We discussed in Chapter 6 how people who have similarities
feel attracted to each other. This similarity effect could not be
detected in the speed dating study, however. The reason is probably that a few minutes of interaction is just not enough time for
people to find out about their similarities.
Overall, the chances of finding a romantic partner in the
speed dating event were about So/o. This may not sound like a
high chance to you, but consider the likelihood of finding a partner when spending some time in a cafe. You probably have a better chance to find someone at a speed dating event than in a cafe. UVInq TOQETHER r:
CHAPTER ,7c STA(jES OF RELATIOnSHIPS conducted a meta-analysis in which they analyzed the results of
numerous studies examining the effects of premarital cohabitation on the quality of marriages and their rate of dissolution.
As predicted, they found a negative correlation between cohabitation and marital stability. That is, people who had cohabited
were more likely to split up with their marital partners. A negative relationship also existed between cohabitation and marital quality. But why is there such a difference between people
who cohabit and people who don't? Studies have found that
people who cohabit tend generally to be less religious and less
traditional (e.g., Stanley, Whitton, & Markman, 2004; Woods
& Emery; 2002). Cohabitors also tend to have more negative
interactions with each other (Cohan & Kleinbaum, 2002). Noncohabitors, on the other hand, tend to be more confident about
their future together and are not as accepting of divorce as are
cohabitors (Cunningham & Thornton, 2005; Kline eta!., 2004).
Interestingly, the negative relationship between cohabitation and
marital stability was particularly pronounced in the United States
and may not be a factor, or may exist to a lesser extent, in other
countries. RELATIOnSHIP mAinTEnAnCE
Once partners have formed a stable relationship, there's still a lot
of work left to do. As you probably know from your own experience, relationships of any kind need serious work to keep them
in good shape. At least in romantic love, where the passion typically wears off after a while, keeping the happiness and satisfaction partners once felt is not easy to achieve. There are different
strategies and mechanisms people can, and often automatically
do, employ to keep their relationship going. Consider what Lea
has to say about her husband of 7 years, Michael:
Michael is one of the most thoughtful and considerate persons
I have ever met. He is always trying to make me feel loved and
special, and is always looking for ways to make me happy. He
is a great match for me because he has such a cheerful attitude
and a great sense of humor. There are few people who can make
me laugh as he can. And even though he is now ·in his 40s, he is
taking good care of himself, which you can see when you look
at him. Of course, he sometimes upsets me when he forgets to
run the errands he promised to do, and he does forget quite frequently. But he is just a forgetful person and doesn't mean to
annoy me. I try to be understanding. So overall I don't think I
could have been much luckier in my choice of a husband. Cohabitation is a trend that is on the rise, and not only
among young people. Older adults age 50 and above also are
cohabiting more and more with partners to whom they are not
married. In the decade from 2000 to 2010, the number of cohabiting adults age 50 and over more than doubled, to about 2.75
million. One big difference between older and younger cohabiting couples is that the partnerships of older cohabiting couples
seem to be much more stable. When Brown, Bulanda, and Lee
(2012) started their study on cohabiting older couples, participating couples had already been living together an average of 8
years. During the next 8 years, only 18% of the couples separated. Over the same time, only 12% of them got married. It
seems that for more mature people cohabitation is an alternative
to marriage rather than a precursor. Can you detect some relationship maintenance mechanisms at
work in Lea's description of Michael? Lea has a very positive outlook toward Michael and their relationship. She mentions how
Michael expresses his love for her through big and small things
almost every day, and he shares in the routine errands that are
necessary for their life as a couple. Lea is very appreciative of
Michael, and she perceives him with some positive thoughtspossibly illusions-that make him look his best while minimizing his flaws. She also believes he is better than most men, and
thus we can assume that she does not pay too much attention to 120 121 ~
~!' ~ CHAPTER STACiES OF RELATIOOSHIPS the men in her immediate social surroundings who might otherwise seem to be attractive alternative mates. Let's have a look at
these maintenance mechanisms in more detaiL Edenfield and colleagues (2012) conducted a study that
relates these relationship maintenance strategies to adult attachment styles. (Remember the different attachment styles we discussed in Chapter 2?) They found that people who are securely
attached are more positive and open toward their partners and
are more likely to give assurance to their partners regarding the
relationship. People who are avoidant tend to distrust a partner's
supportiveness and availability to them and tend to avoid emotional intimacy. Acting in these ways creates distance between the
partners, which may exacerbate already existing problems.
Another thing that keeps people in relationships is feeling
appreciated. A reason for divorce that is stated very frequently is
that partners no longer feel loved and appreciated ( Gigy & Kelly, 1992). Research has shown that when partners sense gratitude
in their relationship, they feel closer to one another and are
generally happier in their relationship (Algoe, Gable, & Maisel,
2010; Gordon, Arnette, & Smith, 2011). Gordon, Impett, Kogan,
Oveis, and Keltner (2012) proposed a model that suggests that
when people feel appreciated by their partners, it gives them
a sense of security. When you feel secure, you're better able to
concentrate on and perceive yout own feelings of appr:eciation
of your partner. When a person feels gratitude toward a partner
and the relationship they have, the value of the relationship
becomes clearer, which in turn leads to an increase in other
behaviors that serve to maintain the relationship. The researchers conducted several studies that confirmed their modeL When
people felt more appreciated by their partners, they in turn felt
gratitude for their partners and were happier in their relationships. Over the course of time, appreciated partners were more
responsive and committed to their relationships than were people who felt less appreciated. Consequently, their relationships
tended to last longer.
A person who is very committed to a partner also tends to
think of the beloved partner in a particular way that helps the
person stay committed to the partner and the relationship. For
example, when the person thinks of the partner, the person sees
him or her in an especially positive light; may see him or her
as particularly smart or thoughtful, or may perceive the partner
as being much better looking than the rest of the crowd. Even
when the person thinks about the partner's flaws, the person
perceives those flaws as less significant or less pronounced than
the same flaws perceived in other people. Missteps the partner
makes in the relationship are attributed not so much to ill will
as to mistakes made accidentally (Conley et al., 2009; Neff &
Karney, 2003 ). These interpretations of a partner's behavior and
character are called positive illusions because the partner is seen 122 123 Canary and Stafford (1992) developed the Relational Maintenance Model, which suggests that the type of relationship two
people have and the degree of equity in their relationship influences what kinds of maintenance behaviors they engage in and
how often they engage in them. They distinguish among five different maintenance strategies:
Positivity: Partners have a positive outlook on, and attitude
about, their relationship.
Openness: Partners are willing to communicate and disclose
information about themselves.
Assurances: Partners express their love for each other and provide comfort in times of need.
Task shming: Partners share everyday duties and responsibilities.
Slfi~ifi~'if£!~;5: Partners also have bonds with others, and
value and share their social networks. ~: fi
STR{iES OF RELRTIOOSHIPS CHRPTER in an especially positive light. Along with those positive illusions comes another perception, namely, that of the superiority of the beloved over other people (perceived superiority). And,
as illustrated earlier in Lea's description of her husband, there
is another consequence of seeing someone in such a positive
light and believing that person to be so much better than most
other people out there: If you are with someone who is so great,
you automatically do not pay much attention to other men and
women you may encounter. This inattenti...

Attachments:

• 1506356420-Relationships Stages.pdf