Three experiments demonstrated that trying to appreciate a close other's unique point of view (imagine-other perspective taking) increases the extent to which individuals overestimate their own transparency to the close other, that is, how many of their values, preferences, traits, and feelings are readily apparent to him or her. Trying to be objective and pay careful attention to cues from a close other, which inhibits perspective taking, instead had the opposite effect. Mediation analyses suggested that increased focus on the self as an object of evaluation contributed to the positive effect of imagine-other perspective taking on perceived transparency, and decreased focus on the self as an object of evaluation contributed to the negative effect of trying to be objective on these judgments. These effects on perceived transparency had important implications for relationship well-being: Enhanced perceived transparency of negative feelings prompted by imagine-other perspective taking during a back-and-forth exchange with a romantic partner led to systematic discrepancies between individuals' own and their partner's experience of the exchange and reduced relationship satisfaction; trying to be objective instead reduced perceived transparency and thereby increased satisfaction. Notably, initial closeness with another person enhanced rather than tempered the egocentric effects of perspective taking. Taken together, these results suggest that positive motivations to nurture a close relationship and be sensitive to a loved one might sometimes be better channeled toward paying closer attention to his or her behavior than toward perspective taking.

Finkel, Rusbult, Kumashiro, and Hannon (2002, Study 1) demonstrated a causal link between subjective commitment to a relationship and how people responded to hypothetical betrayals of that relationship. Participants primed to think about their commitment to their partner (high commitment) reacted to the betrayals with reduced exit and neglect responses relative to those primed to think about their independence from their partner (low commitment). The priming manipulation did not affect constructive voice and loyalty responses. Although other studies have demonstrated a correlation between subjective commitment and responses to betrayal, this study provides the only experimental evidence that inducing changes to subjective commitment can causally affect forgiveness responses. This Registered Replication Report (RRR) meta-analytically combines the results of 16 new direct replications of the original study, all of which followed a standardized, vetted, and preregistered protocol. The results showed little effect of the priming manipulation on the forgiveness outcome measures, but it also did not observe an effect of priming on subjective commitment, so the manipulation did not work as it had in the original study. We discuss possible explanations for the discrepancy between the findings from this RRR and the original study.

Social comparisons are common in dating relationships. We examined individuals' cognitive interpretations (e.g., hope for the future or one's own relationship is not doing well) after an upward, downward, or lateral social comparison to a friend's dating relationship. Exploratory factor analyses indicated three factors in the Relationship Social Comparison Interpretation scale (RSCI): negative interpretations, positive upward interpretations, and positive downward interpretations (Studies 1 and 2). Hierarchical regressions controlling for comparison direction and individual differences in relationship social comparison orientation indicated that the RSCI was associated with relationship satisfaction, commitment, and positive and negative affect (Studies 1 and 2). There were also direct and indirect effects (through relationship quality) of the RSCI, with attention to alternatives and accommodation behaviors (Study 2).

No abstract

How an individual interprets a relationship social comparison may have important implications for the self and one's relationship. We asked whether these interpretations significantly mediated the relation between the manipulated social comparison direction and relationship satisfaction, relationship commitment, satisfaction with life, and happiness for both dating (Studies 1 and 2) and married (Study 2) individuals. Participants were randomly assigned to make an upward or downward comparison to a friend's romantic relationship and completed measures of their interpretations, relationship quality, satisfaction with life, and happiness. For both dating and married individuals, there were indirect effects of manipulated social comparison direction through the interpretations for all dependent variables. Although there were some differences in mediation for married and dating individuals, the effect sizes were not significantly different.