A cross-cultural test of the relational turbulence model: Relationship characteristics that predict turmoil and topic avoidance for Koreans and Americans

Abstract

This study models associations among intimacy, relational uncertainty, partner interference, relational turmoil, and topic avoidance in Korean and American romantic relationships. We surveyed 294 individuals from the United States (N = 156) and South Korea (N = 138). The American model indicated that intimacy was negatively associated with relational uncertainty and curvilinearly associated with partner interference, relational uncertainty was positively associated with topic avoidance, and partner interference was positively associated with perceived turmoil. The South Korean model revealed that intimacy was negatively associated with relational uncertainty, while both relational uncertainty and partner interference were positively associated with perceived turmoil, which was positively associated with topic avoidance. Although the American and Korean models were statistically invariant, some notable cultural differences are discussed.

Relational turbulence among military couples after reunion following deployment

“…The actor effects of relational uncertainty fill a key gap in the model: Whereas cross‐sectional results have been mixed about the link between relational uncertainty and appraisals of turmoil (cf. Knobloch, ; McLaren et al, ; Theiss & Nagy, ), our longitudinal findings supplement a prior over‐time study supporting the model's logic among dating couples (Knobloch & Theiss, ). At a broader level, our results suggest subtle intersections with work on ambiguous loss in military families.…”

“…By definition, relational uncertainty compromises people's ability to understand the nature of their relationship, which escalates the difficulty of interacting with a partner (Knobloch & Satterlee, ). Tests of the model's logic among civilians reveal that relational uncertainty is positively associated with people's appraisals of turmoil in some studies (Knobloch & Theiss, ) but not other studies (Knobloch, ), and in some cohorts but not other cohorts in the same study (McLaren et al, ; Theiss & Nagy, ). With respect to the military context, a recent study revealed a positive cross‐sectional association between relational uncertainty and appraisals of turmoil reported by individuals recently reunited after deployment (Theiss & Knobloch, ).…”

“…Initial evidence both inside and outside the military context is consistent with the model's premise. Both cross‐sectional data (Knobloch, ; McLaren et al, ; Theiss & Nagy, ) and longitudinal data (Knobloch & Theiss, ) reveal a positive association between people's reports of interference from a partner and their appraisals of turmoil within dating relationships. One recent cross‐sectional study in the military context showed that interference from a partner was a positive predictor of people's appraisals of turmoil during the postdeployment transition (Theiss & Knobloch, ).…”

The Communicative and Physiological Manifestations of Relational Turbulence During the Empty-Nest Phase of Marital Relationships

“…Relational uncertainty was positively associated with the three avoidant message features of topic avoidance, indirectness, and withdrawal, but was not significantly associated with the confrontational message features of criticism and demandingness. The results for the avoidant message features are consistent with previous tests of the relational turbulence model (e.g., Knobloch & Theiss, 2011;Theiss & Nagy, 2012). The nonsignificant results for the assertive message features may reflect our operationalization of relational uncertainty.…”

Relational Turbulence Theory: Explaining Variation in Subjective Experiences and Communication Within Romantic Relationships

“…Earlier uses of the phrase relational turbulence referred to specific phenomena associated with relational uncertainty and interference from a partner (e.g., Theiss & Estlein, 2014) and the extent to which a romantic association is in flux (e.g., Knobloch, 2007). Some work suggested that perceptions of turmoil are a cognitive bias heightened by relational uncertainty or interference from a partner (Knobloch & Theiss, 2010;Theiss & Nagy, 2012), but others positioned relational turbulence as a quality of relationships that renders people sensitive to relationship-relevant information (McLaren et al, 2012;Solomon et al, 2010). Importantly, these positions are not incompatible.…”