Daily Supportive Equity in Close Relationships

Abstract

Receiving support in committed relationships has frequently been associated with negative psychological outcomes in the recipient, such as increased distress. The authors hypothesized that these negative effects could be offset by support recipients' reciprocation of support, that is, by creating a sense of supportive equity. To investigate this hypothesis, the authors obtained daily reports of mood and of received and given emotional support from both partners in 85 couples throughout a 4-week period. Reciprocity in support transactions was associated with higher levels of positive mood and lower levels of negative mood. In line with previous research, receiving support without reciprocation was associated with increases in negative mood. Giving support, regardless of receipt, was associated with a decrease in negative mood.

Emotional support for men and women with cancer: Do patients receive what their partners provide?

“…To continue to better understand dyadic coping and support transactions, more needs to be known about mutual provided and received support, as well as conflict and tension among couples. Reciprocity is seen as one determinant of support provision (Cutrona et al, 1997;Gleason et al, 2003;Jung, 1990;Knoll et al, 2006a;Knoll et al, 2006b;Liang et al, 2001). Therefore, it would be valuable to obtain data that allow for a closer examination of such reciprocal effects (Kenny & Cook, 1999;Newsom, 2002).…”

The expression of compassionate love in everyday compassionate acts

“…In prior studies (e.g., Gable et al, 2003;Reis & Carmichael, 2006), we collected daily diary reports of various interactive behaviors over several weeks in samples of married or cohabiting adults (e.g., ''I was physically affectionate toward my partner'' and, in parallel, ''My partner was physically affectionate toward me''). Findings in those studies revealed that for positive and supportive acts, hits predicted increased relationship well-being, whereas misses were unrelated to relationship well-being (see Gleason, Iida, Bolger, & Shrout, 2003;Gleason, Iida, Shrout, & Bolger, 2008, for related results).…”

The Manhattan effect: When relationship commitment fails to promote support for partners’ interests.

“…As illustrated in the Manhattan effect, relationship-oriented individuals may not always be generous to their partner and may impose constraints of freedom, but these gestures can be desired as reassurance that they are committed to maintaining the relationship even when confronting obstacles. In contrast, although partner-oriented individuals may support their partner's personal interests across circumstances without expectations of reciprocation, their partner may feel guilty if he or she fails to reciprocate (e.g., Buunk & Schaufeli, 1999;Gleason, Iida, Bolger, & Shrout, 2003;Uehara, 1995). In addition, because relationship protection is so strongly tied to relationship commitment, individuals may see partner-orientation over relationship-orientation as a cue that a partner simply isn't committed, The Manhattan Effect 57 as illustrated toward the beginning of Manhattan, when Isaac enthusiastically supports Tracy's studyabroad opportunity.…”