Emotional Dynamics and Emotion Regulation in Intimate Relationships

Luginbuehl, Tamara; Schoebi, Dominik

doi:10.4324/9781351001328-10

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems unlikely that individuals high or low in S-NA inertia were simply more distressed or emotionally dysregulated during these daily interactions given that we adjusted for mean levels of and variability in negative affect. In the context of an interaction, emotions assume the function to inform, guide and adjust partners' behavioral responses to each other's demands or concerns (Luginbuehl & Schoebi, 2018). However, it is plausible that if a person's emotion dynamics fail to afford them this guidance, interaction behaviors and affective expressions will be less attuned to a partner's needs and, consequently, contribute to the person being perceived as less responsive (Reis & Gable, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emotions frequently emerge from intense social interactions (Butler, 2011), and as such, they represent a key factor in relationship functioning and interpersonal adjustment (e.g., Luginbuehl & Schoebi, 2018; Schoebi & Randall, 2015). Emotions convey important information about individuals’ current emotional states, as well as concerns and action tendencies, thereby facilitating the coordination of social interactions (Keltner & Haidt, 2001).…”

Section: Context-sensitive Emotional Responses and Interpersonal Adju...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Emotion dynamics and responsiveness in intimate relationships.

Luginbuehl

Schoebi

2020

Emotion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responding appropriately to an intimate partner’s emotional signals and needs requires that one’s emotional responses be reactive to significant interpersonal experiences. The adaptive function of emotions is likely compromised if an individual’s emotional states are insufficiently attuned to interpersonal events. The present studies examine how individual differences in moment-to-moment emotion dynamics affect interpersonal responsiveness and relationship satisfaction. Study 1 examines associations between emotion dynamics and emotional reactivity to positive and negative relationship events. Emotion dynamics were operationalized using assessments of emotional inertia, which is defined as the degree to which emotions are resistant to change over time. Momentary assessments from 44 participants were collected four times per day over 4 weeks. Emotional inertia showed a curvilinear association with context-sensitive emotional responses to conflict, with individuals high or low in emotional inertia experiencing blunted emotional reactions to conflict. Study 2 assessed emotion dynamics based on four emotion reports per day over 10 days of both partners in a total of 103 couples. Associations of emotion dynamics with perceptions of partners’ responsiveness and relationship satisfaction over 12 months were examined. Partners of individuals with high (inert) or low (erratic) emotional inertia perceived them to be less responsive, which then predicted steeper declines in their relationship satisfaction across 12 months. The results suggest that individuals with inert or erratic emotion dynamics exhibit less context-sensitive emotional responding to conflicts and are perceived by their partners to be less responsive which subsequently undermines the quality of their intimate relationships.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Context-sensitive Emotional Responses and Interpersonal Adju...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotion dynamics and responsiveness in intimate relationships.

Luginbuehl

Schoebi

2020

Emotion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This implies that partners can be flexible in responding to, and connecting and disconnecting emotionally with each other. In this regard, Luginbuehl and Schoebi (2018) recently showed that partners of individuals whose emotions were very resistant to change (or not resistant to change at all), perceived their partners as less responsive, resulting in a decline in relationship satisfaction. Change point detection analysis could build further on this sort of research, by identifying if the extent to which partners show changes in their interpersonal emotion dynamics relates to important relationship processes and outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing change point detection analysis in relationship research: An investigation of couples’ emotion dynamics

Sels

Schat

Verhofstadt

et al. 2022

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many relationship theories assume some form of interdependence between relationship partners. Partners are thought to continuously influence each other and to be influenced by each other over time. These influences are not expected to be constant, but dynamic (sometimes partners influence each other a lot, and sometimes they do not influence each other). To investigate such changes in interpersonal dynamics, we showcase the value of using a change point detection approach, which can be used to monitor virtually any preferred quantification of interpersonal dynamics across time. Concretely, we introduce the KCP-RS method, which scans times series for changes in user-specified statistics, in interpersonal emotion dynamic research. We used KCP-RS to investigate changes in 96 couples’ emotional experiences during two 10-minute conversations, which were meant to elicit a negative and a positive interaction context. Based on participants’ continuous reports of the valence of their emotional experience, we looked for changes in three statistical measures, aiming to capture emotional similarity between partners (i.e., does their valence fluctuate together). Specifically, we investigated the occurrence, frequency, and direction of change in partners’ linear correlations, instantaneous derivative matching (IMD), and signal matching (SM). While correlation changes were only observed in 2% of the couples, IDM changes were detected for about one third of the couples (34%), and SM changes were detected in about half of them (49%). Most couples demonstrated one change point, and the direction of the change differed depending on the specific emotional similarity measure. In a first validation of this method, we demonstrated how such change points can pinpoint to subtle but meaningful dynamic processes in couples. We end by discussing the added value of change point detection analyses for relationship research and interpersonal research in general.

show abstract

“…In this work, we review research that has investigated how each ingredient of self‐regulation—standards, self‐regulatory capacity, motivation, and monitoring—affects interpersonal processes in close relationships. This review does not include the topic of emotion regulations (for a review on that topic see English et al, 2013; Lindsey, 2020; Luginbuehl & Schoebi, 2018). To conduct this review, we started by searching for relevant articles using PsycINFO and Google Scholar.…”

Section: The Current Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐regulation in close relationships

Righetti

Đurić

Hofmann

et al. 2022

Personal Relationships

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past 20 years, greater attention has been devoted to the study of self‐regulation in an interpersonal context. This review summarize this work and presents findings on how self‐regulation processes influence close relationship outcomes. The review is organized around the four ingredients of self‐regulation (i.e., standards, monitoring, self‐regulatory capacity, and motivation). For each ingredient, we discuss their influence on relationship processes and dynamics. In the standards section, we discuss the literature on approach/avoidance, promotion/prevention, goal conflicts between partners, and interpersonal goal support. In the monitoring section, we describe how partners' monitoring of each other's goal progress affects relationships. We also highlight that research on this topic is scant. In the self‐regulatory capacity section, we discuss findings on how self‐regulatory capacity is associated with relationship maintenance behaviors. In the motivation section, we review the literature on commitment and its impact on relationship dynamics. Finally, for each ingredient, we address an important avenue for future research.

show abstract

Emotional Dynamics and Emotion Regulation in Intimate Relationships

Cited by 9 publications

References 1 publication

Emotion dynamics and responsiveness in intimate relationships.

Emotion dynamics and responsiveness in intimate relationships.

Introducing change point detection analysis in relationship research: An investigation of couples’ emotion dynamics

Self‐regulation in close relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About