Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing theme for the study of relationships and well-being.

Abstract

As we humans go through life, we are involved in many different goals and activities. We go to school or work; we pursue hobbies, pastimes, and other recreational interests; we socialize with friends, relatives, coworkers, and acquaintances; we care for children, aging parents, and others; and we engage in subsistence activities like preparing meals, managing finances, maintaining our living spaces and vehicles, and sleeping. Traversing all of these is the impact of relationships. Virtually all day-to-day activity requires coordination of our actions with those of other people on whom we depend and who depend on us. In other words, for most people most of the time, successfully accomplishing most life tasks and goals is intrinsically interwoven with how they interact with others.The fact of interdependence with others reflects the importance of social relations in human evolution. Humans are a social species. Mechanisms for relating to and coordinating with others are deeply wired into our neural architecture, as described by numerous theorists (e.g., Buss & Kenrick, 1998;Reis, Collins, & Berscheid, 2000). Reflecting this complexity, a vast and growing literature has emerged describing the nature of social relations and the myriad processes that regulate them. This literature provides compelling evidence about the role of relationships in life activity and personal well-being.

Settling for less out of fear of being single.

“…Partner responsiveness is arguably one of the most fundamental components of satisfying, committed relationships (Maisel & Gable, 2009;Reis et al, 2004). It is a pivotal marker of high quality, lasting relationships (Huston, Caughlin, Houts, Smith, & George, 2001;Karney & Bradbury, 1995).…”

“…Desirability was manipulated in the present study by varying the degree to which targets appeared to be high in partner responsiveness. The extent to which partners have the potential for mutual responsiveness to each other's needs, and the potential for close, intimate connection is an important marker of relationship quality (Maisel & Gable, 2009;Reis, Clark, & Holmes, 2004;Spielmann, MacDonald, & Tackett, 2012). Indeed, intimacy and closeness stemming from partner responsiveness are key to creating rewarding close relationships (Laurenceau, Feldman Barrett, & Pietromonaco, 1998;Laurenceau & Kleinman, 2006).…”

“…The relationship literature extols the importance of partner responsiveness for relationship satisfaction, commitment, and longevity. Those who perceive their relationship partners as responsive feel more intimate, more satisfied, and more committed to their relationships (Karney & Bradbury, 1995;Reis et al, 2004). Therefore, to the extent that individuals would be willing to compromise their standards for a responsive partner may particularly demonstrate a willingness to settle for less.…”

Beyond reciprocity: Gratitude and relationships in everyday life.

“…Given that benefits bring information about the relationship motivations of the benefactor (Ames, Flynn, & Weber, 2004), we suggest an additional critical appraisal for the emotion of gratitude that is interpersonal in nature: perceived responsiveness to the self (Reis, Clark, & Holmes, 2004 (Schwarz & Clore, 2007) in line with emotionrelevant appraisals (Lerner & Tiedens, 2006), then considering the relational implications of gratitude is essential for understanding its role in social life. As a first step, we recently found that gratitude was uniquely associated with a reappraisal of the benefactor's positive qualities and promoted relationship-enhancing motivations toward the benefactor (Algoe & Haidt, 2008).…”

“…associated with feeling understood, valued, and cared for by another individual (Reis et al, 2004). For example, if one gives a gift certificate to a local mall or spends the same amount of money to give a CD that she knows is the recipient's favorite band, the latter better demonstrates responsiveness to one's self.…”