Perceived superiority in close relationships: Why it exists and persists.

Abstract

Two studies used a thought-listing technique to examine perceived superiority, or the inclination to regard one's own relationship as better than (and not as bad as) others' relationships. Consistent with the claim that this is a motivated phenomenon--and motivated in part by strong commitment--Study 1 revealed that (a) tendencies toward perceived superiority and (b) the commitment-superiority link are both strongest given psychologically threatening instructions and weakest given accuracy instructions (control instructions are intermediate). Consistent with the claim that this phenomenon serves a functional purpose, Study 2 revealed that earlier perceived superiority predicts later relationship status (persisted vs. ended) and increases over time in dyadic adjustment. Also, commitment accounts for unique variance in perceived superiority beyond self-esteem.The beliefs individuals hold about themselves tend to be somewhat more positive than a strictly veridical view of the world can support. Research regarding the self has identified three primary forms of positive illusion, demonstrating that we exhibit excessively positive self-evaluations, exaggerated perceptions of control, and unrealistic optimism regarding the future (for reviews, see Taylor & Brown, 1988;Wood, 1989). The empirical literature reveals parallel phenomena in close relationships, demonstrating that we exhibit excessively positive evaluations of our partners and relationships, exaggerated belief in the controllability of our relationships, and unrealistic optimism regarding the future of our involvements (Buunk & Van Yperen, 1991;Martz et al., 1998;Murray & Holmes, 1993, 1997 The present research examines a phenomenon termed perceived superiority, which is defined as the inclination to regard one's own relationship as both better than and not as bad as other people's relationships: This work is based on the assumption that we do not experience our relationships in a vacuum: Although beliefs about a relationship are shaped in part by the good and bad properties of the relationship per se, beliefs are also socially defined. That is, we also understand and experience our involvements in relation to the beliefs we hold about the good and bad properties of other people's involvements.The conceptual model guiding our analysis of this phenomenon rests on three primary assertions. First, we propose that belief systems are subject to motivated processing, suggesting that individuals exhibit perceived superiority in part because they need to regard their relationships favorably. Second, we propose that commitment is a central variable in ongoing relationships, suggesting that strong commitment at least partially accounts for the inclination toward perceived superiority. Third, we suggest that perceived superiority serves a functional purpose, representing a habit of thought that supports couple well-being.Our work extends the existing literature in several respects. To begin with, our method of assessing perceived superiority examines naturally occurring...

History of Social Psychology: Insights, Challenges, and Contributions to Theory and Application

“…For example, one influential program of research by Griffin (1996a, 1996b) has extended earlier work by Taylor and Brown (1988) on positive illusions from the realm of individuals to that of couples, arguing that long-term relational satisfaction is most likely when the partners hold idealized views of each other. Rusbult et al (2000) similarly found greatest relational endurance and satisfaction among partners who perceived themselves as superior to other couples. Although such correlational findings preclude causal conclusions, they parallel results from other domains suggesting that an inflated, even delusional sense of optimism and positivity is not only adaptive, but can also prove self-fulfilling (see Reed, Kemeny, Taylor, Wang, & Visscher, 1994).…”

Interdependence, Interaction, and Relationships

“…Moreover, because dependence constitutes reliance on a partner for fulfilling important needs, increasing dependence yields persistence in interactions and longevity in relationships (Bui et al 1996, Drigotas & Rusbult 1992. To reduce the vulnerabilities inherent in such reliance, dependence also yields patterns of cognition and affect that quell feelings of insecurity and promote congenial interaction (e.g., positive illusion, downward comparison) , Rusbult et al 2000.…”

“…For example, commitment emerges as a consequence of dependence on a specific partner and thus is strengthened as a result of high satisfaction, poor alternatives, and high investments (Rusbult et al 2001). Commitment colors emotional reactions to challenging interaction situations (feeling affection rather than anger when a partner is neglectful) and gives rise to habits of thought that support the decision to persist (use of plural pronouns, positive illusion, derogation of alternatives) (Agnew et al 1998, Johnson & Rusbult 1989, Rusbult et al 2000. In turn, benevolent thoughts and feelings promote prosocial transformation, especially in situations of moderate to high correspondence.…”

Back to caring after being hurt: the role of forgiveness

“…positive illusions about the partner; Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996; derogation of alternatives; Johnson & Rusbult, 1989;Simpson, Gangestad, & Lerma, 1990; perceived superiority of the relationship; Buunk & Van der Eijnden, 1997;Rusbult, Van Lange, Wildschut, Yovetich, & Verette, 2000).…”