Positive psychology in context: Effects of expressing gratitude in ongoing relationships depend on perceptions of enactor responsiveness

Algoe, Sara B.; Zhaoyang, Ruixue

doi:10.1080/17439760.2015.1117131

Cited by 111 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current finding revealed that the implementation of intentional activities in couples' daily lives produced immediate changes from the pretest to the post‐test for some positive indicators (i.e., positive emotion, mutuality communication pattern, quality of interaction, and dyadic adjustment). The improvement in positive emotion was consistent with Coulter and Malouff's () 4‐week single‐component intervention and with Algoe and Zhaoyang's () 28‐day single‐component gratitude intervention. In the current study, couples in the intervention group showed improvements in dyadic variables (i.e., quality of interaction and dyadic adjustment) and in mutuality communication patterns over the course of the intervention compared with those in the control condition.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Positive psychology intervention for couples: A pilot study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this randomized study, a multicomponent, theory‐driven, autonomous self‐help positive psychology intervention (PPI) for couples was examined. This intervention was not designed for distressed couples but rather to address autonomous couples with a good initial level of functioning who, nonetheless, wished to improve it. The objective was to assess the efficacy of the PPI on satisfaction with life, affective life, communication patterns, and dyadic adjustment in each member of the dyad. The 4‐week PPI encompassed dyadic and individual daily activities. Thirty‐eight couples were assigned to an intervention group (n = 20 couples) or a waiting list control (WLC) group (n = 18 couples). Assessments were conducted prior to and after the PPI, with an immediate post‐test and a follow‐up. Ninety‐two percent of the PPI was completed by the participants. Linear mixed models revealed improvements in positive emotions, communication patterns of mutuality, and dyadic adjustment from the pretest to the immediate post‐test in the intervention group compared with the WLC group. Effects of dyadic adjustment were maintained from pretest to 1‐month follow‐up in the intervention group. This pilot study suggests that the realization of intentional dyadic activities presents an interesting approach to contribute to individual positive emotions and dyadic functioning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Positive psychology intervention for couples: A pilot study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People who thank are more likely to feel grateful, and grateful people are more likely to reciprocate, are more prosocial (or concerned about others), and are better relationship partners (Algoe, Fredrickson, & Gable, 2013;Algoe, Gable, & Maisel, 2010;Algoe, Haidt, & Gable, 2008;Algoe, Kurtz, & Hilaire, 2016;Algoe & Haidt, 2009;Algoe & Zhaoyang, 2016;Bartlett, Condon, Cruz, Baumann, & Desteno, 2012;Bartlett & DeSteno, 2006;DeSteno, Bartlett, Baumann, Williams, & Dickens, 2010;Lambert et al, 2010;Lambert & Fincham, 2011;Williams & Bartlett, 2015). Similarly, people who apologize are often seen as more trustworthy and, like thankers, better relationship partners (Darby & Schlenker, 1982;Hannon, Rusbult, Finkel, & Kamashiro, 2010;Ho, 2012;Hodgins & Liebeskind, 2003;Kim et al, 2004Kim et al, , 2006Maio et al, 2008;McCullough et al, 1997;Weiner et al, 1991).…”

Section: Evidence Supporting the Tradeoffmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…RET builds on several streams of previous research, including empirical work on these communications in both psychology and economics (e.g., Abeler et al, 2010;Algoe & Zhaoyang, 2016;Darby & Schlenker, 1982;Deutsch & Lamberti, 1986;Grant & Gino, 2010;Ho, 2012;Ho & Liu, 2011;Hodgins & Liebeskind, 2003;Kim et al, 2004Kim et al, , 2006McGovern et al, 1975;Schlenker & Darby, 1981;Weiner, Graham, Peter, & Zmuidinas, 1991;Williams & Bartlett, 2015); empirical and theoretical work on person perception, self-presentation, and personal relationships in social psychology (e.g., Baumeister, 1982;P. Brown & Levinson, 1987;Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002;Fiske, Xu, Cuddy, & Glick, 1999;Goffman, 1959Goffman, , 1967Leary & Allen, 2011;Schlenker & Weigold, 1992); theoretical work on signaling from evolutionary biology (e.g., Grafen, 1990;Maynard-Smith & Harper, 2003;Zahavi, 1975;Zahavi & Zahavi, 1997); and empirical and theoretical work on language and communication in cognitive psychology (e.g., Goodman & Stuhlmüller, 2013;Grice, 1975;Pinker, 2011;Pinker, Nowak, & Lee, 2008;van Rooij, 2003;Yoon, Tessler, Goodman, & Frank, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thanking is not only helpful in enhancing relationships (Algoe & Zhaoyang, 2016;Lambert, Clark, Durtschi, Fincham, & Graham, 2010;Lambert & Fincham, 2011) but can promote socially and economically valuable behaviors like tipping (Rind & Bordia, 1995), volunteering (Bennett, Ross, & Sunderland, 1996;Grant & Gino, 2010), voting (Panagopoulos, 2011), helping behavior (R. D. Clark, 1975;Deutsch & Lamberti, 1986;Goldman, Seever, & Seever, 1982;Moss & Page, 1972), self-sacrificing protection of strangers (McGovern, Ditzian, & Taylor, 1975), and a variety of other positive actions (e.g., Carey, Clicque, Leighton, & Milton, 1976;H. B. Clark, Northrop, & Barkshire, 1988;Maheux, Legault, & Lambert, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: Responsibility Exchange Theory and the Currency of Communication

Chaudhry¹,

Loewenstein²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the time we are children, we are taught to say “thank you” and “I’m sorry.” These communications are central to many social interactions, and the failure to say them often leads to conflict in relationships. Research has documented that, alongside the impact they can have on relationships, apologies and thanks can also impact material outcomes as small as restaurant tips and as significant as settlements of medical malpractice lawsuits. But, it is trivial to utter the words; how can such “cheap talk” carry so much value? In this paper, we propose a “responsibility exchange theory” that explains why these communications are not costless, and which draws connections between four forms of communication that have not previously been connected: thanking, apologizing, bragging, and blaming. All four of these communications relay information about credit or blame, and thus introduce image-based costs and benefits for both the communicator and the recipient of communication: Each of the four communications involves a tradeoff between appearing competent and appearing warm. By formalizing these social psychological insights with a utility-based approach to modeling communication, and by applying game theoretic analysis, we offer new insights about social communication. We test several of the model’s novel predictions about strategic communication in two experiments: The first involves hypothetical choices in a scenario study, and the second involves real choices in a live interaction. We end with a discussion of the theory’s place in the literature and consider extended predictions and applications as examples of future directions for research.

show abstract

“…Despite being an individual level process, gratitude is embedded in a dynamic system (see Algoe & Zhaoyang, 2016). Displays of gratefulness, for example, may be transmitted from one dating partner to the other (Gordon, Impett, Kogan, Oveis, & Keltner, 2012), and gratitude for a partner's investment in the relationship can motivate an individual's commitment (Joel, Gordon, Impett, MacDonald, & Keltner, 2013).…”

Section: Individual Relationship Enhancementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship Maintenance: A Review of Research on Romantic Relationships

Ogolsky

Monk

Rice

et al. 2017

J of Family Theo & Revie

144

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationship maintenance encompasses a broad array of activities that partners may use to preserve their romantic partnerships. For this article, we systematically review the vast literature (N = 1,149 articles) on relationship maintenance in romantic relationships. We first identify the relevant constructs and propose a conceptual model to organize the literature. Then we turn our focus to the empirical research on the processes and social context of relationship maintenance. We conclude by highlighting the lingering questions in the study of relationship maintenance and offering recommendations for future research.

show abstract

Positive psychology in context: Effects of expressing gratitude in ongoing relationships depend on perceptions of enactor responsiveness

Cited by 111 publications

References 66 publications

Positive psychology intervention for couples: A pilot study

Positive psychology intervention for couples: A pilot study

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: Responsibility Exchange Theory and the Currency of Communication

Relationship Maintenance: A Review of Research on Romantic Relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About