Taking Stock of Reality: Biased Perceptions of the Costs of Romantic Partners’ Sacrifices

Abstract

When romantic partners sacrifice their own self-interest to benefit the relationship, the sacrificer or recipient may—for various reasons—be biased in how they perceive the costs that the sacrificer incurs. In Study 1, romantic couples ( N = 125) rated their own and their partner’s costs after a conversation about a sacrifice in the laboratory, followed by extensive experience sampling in their natural environment. In Study 2, a preregistered experiment, individuals ( N = 775) imagined a scenario in which they, their partner, or an unknown person sacrificed and rated the associated costs and benefits. Both studies demonstrated a consistent discrepancy between perceptions of own and partner sacrifice, driven primarily by people underestimating their own sacrifice costs and overestimating the benefits (Study 2). Results across studies showed that this underestimation bias helps people to feel better and feel more satisfied in the relationship when giving up their own goals and preferences for the relationship.

Lightening the load: Perceived partner responsiveness fosters more positive appraisals of relational sacrifices.

“…On average, couples reported being involved in their current relationship for 2.8 years (SD = 2.4 years, range = 4 months-17 years); 35% lived together and 2.8% were married. The data come from a larger project on sacrifice in romantic relationships (e.g., Faure et al, 2018;Righetti et al, 2016;Visserman et al, 2018Visserman et al, , 2021Zoppolat et al, 2020).…”

“…When romantic partners sacrifice—or consider a sacrifice—they form sacrifice appraisals , which are evaluations of interrelated aspects of the sacrifice one is making, including the costs, the benefits, how satisfying it feels, and how much regret is anticipated or experienced afterward (Righetti & Impett, 2017). When sacrificing seems particularly costly, difficult, or harmful to oneself, this prosocial act can actually detract from—rather than benefit—the well-being of the relationship (Righetti et al, 2015; Ruppel & Curran, 2012; Stanley et al, 2006; Visserman et al, 2021; Whitton et al, 2007) and hurt both partners’ personal well-being (Righetti, Sakaluk, et al, 2020). In contrast, greater satisfaction with making a sacrifice is associated with greater personal and relational well-being in both partners (Righetti, Schneider, et al, 2020; Stanley et al, 2006).…”

“…We build on research demonstrating the detrimental impact of negative sacrifice appraisals (e.g., perceiving greater costs) for individual and relational well-being (Righetti et al, 2015, 2021; Righetti, Sakaluk, et al, 2020; Stanley et al, 2006; Visserman et al, 2021; Whitton et al, 2007), as well as research demonstrating the power of reappraisal —cognitively changing the way a situation is construed in order to manage one’s emotional response—in promoting people’s emotional, psychological, and relational well-being (Denny & Ochsner, 2014; Gross, 2002, Gross & John, 2003). Recent research has shown that appraisals of sacrifices carry some subjectivity and should thus be malleable.…”

“…Recent research has shown that appraisals of sacrifices carry some subjectivity and should thus be malleable. In fact, people reported lower costs and higher personal and relational benefits for their own sacrifices versus their partner’s sacrifices, even when those sacrifices were identical (Visserman et al, 2021). Thus, sacrifice appraisals may not purely reflect the objective costs and benefits that these acts may bring, but can be flexibly construed and reappraised.…”

“…Study 1 is a preregistered experiment in which we manipulated PPR (high, low, or control) using a hypothetical sacrifice scenario in which participants imagined making a sacrifice for their partner. We considered a range of sacrifice appraisals, including the costs of the potential sacrifice to the self (Day & Impett, 2018), the benefits of the sacrifice to the self (Visserman et al, 2021), satisfaction with making the sacrifice (Righetti et al, 2015; Stanley et al, 2006), and anticipated regret (Righetti & Visserman, 2018). We preregistered our hypotheses and analyses before data collection: https://osf.io/w8a5n…”