“You make me a better/worse person”: A two‐dimensional model of relationship self‐change

Abstract

For better or worse, relationships have the potential to affect individuals' self-concepts; however, currently no integrative model exists to explain the variety of these self-concept changes. We propose that self-concept changes occur along two independent dimensions: direction (increase vs. decrease in content) and valence (positivity vs. negativity of content). These two dimensions combine to create four processes of relationship-induced self-concept change: self-expansion (increasing positive content), self-contraction (decreasing positive content), self-pruning (decreasing negative content), and self-adulteration (increasing negative content). Using community and university samples, we developed a measure of self-concept change (Study 1) and examined how the four self-processes were associated with love (Study 1), relationship quality (Studies 2 and 3), and infidelity (Study 3). The self-concept improvement processes (i.e., self-expansion and self-pruning) were associated with greater love and relationship quality, whereas in Study 3 self-concept degradation processes (i.e., self-contraction and self-adulteration) predicted infidelity.Individuals in satisfying romantic relationships often report experiencing positive changes to their self-concepts as a result of their relationship partners. For example, it is common to hear someone speak glowingly of their romantic partner by stating, "He makes me a better person" or "I like the person I am when I'm around her." However, not all relationship partners positively affect individuals' self-concepts. In fact, some romantic partners

Two new scales in the field of couples and marriage counseling: The inclusion of other in the self scale and Turkish self-change in romantic relationships scale

“…In the second stage, based on the existing Relational Self-Change Scale (RSCS) [1], the Two-dimensional Model of the Relational Self-change [1], and a focus group conducted with Turkish college students were used to create an item-pool to measure self-change processes in romantic relationships. Then, these items were examined by four specialists in the field of close relationships.…”

“…In 2014, three social psychology researchers, Brent Mattingly, Gary Lewandowski, and Kevin McIntyre proposed a new psychological model called the Twodimensional Model of Relational Self-change to conceptualize these self-changes, and they developed a scale based on their model [1]. According to this model, self-changes in a romantic relationship can occur based on two dimensions: direction and valence [1,2]. The concept of direction refers to a quantitative self-change and the concept of valence refers to a qualitative self-change.…”

“…The concept of direction refers to a quantitative self-change and the concept of valence refers to a qualitative self-change. Thus, the direction of the self-concept is related to increases or decreases in the content of an individual's self-concept, but the direction of the self-concept is associated with the subjective aspects of the changes in that person's self-concept [1,2]. Based on this conceptualization, there are four types of self-concept changes: selfexpansion, self-pruning, self-contraction, and self-adulteration [1].…”

Does Michelangelo care about age? An adult life-span perspective on the Michelangelo phenomenon

“…While developmental research suggests that personal growth is of major importance for young adults (e.g., Havighurst, 1972), it has also been argued that personal development is particularly important during the early stages of a relationship (Mattingly, McIntyre, & Lewandowski, 2014). Especially at the onset of a romantic relationship, idealization can influence how supportive and affirmative a person perceives his or her partner to be (Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996) and how intuitively self-expansion is experienced .…”

"Let's Have a Date Night!": The Role of Approach Relationship Goals in Self-Expanding Relationship Activities

“…Participants responded to face-valid questions to determine the extent to which they felt that their planned activity embodied each characteristic of self-expansion from (1) "Not at all" to (5) "Extremely". To assess the self-expanding properties of their planned activity more comprehensively, I created a self-expansion composite based upon Lewandowski and Mattingly's (2014) definition of self-expansion, using the face valid ratings of novelty and creativity 5 . This composite consisted of the most common variables used to define self-expansion (Aron et al, 2000;Aron et al, 2013).…”