Why aren't indices of relationship costs always negatively related to indices of relationship quality?
Many researchers have made the seemingly straightforward predictions that relationship rewards will be positively, and relationship costs will be negatively, associated with indices of relationship quality. Existing literature supports the hypothesis for rewards, but evidence regarding costs is mixed. Depending on the study, indices of costs have been observed to be negatively associated, unassociated, and even positively associated with relationship quality. We argue that the mixed results may have been due in part to past cost measures tapping three separate constructs: (a) a partner's intentional poor behavior directed at the participant, (b) negative things associated with the relationship (but not caused by the partner's intentional behavior), and (c) behaving in such a manner as to meet a partner's needs-something which often may involve performing undesirable activities, foregoing desired opportunities, or giving up money, time, or goods. We believe the first two types of costs should be negatively associated with relationship quality. However, we argue that the last type, because it involves adhering to communal norms (Clark & Mills, 1979,1993) will often tend to be either negligibly or even positively associated with relationship quality. In two studies the occurrence of these three categories of events in close relationships as well as the quality of those relationships were measured. The overall pattern of results supports our specific hypotheses as well as the general idea that a lack of conceptual clarity regarding "costs" has contributed to the current mixed nature of our literature on links between relationship costs and relationship quality.
Clark
M S
MS
Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. mc0z+@andrew.cmu.edu
Grote
N K
NK