Individuals who believe that disagreements are healthy and resolvable are more satisfied with their relationships than are those who do not have such a perspective (Crohan, 1992). Unfortunately, remaining optimistic can be difficult. Marital arguing is linked to negative moods (Bolger, DeLongis, Kessler, & Schilling, 1989) and marital instability (McGonagle, Kessler, & Gotlib, 1993). Because arguing is an inevitable part of intimate relationships, researchers have investigated how individuals might conduct their disagreements so as to avoid negative by products. Although research provides useful insights, the methods typically employed yield a restricted view of arguing. With the development of sophisticated methods for studying interaction, researchers have increasingly focused their attention on the behaviors that occur during an argumentative encounter. Often couples enact an argument that is recorded, coded, and statistically scrutinized for patterns. This methodology affords a rigorous way to identify the behaviors occurring during an encounter, but the observed pattern could be limited to the specific interaction that was analyzed. In particular, focusing on a single argumentative encounter may provide little information about the developmental course of the disagreement (i.e., those processes that occurred prior to or after an argumentative episode).

Although treating arguments as though they are of limited duration accurately characterizes some disagreements, this approach does not capture the essence of others. Relational disagreements about a given issue can extend beyond single encounters (Benoit & Benoit, 1987).