Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T11:09:17.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Perspective Taking, Self-Anchoring, and Attention to Context in Long-Distance and Geographically Close Romantic Relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2017

Anca M. Miron*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Wisconsin, USA
Danica Kulibert
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Wisconsin, USA
Alisha Petrouske
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Wisconsin, USA
Ben Saltigerald
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Wisconsin, USA
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Anca Miron, 800 Algoma Blvd., University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, WI 54901, USA. Email: mirona@uwosh.edu
Get access

Abstract

We manipulated perspective taking and measured romantic intimates’ attention to their partners’ context. Participants read a letter supposedly from their romantic partner describing the partner's precarious situation (e.g., stress and financial issues) and either imagined their partner's difficult situation (n = 87) or remained objective and detached (n = 85). Afterwards, they drew a picture of their romantic partner in the situation (drawing task) and wrote about the thoughts they had while reading the letter (writing task). As predicted, when adopting their romantic partner's perspective (vs. remaining detached), geographically close intimates focused more on their partner's context, whereas long-distance intimates relied on self-anchoring processes to produce knowledge about their partner's feelings and thoughts in that specific situation. We discuss theoretical, clinical, and therapeutic implications of the findings for the study of differential perspective-taking processes and mechanisms in long-distance and geographically close relationships.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amorim, M.-A. (2003). What is my avatar seeing? The coordination of ‘out-of-body’ and embodied perspectives for scene recognition across views. Visual Cognition, 10, 157199.Google Scholar
Arriaga, X.B., & Rusbult, C.E. (1998). Standing in my partner's shoes: Partner perspective taking and reactions to accommodative dilemmas, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 927948.Google Scholar
Batson, C.D. (2011). Altruism in humans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bertacco, M., & Deponte, A. (2005), Email as a speed-facilitating device: A contribution to the reduced-cues perspective on communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00250 Google Scholar
Chun, M.M. (2000). Contextual cueing of visual attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 170178.Google Scholar
Davis, H.L., Hoch, S.J., & Ragsdale, E.E. (1986). An anchoring and adjustment model of spousal predictions. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 2537.Google Scholar
Epley, N., & Caruso, E.M. (2009). Perspective taking: Missteping in others’ shoes. In Markman, K.D., Klein, W.M.P., & Suhr, J.A. (Eds.) Handbook of imagination and mental simulation (pp. 295309). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Epley, N., Keysar, B, Van Boven, L., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 327339.Google Scholar
Galinsky, A.D., Maddux, W.W., Gilin, D., & White, J.B. (2008). Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent: The differential effects of perspective taking and empathy in negotiations. Psychological Science, 19, 378384. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02096.x Google Scholar
Gallese, V. (2003). The manifold nature of interpersonal relations: The quest of a common mechanism. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, 1431, 517528.Google Scholar
Gertsel, N., & Gross, H.E. (1984). Commuter marriages: A review. Marriage and Family Review, 5, 7193.Google Scholar
Gross, H.E. (1980). Couples who live apart: Time/place disjunctions and their consequence. Symbolic Interaction, 3, 6982.Google Scholar
Ickes, W. (1993). Empathic accuracy. Journal of Personality, 61, 587610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, L.C., & Hancock, J.T. (2013). Absence makes the communication grow fonder: Geographic separation, interpersonal media, and intimacy in dating relationships. Journal of Communication, 63, 556577. doi:10.1111/jcom.12029 Google Scholar
Jones, E.E., & Nisbett, R.E. (1971). The actor and the observer: stereotypes? Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Kilpatrick, S.D., Bissonnette, V.L., & Rusbult, C.E. (2002). Empathic accuracy and accommodative behavior among newly married couples. Personal Relations, 9, 369393.Google Scholar
Long, E.C.J. (1993a). Maintaining a stable marriage: Perspective taking as a predictor of a propensity to divorce. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 21, 121138. https://doi.org/10.1300/J087v21n01_07 Google Scholar
Long, E.C.J. (1993b). Perspective taking differences between high and low adjustment marriages: Implications for those in intervention. American Journal of Family Therapy, 21, 248260.Google Scholar
Long, E.C.J., Angera, J.J., Carter, S.J., Nakamoto, M., & Kalso, M. (1999). Understanding the one you love: A longitudinal assessment of an empathy training program for couples in romantic relationships. Family Relations, 48, 235242.Google Scholar
Manger, T., Wicklund, R.A., & Eikeland, O. (2003). Speed communication and solving social problems. Communications, 28, 323337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masuda, T., Gonzalez, R., Kwan, L., & Nisbett, R.E. (2008). Culture and aesthetic preference: Comparing the attention to context of East Asians and Americans. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 12601275 Google Scholar
Masuda, T., & Nisbett, R.E. (2006). Culture and change blindness. Cognitive Science, 30, 381399.Google Scholar
Miron, A.M., & Wicklund, R.A., Diestelmann, M., Moore, T., & Schroeder, H. (2015). Perspective taking and specificity of sensory contact. Journal of Relationships Research, 6, 113. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/jrr.2015.10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, R.S. (1999). How we know — and sometimes misjudge — what others know: Imputing one's own knowledge to others. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 737759.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1924). Judgment and reasoning in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Powell, A.A., Branscombe, N.R., & Schmitt, M.T. (2005). Inequality as ‘ingroup privilege’ or ‘outgroup disadvantage’: The impact of group focus on collective guilt and interracial attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 501521. doi:10.1177/0146167204271713 Google Scholar
Regan, D.T., & Totten, J. (1975). Empathy and attribution: Turning observers into actors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 850856.Google Scholar
Royzman, E.B., Cassidy, K.W., & Barron, J. (2003). ‘I know, you know’: Epistemic egocentrism in children and adults. Review of General Psychology, 7, 3247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scaffidi Abbate, C., Isgrò, A., Wicklund, R.A., & Boca, S. (2006). A field experiment on perspective taking, helping, and self-awareness. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 283287. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2803_7 Google Scholar
Scaffidi Abbate, C., Boca, S., & Gendolla, G.H.E. (2016). Self-awareness, perspective-taking, and egocentrism. Self & Identity, 15, 371380.Google Scholar
Schroder-Abe, M., & Schutz, A. (2011). Walking in each other's shoes: Perspective taking mediates effects of emotional intelligence on relationship quality. European Journal of Personality, 25, 155169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sulpizio, V., Committeri, G., Metta, E., Lambrey, S., Berthoz, A., & Galati, G. (2015). Visuospatial transformations and personality: Evidence of a relationship between visuospatial perspective taking and self-reported emotional empathy. Experimental Brain Research, 233, 20912102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tidwell, L.C. & Walther, J.B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Human Communication Research, 28, 317348. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00811.x Google Scholar
Vescio, T.K., Sechrist, G.B., & Paolucci, M.P. (2003). Perspective taking and prejudice reduction: The mediational role of empathy arousal and situational attributions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 455472. doi:10.1002/ejsp.163 Google Scholar
Vorauer, J.D., & Sasaki, S.J. (2012). The pitfalls of empathy as a default intergroup interaction strategy: Distinct effects of trying to empathize with a lower status outgroup member who does versus does not express distress. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 519524.Google Scholar
Wicklund, R.A. (2007). Mellommenneskelige forhold. A se, hore og berore [Interpersonal relations: To see, hear, and touch]. Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
Wicklund, R.A., & Vandekerckhove, M.M.P. (2000). Delay of gratification in interaction rituals. In Postmes, T., Spears, R., Lea, M., & Reicher, S. (Eds.), SIDE Issues Centre Stage: Recent developments in studies of de-individuation in groups (pp. 191202). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar
Wu, S., & Keysar, B. (2007). The effect of culture on perspective taking. Psychological Science, 18, 600606.Google Scholar