Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-sd5qd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-10T01:17:56.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Interpersonal Social Cognition and Relationship Evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2026

By
James K. McNulty  and
Ruddy Faure
Edited by
Anita L. Vangelisti ,
Daniel Perlman  and
Susan Sprecher
Anita L. Vangelisti
Affiliation:
University of Texas, Austin
Daniel Perlman
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Greensboro
Susan Sprecher
Affiliation:
Illinois State University
Get access

Summary

Given that relationship satisfaction is ultimately a cognitive phenomenon, social cognition likely plays a critical role in determining the extent to which intimates are satisfied with their relationships. This chapter begins with a theoretical description of the cognitive processes that determine relationship satisfaction. Following from this framework, the second section reviews work suggesting there are various benefits to thinking positively about one’s relationship. Nevertheless, the third section highlights work suggesting there are important limits to these benefits, such that they depend on qualities of the two partners, their relationship, and the broader context in which that relationship is embedded. The fourth section then introduces the possibility that distinguishing between controlled and more automatic forms of social cognition may offer insights into why such limits exist. The final section concludes by suggesting various directions for future research that may offer insights into how both controlled and automatic thinking shape relationship development.

Keywords

relationship cognitionrelationship evaluationautomatic partner attitudesimplicit social cognition

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships , pp. 331 - 349
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2026

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arriaga, X. B., Slaughterbeck, E. S., Capezza, N. M., & Hmurovic, J. L. (2007). From bad to worse: Relationship commitment and vulnerability to partner imperfections. Personal Relationships, 14(3), 389–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00162.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Anan, Y., & Nosek, B. A. (2014). A comparative investigation of seven indirect attitude measures. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 668–688. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0410-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birnie, K., Garland, S. N., & Carlson, L. E. (2010). Psychological benefits for cancer patients and their partners participating in mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Psycho-Oncology, 19(9), 1004–1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1651CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradbury, T. N., & Fincham, F. D. (1990). Attributions in marriage: Review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buunk, B. P., Oldersma, F. L., & De Dreu, C. K. (2001). Enhancing satisfaction through downward comparison: The role of relational discontent and individual differences in social comparison orientation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(6), 452–467. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buyukcan-Tetik, A., Campbell, L., Finkenauer, C., Karremans, J. C., & Kappen, G. (2017). Ideal standards, acceptance, and relationship satisfaction: Latitudes of differential effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1691. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01691CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, L., Overall, N. C., Rubin, H., & Lackenbauer, S. D. (2013). Inferring a partner’s ideal discrepancies: Accuracy, projection, and the communicative role of interpersonal behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(2), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Creswell, J. D. (2017). Mindfulness interventions. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 491–516. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-042716-051139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Finkel, E. J., & Johnson, S. E. (2011). Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(5), 993–1011. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., & Simpson, J. A. (2019). Best practices for testing the predictive validity of ideal partner preference-matching. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218780689CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faure, R., McNulty, J. K., Hicks, L. L., & Righetti, F. (2020). The case for studying implicit social cognition in close relationships. Social Cognition, 38(Supplement), s98–s114. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2020.38.supp.s98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, R., McNulty, J. K., & Karremans, J. C. (2024). Automatic partner attitudes: Sources, implications, and future directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 18(1), e12887. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, R., McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., & Righetti, F. (2022). Implicit ambivalence: A driving force to improve relationship problems. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(2), 500–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211034277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, R., Righetti, F., Larson, G., Cuellar, M. F., Koutsoumpis, A., Zwicker, M., & Hofmann, W. (2021). When and for whom implicit partner evaluations predict forgiveness. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 708–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620936476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, R., Righetti, F., Seibel, M., & Hofmann, W. (2018). Speech is silver, nonverbal behavior is gold: How implicit partner evaluations affect dyadic interactions in close relationships. Psychological Science, 29(11), 1731–1741. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618785899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazio, R. H. (2007). Attitudes as object–evaluation associations of varying strength. Social Cognition, 25(5), 603–637. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fazio, R. H., Lenn, T. M., & Effrein, E. A. (1984). Spontaneous attitude formation. Social Cognition, 2(3), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1984.2.3.217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 297–327. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2014). The MODE model: Attitude-behavior processes as a function of motivation and opportunity. In Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., & Trope, Y. (Eds.), Dual-process theories of the social mind (pp. 155–171). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., Thomas, G., & Giles, L. (1999). Ideals in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118(2), 247–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022327CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gagné, F. M., & Lydon, J. E. (2004). Bias and accuracy in close relationships: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 322–338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692–731. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B., & Brannon, S. M. (2019). Attitudes and the implicit–explicit dualism. In Albarracín, D. & Johnson, B. T. (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes. Volume 1: Basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 158–196). RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B., & Hahn, A. (2019). Implicit measures: Procedures, use, and interpretation. In Blanton, H., LaCroix, J. M., & Webster, G. D. (Eds.), Measurement in social psychology (pp. 29–55). Taylor & FrancisGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B., & Sritharan, R. (2010). Formation, change, and contextualization of mental associations: Determinants and principles of variations in implicit measures. In Gawronski, B. & Payne, B. K. (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory, and applications (pp. 216–240). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2004). On the propositional nature of cognitive consistency: Dissonance changes explicit, but not implicit attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(4), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.10.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghumman, S., & Barnes, C. M. (2013). Sleep and prejudice: A resource recovery approach. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, E166–E178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, A. M., Impett, E. A., Kogan, A., Oveis, C., & Keltner, D. (2012). To have and to hold: Gratitude promotes relationship maintenance in intimate bonds. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028723CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, A., & Gawronski, B. (2019). Facing one’s implicit biases: From awareness to acknowledgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(5), 769–794. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000155CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, A., & Goedderz, A. (2020). Trait-unconsciousness, state-unconsciousness, preconsciousness, and social miscalibration in the context of implicit evaluation. Social Cognition, 38(Supplement), s115–s134. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2020.38.supp.s115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, A., Judd, C. M., Hirsh, H. K., & Blair, I. V. (2014). Awareness of implicit attitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1369–1392. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, L. L., McNulty, J. K., Faure, R., Meltzer, A. L., Righetti, F., & Hofmann, W. (2021). Do people realize how their partners make them feel? Relationship enhancement motives and stress determine the link between implicitly assessed partner attitudes and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(2), 335–369. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000247CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hicks, L. L., McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., & Olson, M. A. (2016). Capturing the interpersonal implications of evolved preferences? Frequency of sex shapes automatic, but not explicit, partner evaluations. Psychological Science, 27(6), 836–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616638650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, L. L., McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., & Olson, M. A. (2018). A dual-process perspective on how sexual experiences shape automatic versus explicit relationship satisfaction: Reply to Brody, Costa, Klapilov´a, and Weiss (2018). Psychological Science, 29(4), 670–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618760848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., & Friese, M. (2008). Impulses got the better of me: Alcohol moderates the influence of implicit attitudes toward food cues on eating behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117(2), 420–427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.117.2.420CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., Friese, M., Wiers, R. W., & Schmitt, M. (2008). Working memory capacity and self-regulatory behavior: Toward an individual differences perspective on behavior determination by automatic versus controlled processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 962–977. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012705CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofmann, W., Rauch, W., & Gawronski, B. (2007). And deplete us not into temptation: Automatic attitudes, dietary restraint, and self-regulatory resources as determinants of eating behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(3), 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Schmeichel, B. J., & Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Executive functions and self-regulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(3), 174–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.01.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joiner, R. J., Bradbury, T. N., Lavner, J. A., Meltzer, A. L., McNulty, J. K., Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2024). Are changes in marital satisfaction sustained and steady, or sporadic and dramatic? American Psychologist, 79(2), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001207CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, C. R., Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2010). Evaluative conditioning: The “how” question. In Zanna, M. P. & Olson, J. M. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 43, pp. 205–255). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43005-1Google Scholar
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. Delacourt.Google Scholar
Kappen, G., Karremans, J. C., Burk, W. J., & Buyukcan-Tetik, A. (2018). On the association between mindfulness and romantic relationship satisfaction: The role of partner acceptance. Mindfulness, 9(5), 1543–1556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671–018-0902-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kachadourian, L. K., Fincham, F., & Davila, J. (2004). The tendency to forgive in dating and married couples: The role of attachment and relationship satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 11(3), 373–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00088.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93(2), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3Google Scholar
Karney, B. R., & Frye, N. E. (2002). “But we’ve been getting better lately”: Comparing prospective and retrospective views of relationship development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(2), 222–238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.2.222CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karremans, J. C., Schellekens, M. P. J., & Kappen, G. (2017). Bridging the sciences of mindfulness and romantic relationships: A theoretical model and research agenda. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(1), 29–49. https://doi. org/10.1177/1088868315615450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, H. H. (1950). The warm–cold variable in first impressions of persons. Journal of Personality, 18, 431–439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1950.tb01260.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelley, H. H. (1971). Attributions in social interactions. General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, H. H., Berscheid, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J. H., Huston, T. L., Levinger, G. McClintock, E., Peplau, L. A., Peterson, D. R. (1983) Close relationships. Freeman.Google Scholar
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of independence. Wiley.Google Scholar
Koole, S. L., Govorun, O., Cheng, C. M., & Gallucci, M. (2009). Pulling yourself together: Meditation promotes congruence between implicit and explicit self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(6), 1220–1226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larson, G. M., Faure, R., Righetti, F., & Hofmann, W. (2022). How do implicit and explicit partner evaluations update in daily life? Evidence from the lab and the field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(10), 2511–2533. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001199CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lam, B. C. P., Cross, S. E., Wu, T.-F., Yeh, K.-H., Wang, Y.-C., & Su, J. C. (2016). What do you want in a marriage? Examining marriage ideals in Taiwan and the United States. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(6), 703–722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216637842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeBel, E. P., & Campbell, L. (2009). Implicit partner affect, relationship satisfaction, and the prediction of romantic breakup. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(6), 1291–1294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeBel, E. P., & Campbell, L. (2013). The interactive role of implicit and explicit partner evaluations on ongoing affective and behavioral romantic realities. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(2), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612448196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S., Rogge, R. D., & Reis, H. T. (2010). Assessing the seeds of relationship decay: Using implicit evaluations to detect the early stages of disillusionment. Psychological Science, 21(6), 857–864. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610371342CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindsay, E. K., & Creswell, J. D. (2019). Mindfulness, acceptance, and emotion regulation: Perspectives from monitor and acceptance theory (MAT). Current Opinion in Psychology, 28, 120–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.12.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lydon, J. E., Meana, M., Sepinwall, D., Richards, N., & Mayman, S. (1999). The commitment calibration hypothesis: When do people devalue attractive alternatives? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(2), 152–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299025002002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, J. K. (2008). Forgiveness in marriage: Putting the benefits into context. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(1), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.171CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K. (2010). Forgiveness increases the likelihood of subsequent partner transgressions in marriage. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(6), 787–790. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021678CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K. (2011). The dark side of forgiveness: The tendency to forgive predicts continued psychological and physical aggression in marriage. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(6), 770–783. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211407077CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K. (2016a). Highlighting the contextual nature of interpersonal relationships. In Olson, J. M. & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 247–315). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2016.02.003Google Scholar
McNulty, J. K. (2016b). Should spouses Be demanding less from marriage? A contextual perspective on the implications of interpersonal standards. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(4), 444–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216634050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, J. K., & Dugas, A. (2019). A dyadic perspective on gratitude sheds light on both its benefits and its costs: Evidence that low gratitude acts as a “weak link.” Journal of Family Psychology, 33(7), 876–881. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000533CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K., & Karney, B. R. (2004). Positive expectations in the early years of marriage: Should couples expect the best or brace for the worst? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 729–743. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.729CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., Hicks, L. L., Turner, J. A., Olson, M. A. (2025). Testing the limits of motivated reasoning: Automatic partner attitudes capture interpersonal negativity not captured by self-reported satisfaction. Unpublished Manuscript. Florida State University.Google Scholar
McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., Makhanova, A., & Maner, J. K. (2018). Attentional and evaluative biases help people maintain relationships by avoiding infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(1), 76–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000127CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2021). How both partners’ individual differences, stress, and behavior predict change in relationship satisfaction: Extending the VSA model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(27), Article e2101402118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2101402118CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K., Olson, M. A., & Joiner, T. E., Jr. (2019). Implicit interpersonal evaluations as a risk factor for suicidality: Automatic spousal attitudes predict changes in the probability of suicidal thoughts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(5), 978–997. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000180CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K., Olson, M. A., Jones, R. E., & Acosta, L. M. (2017). Automatic associations between one’s partner and one’s affect as the proximal mechanism of change in relationship satisfaction: Evidence from evaluative conditioning. Psychological Science, 28(8), 1031–1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617702014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, J. K., Olson, M. A., Meltzer, A. L., & Shaffer, M. J. (2013). Though they may be unaware, newlyweds implicitly know whether their marriage will be satisfying. Science, 342(6162), 1119–1120. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1243140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, J. K., O’Mara, E. M., & Karney, B. R. (2008). Benevolent cognitions as a strategy of relationship maintenance: “Don’t sweat the small stuff”… But it is not all small stuff. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 631–646. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, J. K., & Russell, V. M. (2016). Forgive and forget, or forgive and regret? Whether forgiveness leads to less or more offending depends on offender agreeableness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(5), 616–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216637841CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., Ho, K., & Ritov, I. (1997). Decision affect theory: Emotional Reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science, 8(6), 423–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00455.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, A. (2025). Invisible gorillas in the mind: Internal inattentional blindness and the prospect of introspection training. Open Mind, 9, 606–634. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00204CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, A., & Kurdi, B. (2023). Awareness of implicit attitudes: Large-scale investigations of mechanism and scope. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(12), 3311–3343. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001464CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, S. L. (1999). The quest for conviction: Motivated cognition in romantic relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1001_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. L., Griffin, D. W., Derrick, J. L., Harris, B., Aloni, M., & Leder, S. (2011). Tempting fate or inviting happiness? Unrealistic idealization prevents the decline of marital satisfaction. Psychological Science, 22(5), 619–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611403155CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. W. (1996). The self-fulfilling nature of positive illusions in romantic relationships: Love is not blind, but prescient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(6), 1155–1180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Pinkus, R. T. (2010). A smart unconscious? Procedural origins of automatic partner attitudes in marriage. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(4), 650–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. L., Lupien, S. P., & Seery, M. D. (2012). Resilience in the face of romantic rejection: The automatic impulse to trust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(4), 845–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.02.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. L., McNulty, J. K., Xia, J., Lamarche, V. M., Seery, M. D., Ward, D. E., Griffin, D. W., Hicks, L. L., & Jung, H. Y. (2023). Pursuing safety in social connection regulates the risk-regulation, social-safety, and behavioral-immune systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125(3), 519–547. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000420CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, S. L., Pinkus, R. T., Holmes, J. G., Harris, B., Gomillion, S., Aloni, M., Derrick, J. L., & Leder, S. (2011). Signaling when (and when not) to be cautious and self-protective: Impulsive and reflective trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 485–502. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023233CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2003). The dynamic structure of relationship perceptions: Differential importance as a strategy of relationship maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(11), 1433–1446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203256376CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyklíček, I., Zonneveld, R., & Denollet, J. (2020). Introspective interest and insight in the context of mindfulness-based stress reduction: A randomized trial. Mindfulness, 11(9), 2176–2188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-020-01439-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2008). Implicit and explicit measures of attitudes: The perspective of the MODE model. In Petty, R. E., Fazio, R. H., & Briñol, P. (Eds.), Attitudes: Insights from the new implicit measures (pp. 19–63). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
O’Mara, E. M., McNulty, J. K., & Karney, B. R. (2011). Positively biased appraisals in everyday life: When do they benefit mental health and when do they harm it? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 415–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overall, N. C., Fletcher, G. J. O., & Simpson, J. A. (2006). Regulation processes in intimate relationships: The role of ideal standards. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 662–685. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.662CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, S. D., Meltzer, A., French, L., Altgelt, J. E., McNulty, E. E., Hicks, J. K., L. L. (2025). Is Interpersonal Wisdom Individual or Collective? Distinguishing the Effects of Ideal-Partner Consistency and Normative Desirability on Relationship Outcomes. Unpublished Manuscript. Florida State University.Google Scholar
Proulx, C. M., Helms, H. M., & Buehler, C. (2007). Marital quality and personal well‐being: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(3), 576–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00393.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Righetti, F., Schneider, I., Ferrier, D., Spiridonova, T., Xiang, R., & Impett, E. A. (2020). The bittersweet taste of sacrifice: Consequences for ambivalence and mixed reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(10), 1950–1968. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000750CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robles, T. F., Slatcher, R. B., Trombello, J. M., & McGinn, M. M. (2014). Marital quality and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), 140–187. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogge, R. D., Fincham, F. D., Crasta, D., & Maniaci, M. R. (2017). Positive and negative evaluation of relationships: Development and validation of the Positive–Negative Relationship Quality (PN-RQ) scale. Psychological Assessment, 29(8), 1028–1043. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000392CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rusbult, C. E., Olsen, N., Davis, J. L., & Hannon, P. A. (2001). Commitment and relationship maintenance mechanisms. In Harvey, J. H. & Wenzel, A. E. (Eds.), Close romantic relationships (pp. 87–113). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Scinta, A., & Gable, S. L. (2007). Automatic and self-reported attitudes in romantic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(7), 1008–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207301013CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shepperd, J. A., & McNulty, J. K. (2002). The affective consequences of expected and unexpected outcomes. Psychological Science, 13(1), 85–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00416CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valentine, K. A., Li, N. P., Meltzer, A. L., & Tsai, M.-H. (2020). Mate preferences for warmth-trustworthiness predict romantic attraction in the early stages of mate selection and satisfaction in ongoing relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(2), 298–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219855048CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Harreveld, F., Nohlen, H. U., Schneider, I. K., Zanna, M. P., & Olson, J. M. (2015). The ABC of ambivalence: Affective, behavioral, and cognitive consequences of attitudinal conflict. In Olson, J. M. & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 52, pp. 285–324). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01. 002Google Scholar
van Harreveld, F., van der Pligt, J., & de Liver, Y. N. (2009). The agony of ambivalence and ways to resolve it: Introducing the MAID model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308324518CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, D., & Furr, R. M. (2016). The correlates of similarity estimates are often misleadingly positive: The nature and scope of the problem, and some solutions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(2), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868315581119CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zayas, V., & Shoda, Y. (2015). Love you? Hate you? Maybe it’s both: Evidence that significant others trigger bivalent-priming. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614541297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zell, E., Strickhouser, J. E., Sedikides, C., & Alicke, M. D. (2020). The better-than-average effect in comparative self-evaluation: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(2), 118–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000218CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zoppolat, G., Righetti, F., Faure, R., & Schneider, I. K. (2024). A systematic study of ambivalence and well-being in romantic relationships. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 15(3), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506231165585CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Inaccessible, or known limited accessibility

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter is known to have missing or limited accessibility features. We may be reviewing its accessibility for future improvement, but final compliance is not yet assured and may be subject to legal exceptions. If you have any questions, please contact accessibility@cambridge.org.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.

Visual Accessibility

Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×