by: ashley coleman
Why Relationships End
Unfortunately, many romantic relationships (one type of a close relationship) come to an end. A meta-analysis of relationship dissolution found that low levels of commitment, love, inclusion of other in the self, and dependence strongly predicted dissolution (Le, Dove, Agnew, Korn, & Mutso, 2010). These results suggest that specific relationship factors predict the chances of a relationship ending. Specifically, important variables including love, commitment, and dependence may be necessary for the continuation of a successful relationship.
The vulnerability-stress-adaptation model (Karney & Bradbury, 1995) explained that there is a reciprocal relationship between individual and relationship vulnerability to stressful experiences and how a couple responds to stress within the relationship. This theory suggests that stress could result in relationship strength for couples that adapt well to stress within the relationship, whereas stress could result in relationship ending for couples with higher vulnerability, more stress overall, or less adaptive responses to stress within the relationship.
Why Relationships Succeed
Niehuis, Huston, and Rosenband (2006) defended that the success or ending of a relationship can be predicted early on. For example, they argue that courting couples understand each other’s strengths and weaknesses before marriage. In addition, they claim that factors such as interpersonal patterns and compatibility are also predictors of marital success or ending that are evident during courtship.
However, another relationship component, commitment, may be an important variable involved in relationship success. The investment model (Rusbult & Agnew, 2012) explained that commitment is a product of high levels of satisfaction, limited alternatives, and high levels of investment. In this model, satisfaction with the relationship is impacted by the cost-benefit analysis associated with the relationship, alternatives are other attractive relationships that may be available to the other partner, and investment is the amount of resources (including effort) that are expended for the relationship. Each of these variables contributes to the success or ending of a relationship. For example, a relationship with low satisfaction, many alternatives, and low investment is likely doomed to end; whereas a relationship high in satisfaction, in which partners perceive few attractive alternatives to the relationship and are heavily invested in the relationship, is more likely to succeed.
Factors Related to Relationship Maintenance
Other factors related to relationship success involve relationship maintenance. Two important factors include gratitude and forgiveness. Higher levels of gratitude, or appreciating the efforts of the other partner, predict better relationship quality (Gordon, Impett, Kogan, Oveis, & Keltner, 2012). Gordon et al. (2012) also found that levels of partner gratitude were correlated, such that higher levels of gratitude for one partner predicted higher levels of gratitude for the other. In addition, they found that higher levels of gratitude predicted increased responsivity to the partner, longer relationship length, and higher levels of commitment to the relationship. Therefore, the combination of high levels of gratitude and commitment appear to predict successful relationships.
Furthermore, higher levels of forgiveness within a relationship predict higher levels of relationship satisfaction (Braithwaite, Selby, & Fincham, 2011). Specifically, the relationship between forgiveness and relationship satisfaction is mediated (or explained by) increased relational effort and decreased negative conflict. These findings suggest that (1) forgiveness increases relationship satisfaction because the partner increases effort, or resources expended; and (2) forgiveness increases relationship satisfaction because the partner decreases the conflict within the relationship. As previously stated, more resources invested in the relationship predict relationship success, and higher levels of conflict (poor adaptation or response to relationship stress) predict that a relationship will end.
In addition, higher levels of relationship closeness predict higher levels of forgiveness (Strelan, Karremans, & Krieg, 2017). However, this relationship is mediated (or explained by) higher levels of trust (Strelan et al., 2017). These findings indicate that the level of trust within the relationship is related to both forgiveness and relationship closeness. Taken together, studies on forgiveness suggest that forgiveness is an important component for maintaining a relationship, through building satisfaction and closeness. Furthermore, variables such as increased trust, increased effort, and decreased conflict may play important roles in the observed relationship between forgiveness and relationship maintenance.
Predictors of Relationship Success and Ending
Several predictors of relationship success and relationship ending have been presented. Commitment, investment, and satisfaction seem to be important factors for predicting the success or ending of a relationship. In addition, partners who are more committed, invested, and satisfied may also be more likely to be grateful and to forgive. Although these are not the only factors related to relationship outcome, they appear to be important considerations for predicting the outcome of a relationship.
References
- Braithwaite, S. R., Selby, E. A., & Fincham, F. D. (2011). Forgiveness and relationship satisfaction: Mediating mechanisms. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(4), 551-559. doi:10.1037/a0024526
- Fiske, S. T. (2014). Social Beings: Core Motives in Social Psychology (3rd edition). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
- 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. doi:10.1037/a0028723
- 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. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3
- Le, B., Dove, N. L., Agnew, C. R., Korn, M. S., & Mutso, A. A. (2010). Predicting nonmarital romantic relationship dissolution: A meta-analytic synthesis. Personal Relationships, 17(3), 377-390. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01285.x
- Niehuis, S., Huston, T. L., & Rosenband, R. (2006). From courtship into marriage: A new developmental model and methodological critique. Journal of Family Communication, 6(1), 23-47. doi:10.1207/s15327698jfc0601_3
- Rusbult, C. E., Agnew, C. R., & Arriaga, X. B. (2012). The investment model of commitment processes. In P. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, E. T. Higgins, P. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, Vol. 2 (pp. 218-231). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. doi:10.4135/9781446249222.n37
- Strelan, P., Karremans, J. C., & Krieg, J. (2017). What determines forgiveness in close relationships? The role of post-transgression trust. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56(1), 161-180. doi:10.1111/bjso.12173