Significance: What predicts how happy people are with their romantic relationships? Relationship science—an interdisciplinary field spanning psychology, sociology, economics, family studies, and communication—has identified hundreds of variables that purportedly shape romantic relationship quality. The current project used machine learning to directly quantify and compare the predictive power of many such variables among 11,196 romantic couples. People’s own judgments about the relationship itself—such as how satisfied and committed they perceived their partners to be, and how appreciative they felt toward their partners—explained approximately 45% of their current satisfaction. The partner’s judgments did not add information, nor did either person’s personalities or traits. Furthermore, none of these variables could predict whose relationship quality would increase versus decrease over time.

Prosocial behavior is often thought to bring benefits to individuals and relationships. Do such benefits exist when prosocial behavior is costly for the individual, such as when people are sacrificing for their partner or relationship? Although different theoretical accounts would predict that sacrifice is either positively or negatively associated with personal and relational well-being, empirical work in this regard has been inconclusive. We conducted a meta-analytic synthesis of 82 data sets and 9,547 effect sizes (N = 32,053) to test the link between sacrifice and both personal and relationship well-being for both the individual who performs the sacrifice and their romantic partner. We examined four different facets of sacrifice (i.e., willingness to sacrifice, behavioral sacrifice, satisfaction with sacrifice, and costs of sacrifice). Results revealed that these facets were differently associated with well-being. Specifically, an individual's willingness to sacrifice was positively associated with their own personal and relationship well-being and with their partner's relationship well-being (.09 < rs < .27). However, behavioral sacrifice was negatively associated with own personal well-being (r = -.07). Satisfaction with sacrifice was positively associated with individual and partner well-being (.11 < rs < .43). Costs of sacrifice were negatively related to one's own personal and relationship well-being and to the partner's relationship well-being (-.10 < rs < -.26). Some moderators were also identified. We discuss the implications of these findings for research on prosocial behavior and relationships, address the implications of the methodologies used to study prosocial behavior, and suggest directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

People in close relationships can, and often do, experience ambivalence (i.e., mixed feelings) toward their romantic partner. Although ambivalence is common and consequential, research on this phenomenon is fragmented. The present work examines how four different types of ambivalence (i.e., objective, subjective, implicit-explicit, and implicit ambivalence) relate to well-being. In four intensive studies ( N = 1,134) and internal meta-analyses, ambivalence was related to lower personal and relational well-being, but this association was only statistically significant for explicit (i.e., objective and subjective) types of ambivalence, with subjective ambivalence showing the strongest association, particularly for relationship outcomes. This work is the first systematic study of ambivalence and well-being in relationships and highlights the importance of capturing mixed feelings in relationship research and how such focus can benefit research on attitudinal ambivalence and well-being more broadly.

Growing evidence suggests that the seeds of relationship decay can be detected via implicit partner evaluations even when explicit evaluations fail to do so. However, little is known about the concrete daily relational processes that explain why these gut feelings are such important determinants of relationships’ long-term outcomes. The present integrative multimethod research yielded a novel finding: that participants with more positive implicit partner evaluations exhibited more constructive nonverbal (but not verbal) behavior toward their partner in a videotaped dyadic interaction. In turn, this behavior was associated with greater satisfaction with the conversation and with the relationship in the following 8-day diary portion of the study. These findings represent a significant step forward in understanding the crucial role of automatic processes in romantic relationships. Together, they provide novel evidence that relationship success appears to be highly dependent on how people spontaneously behave in their relationship, which may be ultimately rooted in their implicit partner evaluations.

People in romantic relationships tend to have positive feelings toward their partner and want their relationship to last. However, maintaining a romantic relationship over time is challenging, and people can often experience mixed and conflicting feelings (i.e., ambivalence) toward their significant other. While research has identified the serious consequences that ambivalence can have for personal and relational well-being, very little is known about the factors that can lead people to experience ambivalence in relationships. The present work examines how extradyadic desire (i.e., desire for someone other than the partner), a common difficulty people face in the context of monogamy, is a situation in which people feel more ambivalent toward their partner. In three studies (N = 1,178) using experimental, daily diary, and longitudinal approaches, we find that feelings of desire for an attractive alternative increase ambivalence toward the current partner, above and beyond how much people actually value their partner, and that this has short- and long-term negative consequences for personal and relational well-being. Furthermore, while most people could identify an attractive alternative in their life, desire for the alternative-rather than just their presence-seems to play a stronger role in increasing ambivalence. This work highlights the emotional processes through which attractive alternatives pose a threat to romantic relationships and the role that ambivalence plays in daily life and over time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Implicit ambivalence involves holding strong positive and negative implicit evaluations toward the same object. This state is common in close relationships because even the most satisfying partnerships involve in conflicts and other frustrating experiences that can be explained away through effortful motivated reasoning yet remain in memory as mental representations involving the partner. In fact, it appears normative for implicit measures of partner attitudes to reveal implicit ambivalence. Despite being common, however, little is known about the consequences of implicit ambivalence. The present longitudinal investigation provides initial evidence that implicit ambivalence can motivate relationship improvements. Across two studies of newlywed couples (N = 448 individuals), multilevel dyadic modeling revealed that higher implicit ambivalence was associated with higher motivation to make efforts to improve current marital problems, which predicted reduced marital-problems severity reported by the partner and increased marital satisfaction reported by both spouses 4 months later.