Empirical evidence about the development of social relationships across adulthood into late life continues to accumulate, but theoretical development has lagged behind. The Differential Investment of Resources (DIRe) model integrates these empirical advances. The model defines the investment of time and energy into social ties varying in terms of emotional closeness and kinship as the core mechanism explaining the formation and maintenance of social networks. Individual characteristics, acting as capacities, motivations, and skills, determine the amount, direction, and efficacy of the investment. The context (e.g., the living situation) affects the social opportunity structure, the amount of time and energy available, and individual characteristics. Finally, the model describes two feedback loops: (a) social capital affecting the individual's living situation and (b) different types of ties impacting individual characteristics via social exchanges, social influences, and social evaluations. The proposed model will provide a theoretical basis for future research and hypothesis testing.
Relationship partners affect one another's health outcomes through their health behaviors, yet how this occurs is not well understood. To fill this gap, we present the Dyadic Health Influence Model (DHIM). The DHIM identifies three routes through which a person (the agent) can impact the health beliefs and behavior of their partner (the target). An agent may (a) model health behaviors and shape the shared environment, (b) enact behaviors that promote their relationship, and/or (c) employ strategies to intentionally influence the target's health behavior. A central premise of the DHIM is that agents act based on their beliefs about their partner's health and their relationship. In turn, their actions have consequences not only for targets' health behavior but also for their relationship. We review theoretical and empirical research that provides initial support for the routes and offer testable predictions at the intersection of health behavior change research and relationship science.
Contemporary research on human sociality is heavily influenced by the social identity approach, positioning social categorization as the primary mechanism governing social life. Building on the distinction between agency and identity in the individual self ("I" vs. "Me"), we emphasize the analogous importance of distinguishing collective agency from collective identity ("We" vs. "Us"). While collective identity is anchored in the unique characteristics of group members, collective agency involves the adoption of a shared subjectivity that is directed toward some object of our attention, desire, emotion, belief, or action. These distinct components of the collective self are differentiated in terms of their mental representations, neurocognitive underpinnings, conditions of emergence, mechanisms of social convergence, and functional consequences. Overall, we show that collective agency provides a useful complement to the social categorization approach, with unique implications for multiple domains of human social life, including collective action, responsibility, dignity, violence, dominance, ritual, and morality.
Victims commonly respond to experienced wrongdoing by punishing or forgiving the transgressor. While much research has looked at predictors and immediate consequences of these post-transgression responses, comparably less research has addressed the conditions under which punishment or forgiveness have positive or negative downstream consequences on the victim-transgressor relationship. Drawing from research on Social Value Orientation (SVO), we argue that both forgiveness and punishment can be rooted in either prosocial (i.e., relationship- or other-oriented), individualistic (i.e., self-oriented), or competitive (i.e., harm-oriented) motives pursued by the victim. Furthermore, we posit that downstream consequences of forgiveness and punishment crucially depend on how the transgressor interprets the victim's response. The novel motive-attribution framework presented here highlights the importance of alignment between a victim's motives and a transgressor's motive attributions underlying post-transgression responses. This framework thus contributes to a better understanding of positive and negative dynamics following post-transgression interactions.
Dating is widely thought of as a test phase for romantic relationships, during which new romantic partners carefully evaluate each other for long-term fit. However, this cultural narrative assumes that people are well equipped to reject poorly suited partners. In this article, we argue that humans are biased toward pro-relationship decisions-decisions that favor the initiation, advancement, and maintenance of romantic relationships. We first review evidence for a progression bias in the context of relationship initiation, investment, and breakup decisions. We next consider possible theoretical underpinnings-both evolutionary and cultural-that may explain why getting into a relationship is often easier than getting out of one, and why being in a less desirable relationship is often preferred over being in no relationship at all. We discuss potential boundary conditions that the phenomenon may have, as well as its implications for existing theoretical models of mate selection and relationship development.
Researchers often study constructs that are conceptually and/or empirically related, but distinct (i.e., "sibling constructs"). In social-personality psychology, as well as psychology more generally, there is little guidance for how to deal with sibling constructs, which can result in researchers ignoring or mishandling them. In this article, we start by situating sibling constructs in the literature on the jingle-jangle fallacies. Then, we outline 10 conceptual and empirical criteria for determining the degree to which, and in what ways, constructs may share a sibling relationship, using self-esteem and grandiose narcissism as a running example. Finally, we discuss strategies for handling sibling constructs in a systematic and transparent way. We hope that the procedures described here will help social-personality psychologists identify sibling constructs, understand when and why they pose problems for their research, and adopt strategies that ameliorate their adverse effects.
The impact of personal values on preferences, choices, and behaviors has evoked much interest. Relatively little is known, however, about the processes through which values impact behavior. In this conceptual article, we consider both the content and the structural aspects of the relationships between values and behavior. We point to unique features of values that have implications to their relationships with behavior and build on these features to review past research. We then propose a conceptual model that presents three organizing principles: accessibility, interpretation, and control. For each principle, we identify mechanisms through which values and behavior are connected. Some of these mechanisms have been exemplified in past research and are reviewed; others call for future research. Integrating the knowledge on the multiple ways in which values impact behavior deepens our understanding of the complex ways through which cognition is translated into action.