94 research outputs found

    Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies

    Get PDF
    Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner’s ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person’s own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships

    Understanding How University Students Use Perceptions of Consent, Wantedness, and Pleasure in Labeling Rape.

    Get PDF
    While the lack of consent is the only determining factor in considering whether a situation is rape or not, there is sufficient evidence that participants conflate wantedness with consent and pleasurableness with wantedness. Understanding how people appraise sexual scenarios may form the basis to develop appropriate educational packages. We conducted two large-scale qualitative studies in two UK universities in which participants read vignettes describing sexual encounters that were consensual or not, wanted or unwanted and pleasurable or not pleasurable. Participants provided free-text responses as to whether they perceived the scenarios to be rape or not and why they made these judgments. The second study replicated the results of the first and included a condition where participants imagined themselves as either the subject or initiator of the sexual encounter. The results indicate that a significant portion of our participants held attitudes reflecting rape myths and tended to blame the victim. Participants used distancing language when imagining themselves in the initiator condition. Participants indicated that they felt there were degrees of how much a scenario reflected rape rather than it simply being a dichotomy (rape or not). Such results indicate a lack of understanding of consent and rape and highlight avenues of potential educational materials for schools, universities or jurors

    When Holding Back Helps

    No full text

    Turning toward or away from God: COVID-19 and changes in religious devotion.

    No full text
    Major stressors can influence religiosity, making some people more religious, while making others less religious. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a mixed-method study with a nationally representative sample of religiously affiliated American adults (N = 685) to assess group differences between those who decreased, stayed the same, or increased in their religious devotion. In quantitative analyses we evaluated differences on sociodemographic variables, religious behaviors, individual differences, prosocial emotions, well-being, and COVID-19 attitudes and behaviors. Of most note, those who changed (i.e., increased or decreased) in religious devotion were more likely than those with no change in devotion to experience high levels of stress and threat related to COVID-19, but only those who increased in religious devotion had the highest dispositional prosocial emotions (i.e., gratitude and awe). Further, those who changed in religious devotion were more likely to report searching for meaning than those with no change, but only those who increased were more likely to report actual presence of meaning. Qualitative analyses revealed that those who increased in religious devotion reported increasing personal worship, the need for a higher power, and uncertainty in life as reasons for their increase in religious devotion; those who decreased reported being unable to communally worship, a lack of commitment or priority, and challenges making it hard to believe in God as reasons for their decrease in religious devotion. The findings help identify how COVID-19 has affected religious devotion, and how religion might be used as a coping mechanism during a major life stressor
    • 

    corecore