Relationship Norm Strength: Measurement Structure, Dyadic Interdependence, Correlates, Causes and Consequences

The study of norms and close relationships are two pillars of social psychological scholarship, yet the two topics are rarely studied in tandem. When relationship norms have been the subject of empirical study, researchers have focused on evaluating the importance of their content for relational processes. In the present dissertation, I propose the strength of relationship norms as a topic worthy of empirical attention. Across five studies, including correlational, quasi-experimental, experimental, and dyadic designs, I evaluated the primary hypothesis that relationship norms would be stronger in relationships characterized by greater affiliative motivation, opertationalized both in terms of organically occurring relationship types, and ratings of relationship quality. Throughout the five studies, I also tested secondary hypotheses related to the association between relationship norm strength and perceived similarity, asset and resource sharing, and conflict between relationship partners, as well as the extent to which members of romantic couples abided by the norms of their relationship. In Study 1, participants (n = 100) perceived relationship types implying greater commitment (e.g., committed romantic relationships) as having stronger norms than those implying lesser commitment (e.g., casual sex relationships). In Study 2, I piloted a multidimensional measure of relationship norm strength and documented similar differences in norm strength and relationship quality among participants (n = 312) who were currently in the relationship types examined in Study 1. In Study 3, some aspects of relationship norm strength and relationship quality were positively associated for members of romantic dyads (ncouples = 25, nindividuals = 11). Individuals in a relationship with stronger norms generally reported complying with their relationship’s norms to a greater extent, though the opposite was sometimes true of their partner; individuals also exhibited a large amount of bias in appraising their partner’s level of norm compliance. In Study 4, participants currently in a romantic relationship (n = 286) primed to recall memories of high relationship quality reported feeling stronger norms in their romantic relationship, relative to those primed to recall moments of low relationship quality. Finally, in Study 5, participants currently in a romantic relationship (n = 239) primed to perceive their relationship norms as strong perceived their relationship as being higher quality than those in a control condition. These five studies provide initial promising support for the hypothesized role of relationship norm strength. I discuss their implications and the importance of continued investigations of relationship norm strength

Harmful and Helpful Therapy Practices with Consensually Non-Monogamous Clients: Toward an Inclusive Framework

Drawing on minority stress perspectives, we investigated the therapy experiences of individuals in consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships. Method: We recruited a community sample of 249 individuals engaged in CNM relationships across the U.S. and Canada. Confirmatory factor analysis structural equation modeling was used to analyze client perceptions of therapist practices in a number of exemplary practices (affirming of CNM) or inappropriate practices (biased, inadequate, or not affirming of CNM), and their associations with evaluations of therapy. Open-end responses about what clients found very helpful and very unhelpful were also analyzed. Results: Exemplary and inappropriate practices constituted separate but related patterns of therapist conduct. As expected, perceptions of exemplary and inappropriate practices predicted therapist helpfulness ratings and whether participants prematurely terminated their therapeutic relationships. Qualitative results point toward the importance of having/pursuing knowledge about CNM and using affirming, nonjudgmental practices. Conclusions: Therapists are positioned to either combat or perpetuate the minority stress faced by individuals engaged in CNM. The results of this study highlight the need for additional research, training, and guidelines regarding CNM clients and their therapy experiences

Promoting Replicable Sexual Science: A Methodological Review and Call for Metascience

Concerns have increased within the medical and social science communities about the replicability of scientific findings, and subsequently, assessments of replicability and proposals for how it may be increased have become more common. Sexual scientists, however, with few exceptions, have yet to formally participate in the published discourses about replicability. In this commentary, I begin by highlighting how replicability is important for science in general, and then arguing that sexual science could be uniquely and negatively impacted without more direct involvement in the replicability movement from those within our field. I then briefly review several mechanisms through which replicability can be undermined in research, and some of the proposals for addressing these issues. I conclude by offering some ideas for how sexual scientists might begin to evaluate and improve the replicability of our field, and stress the need for sexual scientists to add their voices to the ongoing discussions about the problem of replicability of scientific findings

Problems with Recall-Based Attachment Style Priming Paradigms: Exclusion Criteria, Sample Bias and Reduced Power

Attachment styles are often primed by having participants recall and describe a relationship that is prototypical of a given attachment style. Researchers may exclude participants who cannot recall such a relationship, or who describe relationships that do not conform to the assigned prime. I suggest that excluding participants is untenable, and may threaten a study’s validity. In the present research, I examine predictors of exclusion from an attachment priming study. Priming insecure attachment resulted in greater odds of exclusion relative to a control condition. Female participants with greater sexual experience also had lesser odds of exclusion. These results suggest that attachment-priming procedures contribute to participant exclusion that compromise internal and external validity. Discussion focuses on directions for future attachment-priming research

Measurement Modeling Peer-Review Template

This is a personalized template for peer-reviewing measurement modeling/psychometric-forward submissions at various journals, like within the context of a measure development + validation project

Exploring Small, Confirming Big: An alternative system to The New Statistics for advancing cumulative and replicable psychological research

While outlining his vision of The New Statistics, Cumming (2014) proposes that a more rigorous and cumulative psychological science will be built, in part, by having psychologists abandon traditional null-hypothesis significance testing (NHST) approaches, and conducting small-scale meta-analyses on their data whenever possible. In the present paper, I propose an alternative system for conducting rigorous and replicable psychological investigations, which I describe as Exploring Small, Confirming Big. I begin with a critical evaluation of the merits of NHST and small-scale meta-analyses, and argue that NHST does have a valuable role in the scientific process, whereas small-scale meta-analyses will do little to advance a cumulative science. I then present an overview of an alternative system for producing cumulative and replicable psychological research: Exploring Small, Confirming Big. It involves a two-step process to psychological research, consisting of (1) small N investigation(s), in which psychologists use NHST to develop exploratory models; and (2) strong, confirmatory tests of exploratory models, by analyzing new and/or existing large N datasets with variables that capture the effect(s) of interest from the Exploring Small stage. I conclude by discussing several anticipated benefits and challenges of adopting the Exploring Small, Confirming Big approach

Problems with Recall-Based Attachment Style Priming Paradigms: Exclusion Criteria, Sample Bias and Reduced Power

Attachment styles are often primed by having participants recall and describe a relationship that is prototypical of a given attachment style. Researchers may exclude participants who cannot recall such a relationship, or who describe relationships that do not conform to the assigned prime. I suggest that excluding participants is untenable, and may threaten a study’s validity. In the present research, I examine predictors of exclusion from an attachment priming study. Priming insecure attachment resulted in greater odds of exclusion relative to a control condition. Female participants with greater sexual experience also had lesser odds of exclusion. These results suggest that attachment-priming procedures contribute to participant exclusion that compromise internal and external validity. Discussion focuses on directions for future attachment-priming research

Promoting Replicable Sexual Science: A Methodological Review and Call for Metascience

Concerns have increased within the medical and social science communities about the replicability of scientific findings, and subsequently, assessments of replicability and proposals for how it may be increased have become more common. Sexual scientists, however, with few exceptions, have yet to formally participate in the published discourses about replicability. In this commentary, I begin by highlighting how replicability is important for science in general, and then arguing that sexual science could be uniquely and negatively impacted without more direct involvement in the replicability movement from those within our field. I then briefly review several mechanisms through which replicability can be undermined in research, and some of the proposals for addressing these issues. I conclude by offering some ideas for how sexual scientists might begin to evaluate and improve the replicability of our field, and stress the need for sexual scientists to add their voices to the ongoing discussions about the problem of replicability of scientific findings