Ideal-Actual Mate Mismatch and Relational Out-comes in Romantic Couples
Abstract
This study aims at ascertaining how the discrepancy between people’s ideal standards and romantic partner traits are associated with relationship constructs among romantic couples. Specifically, this study aims to examine how the relationship evaluations of the parties change when a person’s romantic partner does not match the characteristics, s/he dreams or desires within the framework of the Ideal Standards Model. The main hypothesis of the study was that not only the participants’ own, but also their partner’s ideal-actual discrepancy would be negatively associated with relationship quality, basic need satisfaction and perceived partner responsiveness. A total of 154 romantic couples participated in the study. Results of Actor Partner Interdependence Model analyses revealed that both one’s own and one’s partner’s higher ideal-actual discrepancy were associated with lower perceived partner responsiveness, basic need fulfillment and relationship quality. The findings replicate and support the previous studies regarding relationship quality and provide contributions to the relevant literature in terms of need satisfaction in relationships and perceived partner responsiveness.
Keywords
ideal-actual mate mismatch , relational outcomes , romantic couples
Kaynakça
- Campbell, L., and Kashy, D. A. (2002). Estimating actor, partner, and interaction effects for dyadic data using PROC MIXED and HLM: A user-friendly guide. Personal Relationships, 9, 327–342.
- Campbell, L., Simpson, J., Kashy, D., and Fletcher, G. (2001). Ideal standards, the self, and flexibility of ideals in close relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 447–462. doi:10.1177/ 0146167201274006
- Campbell, L., and Stanton, S.C.E. (2014) The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences in relationship formation: What we know, what we don’t know, and why it matters. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 485–494. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/spc3.12126
- Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self- determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
- Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology, 49(1), 14-23. doi: 10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.14
- Durante, K. M., Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., Gangestad, S. W., and Simpson, J. A. (2016). Pair-bonded relationships and romantic alternatives: Toward an integration of evolutionary and relationship science perspectives. In Olson J. M., ve Zanna M. P. (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (p. 1–74). Burlington, MA: Academic Press.
- Eastwick, P. W., Luchies, L. B., Finkel, E. J., and Hunt, L. L. (2013, April 15). The predictive validity of ıdeal partner preferences: A review and meta- analysis. Psychological Bulletin. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0032432
- Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., and Eagly, A. H. (2011). When and why do ideal partner preferences affect the process of initiating and maintaining romantic relationships? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 1012–1032. doi:10.1037/a0024062
- Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., and Simpson, J. A. (2019). Best practices for testing the predictive validity of ideal partner preference-matching. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 167-181.
- Eastwick, P. W., and Neff, L. A. (2012). Do ideal partner preferences predict divorce? A tale of two metrics. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 667–674. doi:10.1177/1948550611435941