A longitudinal test of the relational turbulence model of romantic relationship development

Authors

  • DENISE HAUNANI SOLOMON,

    Corresponding author
    1. a Pennsylvania State University and bRutgers University
      Denise Haunani Solomon, Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, 234 Sparks Building, University Park, PA 16802, e-mail: dhs12@psu.edu.
    Search for more papers by this author
      Denise Haunani Solomon, Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Pennsylvania State University
  • and a JENNIFER A. THEISS b

    1. a Pennsylvania State University and bRutgers University
    Search for more papers by this author
      Jennifer A. Theiss, Department of Communication, Rutgers University.

  • Denise Haunani Solomon, Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Pennsylvania State University; Jennifer A. Theiss, Department of Communication, Rutgers University.

  • This research is a portion of the second author’s dissertation conducted under the direction of the first author at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

Denise Haunani Solomon, Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, 234 Sparks Building, University Park, PA 16802, e-mail: dhs12@psu.edu.

Abstract

A longitudinal study evaluated associations between intimacy and relational uncertainty and characteristics of interdependence within nonmarital romantic relationships. Three hundred and fifteen college students in the United States completed a Web-based survey about their relationship weekly for 6 weeks. Results indicated nonlinear associations between intimacy and relational uncertainty and perceptions of a partner’s interference (p < .001) that were inconsistent with hypotheses. Intimacy was positively associated with a partner’s influence in and facilitation of activities (p < .001). An interaction between intimacy and a partner’s influence predicted a partner’s interference, such that a partner’s influence was more positively associated with interference at low, compared to high, intimacy (p < .05). The implications of these findings for rethinking the relational turbulence model are discussed.

Ancillary