Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pilkington, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Stephens, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Complementarity in Romantic Relationships: A Self-Evaluation Maintenance Perspective

Constance J. Pilkington

SUNY College at Oswego

Abraham Tesser

University of Georgia

Deborah Stephens

Brandeis University

Three studies were conducted to extend the Self-Evaluation Maintenance (SEM) model to romantic relationships. Subjects in all three studies indicated the importance of sixty-eight activities to themselves and, in Studies 2 and 3, to their partners. For activities that were relevant to subjects' self-definitions, a comparison effect emerged; subjects reported outperforming their partners. When self-relevance was low, a reflection effect emerged; subjects reported being outperformed by their partners. Subjects' reports also showed `empathic' comparison and reflection processes for their partners. These effects were strongest when relevance was high for one partner and low for the other; when partners' self-definitions were similar, the SEM processes were attenuated. These effects persisted even when the reports of both partners were considered (Study 3). The findings are discussed in the framework of the complementarity hypothesis, and implications for both the SEM model and the complementarity hypothesis are considered.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 8, No. 4, 481-504 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/026540759184003
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Organization ManagementHome page
A. Oosterhof, G. S. Van der Vegt, E. Van de Vliert, and K. Sanders
Valuing Skill Differences: Perceived Skill Complementarity and Dyadic Helping Behavior in Teams
Group Organization Management, October 1, 2009; 34(5): 536 - 562.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
M. T. Schmitt, P. J. Silvia, and N. R. Branscombe
The Intersection of Self-Evaluation Maintenance and Social Identity Theories: Intragroup Judgment in Interpersonal and Intergroup Contexts
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, December 1, 2000; 26(12): 1598 - 1606.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
H. A. O'Mahen, S. R. H. Beach, and A. Tesser
Relationship Ecology and Negative Communication in Romantic Relationships: A Self-Evaluation Maintenance Perspective
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, November 1, 2000; 26(11): 1343 - 1352.
[Abstract] [PDF]