Factors predicting future time orientation for romantic relationships with the opposite sex

Pathological jealousy and pathological love: Apples to apples or apples to oranges?

Pathological jealousy evokes emotions, thoughts, and behaviors that cause damage to social and interpersonal relationships. On the other hand, pathological love is the uncontrollable behavior of caring for a partner that results in neglecting the needs of the self. The aim of the present research was to assess the similarities and differences between the two psychopathologies of love. To this end, thirty-two individuals with pathological jealousy and 33 individuals with pathological love were compared on demographics, aspects of romantic relationship (jealousy, satisfaction, love style), psychiatric co-morbidities, personality and psychological characteristics (e.g., impulsivity). In a univariate analysis individuals with pathological jealousy were more likely to be in a current relationship and reported greater satisfaction. The avoidant attachment and the ludus love style were associated with pathological jealousy whereas the secure attachment and agape love style was associated with pathological love. Almost three-quarters (72.3%) of the sample met criteria for a current psychiatric disorder, however no differences emerged between the pathological jealousy and pathological love groups. In a binary logistic regression, relationship status and impairments in parenting significantly differentiated the groups. While both pathological jealousy and pathological love share similarities, they also present with unique differences, which may have important treatment implications.

Pathological jealousy: romantic relationship characteristics, emotional and personality aspects, and social adjustment

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to identify romantic relationship characteristics, emotional and personality aspects and social adjustment in subjects with pathological jealousy (PJ) and to compare them to control group.

METHODS

The participants, 32 individuals with PJ and 31 healthy volunteers completed measures of jealousy intensity, attachment type, love and relationship styles, personality, impulsivity, aggressiveness and social adjustment. Socio-demographic profiles were also obtained.

RESULTS

Participants with PJ were significantly older than the control group, but no other important socio-demographic differences were observed. Participants with PJ were significantly more jealous and were predominately categorized with anxious-ambivalent attachment type, and Mania love style. They presented with elevated novelty seeking and harm avoidance, low self-directedness and cooperativeness, high levels of impulsivity and trait anxiety, and poor social adjustment. Multivariate analysis showed that jealousy intensity and trait anxiety were the variables that best distinguished participants with PJ from the control group.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the cross-sectional design and relatively small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

PJ presents a particular pattern of attachment, love style, and personality structure, and deserves further attention as a specific potential disorder of the romantic bonding.

Self-Monitoring and Close Relationships

Three types of close relationships have received attention from theorists and researchers interested in self-monitoring: friendships, romantic relationships, and marriage. Our review of this literature was organized around three phases of relationships: initiation, maintenance, and dissolution. Across the three types of relationships, consistent differences between high self-monitors and low self-monitors emerged concerning the structure of their social relationships (segmented vs. integrated), the basis for choosing friends and romantic partners (activity-based vs. person-based), and the orientation taken to romantic and marital partners (uncommitted vs. committed). Across all three types of relationships, however, little is known about the processes and consequences involved in the dissolution of close relationships for high self-monitors and low self-monitors. Relatively little is also known about the processes used by high self-monitors and low self-monitors to maintain their friendships and marriages. In addition to addressing these deficiencies in the literature, theorists and researchers interested in self-monitoring and close relationships need to develop sophisticated, causal models that can account for (a) interaction exchanges in the relationships, (b) dyadic as well as individual levels of analysis, and (c) temporal and situational changes in the course of close relationships.

FUTURE TIME ORIENTATION IN ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS AND THE MINDING THEORY OF RELATING

The aim of this study was to explore the differences between high and low scorers of Future Time Orientation in Romantic Relationships (FTORR) on the three subscales of the minding scale, namely Acceptance, Knowledge, and Attribution. Undergraduate students (N = 160) from Middle East Technical University were given the FTORR scale developed by Öner (2000b) together with the Minding Scale developed by Omarzu, Whalen and Harvey (2001). Results indicated an interaction effect between subscales of the minding scale and FTORR. In terms of the “Acceptance” subscale, individuals with high FTORR scores were found to score lower than were individuals who had lower FTORR scores – whereas for both “Knowledge” and “Attribution” measures, individuals with higher scores of FTORR scored higher than did individuals who had lower FTORR scores. Detailed analysis of the results and research implications were discussed.

How do romantic relationship satisfaction, gender stereotypes, and gender relate to future time orientation in romantic relationships?

The present study is an investigation into how romantic relationship satisfaction and attitudes toward gender stereotypes about romantic relationship and gender are related to future time orientation in romantic relationships (FTORR). Four hundred and thirteen (208 men and 205 women) university students taking elective psychology courses at Middle East Technical University were given a scale including items about FTORR, romantic relationship satisfaction, and attitudes toward gender stereotypes about romantic relationships. All the participants were then involved in a heterosexual romantic relationship. Multiple regression results showed that for the women, attitudes toward men's assertiveness and men's dominance in relationships were more important predictors of FTORR than relationship satisfaction. For the men, attitudes toward men's assertiveness and romantic relationship satisfaction were important predictors of FTORR, but attitude toward men's dominance was not a predictor of FTORR. Women were more future oriented in their ongoing romantic relationships than were men. Finally, participants who were highly satisfied with their relationships scored higher on FTORR than those who were less satisfied.

Self-monitoring and future time orientation in romantic relationships

The author examined the relationship between self-monitoring and participant's gender, and future time orientation in romantic relationships (FrORR) and tested the concurrent validity of the FTORR scale in this respect. One hundred seventy-three undergraduate students from Middle East Technical University were given M. Snyder's (1974) self-monitoring scale and B. Oner's (2000b) FTORR scale. Low self-monitoring participants had a more extended future time orientation (FTO) than high self-monitoring participants in terms of romantic associations.