This paper reviews theory and research regarding the “Michelangelo phenomenon.” The Michelangelo model suggests that close partners sculpt one another's selves, shaping one another's skills and traits and promoting versus inhibiting one another's goal pursuits. As a result of the manner in which partners perceive and behave toward one another, each person enjoys greater or lesser success at attaining his or her ideal-self goals. Affirmation of one another's ideal-self goals yields diverse benefits, both personal and relational. The Michelangelo model and supportive empirical evidence are reviewed, the phenomenon is distinguished from related interpersonal processes, and directions for future work are outlined.
CarverC.S.ScheierM.F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
2.
CooleyD.H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribners.
3.
DeciE.L.RyanR.M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
4.
DrigotasS.M. (2002). The Michelangelo phenomenon and personal well-being. Journal of Personality, 70, 59–77.
5.
DrigotasS.M.RusbultC.E.WieselquistJ.WhittonS. (1999). Close partner as sculptor of the ideal self: Behavioral affirmation and the Michelangelo phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 293–323.
6.
GombrichE.H. (1995). The story of art (16th ed.). London: Phaidon Press.
7.
HigginsE.T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340.
8.
KelleyH.H.BerscheidE.ChristensenA.HarveyJ.H.HustonT.L.LevingerG.(Eds.). (1983). Close relationships. New York: W. H. Freeman.
9.
KelleyH.H.HolmesJ.G.KerrN.L.ReisH.T.RusbultC.E.Van LangeP.A.M. (2003). An atlas of interpersonal situations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
KumashiroM.RusbultC.E.CoolsenM.K.WolfS.T.van den BoschM.van der LeeR. (2009). Partner affirmation, verification, and enhancement as determinants of attraction to potential dates: Experimental evidence of the unique effect of affirmation. Unpublished manuscript, Goldsmiths, University of London.
11.
KumashiroM.RusbultC.E.FinkenauerC.StockerS.L. (2007). To think or to do: The impact of assessment and locomotion orientation on the Michelangelo phenomenon. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 591–611.
12.
MarkusH.NuriusP. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969.
13.
MurrayS.L.HolmesJ.G.GriffinD.W. (1996). The benefits of positive illusions: Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 79–98.
14.
RusbultC.E.CoolsenM.KirchnerJ.StockerS.KumashiroM.WolfS. (2009). Partner affirmation and target movement toward ideal in newly-committed relationships. Unpublished manuscript, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
15.
RusbultC.E.KumashiroM.FinkelE.KirchnerJ.CoolsenM.StockerS.ClarkeJ. (2009). A longitudinal study of the Michelangelo phenomenon in marital relationships. Unpublished manuscript, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
16.
RusbultC.E.KumashiroM.KubackaK.E.FinkelE.J. (2009). The part of me that you bring out: Ideal similarity and the Michelangelo phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 61–82.
17.
RusbultC.E.ReisH.T.KumashiroM. (2009). On the regulation of ongoing relationships: Partner affirmation, perceived responsiveness, and mutual cyclical growth. Unpublished manuscript, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
18.
RusbultC.E.Van LangeP.A.M. (2003). Interdependence, interaction, and relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 351–375.
19.
SwannW.B.Jr.DeLaRondeC.HixonJ.G. (1994). Authenticity and positivity strivings in marriage and courtship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 857–869.
