Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
The Role of Relationship Parameters in Emotion Experiences During Interactions Between Romantic Partners: Testing Relational Turbulence Theory in a Dyadic,Lab Study
Relational turbulence theory explains the mechanisms whereby relationship parameters influence partners’ emotion, cognition, and communication during specific episodes. Using dyadic, collaborative interactions, this study tested three understudied claims proposed by the theory to shed light on the antecedents and consequences of emotion during everyday conversations between romantic partners. Seventy-one couples completed a pre-test survey that included measures of relationship parameters, were video-taped participating in two planning discussions (randomly ordered), and completed post-tests after each discussion. The conversations were then evaluated for communication engagement and valence by outside observers. Results point to relationship uncertainty as a predictor of emotion during communication and add nuance to our understanding of how happiness and annoyance associate with communicative valence and engagement during everyday interactions.
AcitelliL. K. (1992). Gender differences in relationship awareness and marital satisfaction among young married couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 102–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292181015
2.
AfifiW. A.MorganS. E.StephensonM. T.MorseC.HarrisonT.ReichertT.LongS. D. (2006). Examining the decision to talk with family about organ donation: Applying the theory of motivated information management. Communication Monographs, 73(2), 188–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750600690700
3.
AfifiW. A.ReichertT. (1996). Understanding the role of uncertainty in jealousy experience and expression. Communication Reports, 9(2), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934219609367642
4.
AverillJ. A. (1993). Putting the social in social cognition, with special reference to emotion. In WyerR. S.SrullT. K. (Eds.), Perspectives on anger and emotion: Advances in social cognition (Vol. 6, pp. 47–56). Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
BergC. A.JohnsonM. M. S.MeeganS. P.StroughJ. (2003). Collaborative problem-solving interactions in young and old married couples. Discourse Processes, 35(1), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3501_2
6.
BerscheidE. (1983). Emotion. In KelleyH. H.BerscheidE.ChristensenA.HarveyJ. H.HustonT. L.LevingerG.McClintockE.PeplauL. A.PetersonD. R. (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 110–168). Freeman.
7.
BolkanS.GoodboyA. K.ShinM.QuaackK. R. (2023). Relational turbulence: A latent model test of theoretical propositions. Southern Communication Journal, 88(5), 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/1041794x.2023.2167108
8.
BrosschotJ. F.VerkuilB.ThayerJ. F. (2016). The default response to uncertainty and the importance of perceived safety in anxiety and stress: An evolution-theoretical perspective. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 41, 22–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.04.012
9.
ButlerE. A. (2011). Temporal interpersonal emotion systems: The “TIES” that form relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(4), 367–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311411164
CunninghamM. R.BarbeeA. P.DruenP. B. (1997). Social allergens and the reactions that they produce: Escalation of annoyance and disgust in love and work. In KowalskiR. M. (Ed.), Aversive Interpersonal Behaviors (pp. 189–214). Springer US.
12.
FitzsimonsG. M.ShahJ. Y. (2008). How goal instrumentality shapes relationship evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(2), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.2.319
13.
FontaineJ. J. R.SchererK. R. (2013). Emotion is for doing: The action tendency component. In FontaineJ. J. R.SchererK. R.SorianoC. (Eds.), Components of emotional meaning: A sourcebook (pp. 170–185). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199592746.003.0012
14.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge University Press.
15.
FrijdaN. H.KuipersP.Ter SchureE. (1989). Relations among emotion, appraisal, and emotional action readiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(2), 212–228. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.2.212
16.
GhoseA.SinghP. V.TodriV. (2017). Got annoyed? Examining the advertising effectiveness and annoyance dynamics [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS ’17). AIS.
17.
GoodboyA. K.BolkanS.SharabiL. L.MyersS. A.BakerJ. P. (2020). The relational turbulence model: A meta-analytic review. Human Communication Research, 46(2-3), 222–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqaa002
18.
GoodboyA. K.DillowM. R.KnosterK. C.HowardH. A. (2023). Dyadic processes of relational turbulence theory. Personal Relationships, 30(3), 1000–1023. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12487
HirshJ. B.MarR. A.PetersonJ. B. (2012). Psychological entropy: A framework for understanding uncertainty-related anxiety. Psychological Review, 119(2), 304–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026767
21.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Publications.
22.
KnoblochL. K. (2005). Evaluating a contextual model of responses to relational uncertainty increasing events: The role of intimacy, appraisals, and emotions. Human Communication Research, 31(1), 60–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/31.1.60
23.
KnoblochL. K.MillerL. E.CarpenterK. E. (2007). Using the relational turbulence model to understand negative emotion within courtship. Personal Relationships, 14(1), 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00143.x
24.
KnoblochL. K.SatterleeK. L. (2009). Relational uncertainty: Theory and application. In AfifiT. D.AfifiW. A. (Eds.), Uncertainty, information management, and disclosure decisions: Theories and applications (pp. 106–127). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203933046
25.
KnoblochL. K.TheissJ. A. (2010). An actor—partner interdependence model of relational turbulence: Cognitions and emotions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(5), 595–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510368967
26.
KnoblochL. K.TheissJ. A. (2011). Depressive symptoms and mechanisms of relational turbulence as predictors of relationship satisfaction among returning service members. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(4), 470–478. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024063
27.
KnosterK.HowardH. A.GoodboyA. K.DillowM. R. (2020). Spousal interference and relational turbulence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Communication Research Reports, 37(5), 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2020.1841621
28.
LancasterA. L.DillowM. R.BallH.BorchertK.TylerW. J. C. (2016). Managing information about a romantic partner’s relationship history: An application of the theory of motivated information management. Southern Communication Journal, 81(2), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/1041794x.2015.1089926
29.
LillieH. M.Chernichky-KarcherS.VenetisM. K. (2021). Dyadic coping and discrete emotions during COVID-19: Connecting the communication theory of resilience with relational uncertainty. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(6), 1844–1868. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211009302
30.
McLarenR. M.SolomonD. H.PriemJ. S. (2011). Explaining variation in contemporaneous responses to hurt in premarital romantic relationships: A relational turbulence model perspective. Communication Research, 38(4), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210377896
31.
NabiR. L. (1999). A cognitive-functional model for the effects of discrete negative emotions on information processing, attitude change, and recall. Communication Theory, 9(3), 292–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00172.x
32.
OgolskyB. G.BowersJ. R. (2013). A meta-analytic review of relationship maintenance and its correlates. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 343–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512463338
33.
OverallN. C.FletcherG. J.SimpsonJ. A. (2010). Helping each other grow: Romantic partner support, self-improvement, and relationship quality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(11), 1496–1513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210383045
34.
QuaackK. R.BolkanS.GoodboyA. K. (2022). Interdependence and affective processes in relational turbulence theory. Communication Reports, 35(3), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2022.2080843
35.
RauscherE. A.HesseC. (2014). Investigating uncertainty and emotions in conversations about family health history: A test of the theory of motivated information management. Journal of Health Communication, 19(8), 939–954. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2013.837558
36.
SolomonD. H.BrisiniK. S. (2019). Relational uncertainty and interdependence processes in marriage: A test of relational turbulence theory. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(8), 2416–2436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518788700
37.
SolomonD. H.BrisiniK. S. C. (2017). Operationalizing relational turbulence theory: Measurement and construct validation. Personal Relationships, 24(4), 768–789. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12212
38.
SolomonD. H.KnoblochL. K. (2001). Relationship uncertainty, partner interference, and intimacy within dating relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18(6), 804–820. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407501186004
39.
SolomonD. H.KnoblochL. K. (2004). A model of relational turbulence: The role of intimacy, relational uncertainty, and interference from partners in appraisals of irritations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21(6), 795–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407504047838
40.
SolomonD. H.KnoblochL. K.TheissJ. A.McLarenR. M. (2016). Relational turbulence theory: Explaining variation in subjective experiences and communication within romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 42(4), 507–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12091
41.
SolomonD. H.TheissJ. A. (2011). Relational turbulence: What doesn’t kill us makes us stronger. In CupachW. R.SpitzbergB. H. (Eds.), The dark side of close relationships II (pp. 197–216). Routledge.
42.
SolomonD. H.TheissJ. A.KnoblochL. K.McLarenR. M. (2019). Reflections on the development of relational turbulence theory. In WilsonS. R.SmithS. W. (Eds.), Reflections on interpersonal communication research (pp. 315–336). Cognella.
43.
TheissJ. A.KnoblochL. K. (2009). An actor-partner interdependence model of irritations in romantic relationships. Communication Research, 36(4), 510–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209333033
44.
TheissJ. A.KnoblochL. K.ChectonM. G.Magsamen-ConradK. (2009). Relationship characteristics associated with the experience of hurt in romantic relationships: A test of the relational turbulence model. Human Communication Research, 35(4), 588–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01364.x
45.
TheissJ. A.NagyM. E. (2010). Actor-partner effects in the associations between relationship characteristics and reactions to marital sexual intimacy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(8), 1089–1109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510381254
46.
TheissJ. A.SolomonD. H. (2006). Coupling longitudinal data and multilevel modeling to examine the antecedents and consequences of jealousy experiences in romantic relationships: A test of the relational turbulence model. Human Communication Research, 32(4), 469–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2006.00284.x
47.
TianX.SolomonD. H. (2020). A relational turbulence theory perspective on women’s grief following miscarriage. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37(6), 1852–1872. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520910792
Van DijkE.ZeelenbergM. (2006). The dampening effect of uncertainty on positive and negative emotions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19(2), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.504
WeberK. M.SolomonD. H. (2008). Locating relationship and communication issues among stressors associated with breast cancer. Health Communication, 23(6), 548–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230802465233
52.
WeissR. L. (1980). Strategic behavioral marital therapy: Toward a model for assessment and intervention. In VincentJ. P. (Ed.), Advances in family intervention, assessment, and theory (Vol. 1, pp. 229–271). JAI Press.
53.
WilkowskiB. M.RobinsonM. D. (2010). The anatomy of anger: An integrative cognitive model of trait anger and reactive aggression. Journal of Personality, 78(1), 9–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00607.x
54.
WorleyT.SampJ. (2014). Exploring the associations between relational uncertainty, jealousy about partners’ friendships, and jealousy expression in dating relationships. Communication Studies, 65(4), 370–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2013.833529
55.
ZillmannD. (1996). Sequential dependencies in emotional experience and behavior. In KavanaughR. D.ZimmerbergB.FeinS. (Eds.), Emotion: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 243–272). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
