The precarious couple effect occurs when men pair with women who are both critical and more verbally disinhibited than them. Evidence that dissatisfaction runs high in such relationships makes one ask why people enter them in the first place. In Study 1, respondents recalled that past partners who were verbally disinhibited were relatively active in initiating the relationship. In Study 2, verbally inhibited men evidenced ambivalence in that they disliked disinhibited women more than inhibited ones but these feelings of disliking did not translate into expectations of feeling tense during the interaction. Study 3 revealed that initial interactions between inhibited men and disinhibited women go smoothly unless (a) the women are critical and (b) the pair discusses a stressful topic. The authors suggest that members of precarious couples are drawn to one another because, in initial encounters, their communication styles are relatively symbiotic. Alas, this initial chemistry does not always endure.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Berscheid, E.,& Reis, H. T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology(4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 193-281). New York: McGraw-Hill.
3.
Byrne, D. E. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
4.
Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, & influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941-951.
5.
Carli, L. L., LaFleur, S. J.,& Loeber, C. C. (1995). Nonverbal behavior, gender, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1030-1041.
6.
Carrére, S., & Gottman, J. M. (1999). Predicting divorce among newlyweds from the first three minutes of a marital conflict discussion. Family Processes, 38, 293-301.
7.
Cattell, R. B., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1967). Likeness and completeness theories examined by sixteen personality factor measures on stably and unstably married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 351-361.
8.
Condon, J. W., & Crano, W. D. (1988). Inferred evaluation and the relation between attitude similarity and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 789-797.
9.
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
10.
Felmlee, D. H. (1995). Fatal attractions: Affection and disaffection in intimate relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12(2), 295-311.
11.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Sexism and other “isms”: Interdependence, status, and the ambivalent content of stereotypes. In W. B. Swann, J. H. Langlois, & L. A. Gilbert (Eds.), Sexism and stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Taylor Spence(pp. 193-221). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
12.
Gottman, J. (1982). Emotional responsiveness in marital conversations. Journal of Communication, 32, 108-120.
13.
Gottman, J. (1994). Why marriages succeed or fail. New York: Simon & Schuster.
14.
Gottman, J. M., & Krokoff, L. J. (1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 47-52.
15.
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1999). What predicts change in marital interaction over time? A study of alternative models. Family Processes, 38, 143-158.
16.
Holmes, J. G. (2000). Social relationships: The nature and function of relational schemas. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 447-496.
17.
Houts, R., Huston, T. L., & Robins, E. (1996). Compatibility and the development of premarital relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 7-20.
18.
Ickes, W., & Barnes, R. D. (1978). Boys and girls together—and alienated: On enacting stereotyped sex roles in mixed-sex dyads. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 669-683.
19.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin& O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research(2nd ed., pp. 102-139). New York: Guilford.
20.
Kelly, L., Keaten, J., Finch, C., Duarte, I., Hoffmann, P., & Michels, M. M. (2002). Family communication patterns and the development of reticence. Communication Education, 51, 202-209.
21.
Klohnen, E. C., & Mendelsohn, G. (1998). Partner selection for personality characteristics: A couple-centered approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 268-278.
22.
Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (1999). The association between spouses' self-reports of attachment styles and representations of family dynamics. Family Process, 38, 69-83.
23.
Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. 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.
24.
Plomin, R., Chipuer, H. M., & Loehlin, J. C. (1990). Behavioral genetics and personality. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research(pp. 225-243). New York: Guilford.
25.
Robins, R. W., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. (2000). Two personalities, one relationship: Both partners' personality traits shape the quality of their relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 251-259.
26.
Robins, R. W., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. (2002). It's not just who you're with, it's who you are: Personality and relationship experiences across multiple relationships. Journal of Personality, 70, 925-964.
27.
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743-762.
28.
Stern, D. (1977). The first relationship. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
Swann, W. B., Jr., McClarty, K. L., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2004). Shelter from the storm? Experimental evidence that (some) romantic partners facilitate recovery from stress. Manuscript submitted for publication, University of Texas at Austin.
30.
Swann, W. B., Jr., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2001). Blirtatiousness: Cognitive, behavioral and physiological consequences of rapid responding. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 81, 1160-1175.
31.
Swann, W. B., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. G. (2003). The precarious couple effect: Verbally inhibited men + critical, disinhibited women = bad chemistry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 1095-1106.
32.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A.,& Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
33.
Willerman, L., Turner, R. G., & Peterson, M. (1976). A comparison of the predictive validity of typical and maximal personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 482-492.
