The current research examined accuracy and bias in daily forecasts within romantic relationships. Results of an extensive daily report study involving 200 romantic dyads and 4,822 daily observations suggested that predictions regarding affect and partner behavior that will occur tomorrow are somewhat accurate, predicted by actual experiences tomorrow, but are largely biased by current experiences. Participants appeared to project the current state of their relationship into the future, a temporal projection bias. This bias predicted forecasters’ pro-relationship motivation and behavior. Forecasters were less likely to exhibit the temporal projection bias when they were high in relationship commitment, and they were more likely to exhibit the bias when they were high in need for cognitive closure, suggesting that motivation can constrain or amplify tendencies to project the present into the future. Implications for interpersonal relationships are discussed.
ArielyD.LoewensteinG. (2006). The heat of the moment: The effect of sexual arousal on sexual decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19, 87-98.
2.
ArmorD. A.TaylorS. E. (1998). Situated optimism: Specific outcome expectancies and self-regulation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 309-379.
3.
AssadK. K.DonnellanM. B.CongerR. D. (2007). Optimism: An enduring resource for romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 285-297.
4.
BaronJ. (1992). The effect of normative beliefs on anticipated emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 320-330.
5.
BowerG. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36, 129-148.
6.
ChiuC.-Y.HongY.-Y.DweckC. S. (1997). Lay dispositionism and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 19-30.
7.
ClarkM. S.LemayE. P.Jr. (2010). Close relationships. In FiskeS. T.GilbertD. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 898-940). New York, NY: Wiley.
8.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
9.
EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J.KrishnamurtiT.LoewensteinG. (2008). Mispredicting distress following romantic breakup: Revealing the time course of the affective forecasting error. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 800-807.
10.
EndersC. K.TofighiD. (2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12, 121-138.
11.
ForgasJ. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117, 39-66.
12.
GilbertD. T.GillM. J. (2000). The momentary realist. Psychological Science, 11, 394-398.
13.
GilbertD. T.GillM. J.WilsonT. D. (2002). The future is now: Temporal correction in affective forecasting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 430-444.
14.
GilbertD. T.PelhamB. W.KrullD. S. (1988). On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 733-740.
15.
GilbertD. T.PinelE. C.WilsonT. D.BlumbergS. J.WheatleyT. P. (1998). Immune neglect: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 617-638.
16.
GriffinD.MurrayS.GonzalezR. (1999). Difference score correlations in relationship research: A conceptual primer. Personal Relationships, 6, 505-518.
17.
HigginsE. T.RholesW. S.JonesC. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141-154.
18.
IgouE. R. (2004). Lay theories in affective forecasting: The progression of affect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 528-534.
19.
IsenA. M.ShalkerT. E.ClarkM.KarpL. (1978). Affect, accessibility of material in memory, and behavior: A cognitive loop?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1-12.
20.
JacowitzK. E.KahnemanD. (1995). Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1161-1166.
21.
JiL.-J. (2008). The leopard cannot change his spots, or can he? Culture and the development of lay theories of change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 613-622.
JohnsonD. J.RusbultC. E. (1989). Resisting temptation: Devaluation of alternative partners as a means of maintaining commitment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 967-980.
24.
KennyD. A.DePauloB. M. (1993). Do people know how others view them? An empirical and theoretical account. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 145-161.
25.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
26.
KruglanskiA. W.WebsterD. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.”Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
27.
LakeyB.McCabeK. M.FisicaroS. A.DrewJ. B. (1996). Environmental and personal determinants of support perceptions: Three generalizability studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1270-1280.
28.
LeB.AgnewC. R. (2003). Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta-analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships, 10, 37-57.
29.
LemayE. P.Jr.ClarkM. S. (2008). How the head liberates the heart: Projection of communal responsiveness guides relationship promotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 647-671.
30.
LevesqueM. J. (1997). Meta-accuracy among acquainted individuals: A social relations analysis of interpersonal perception and metaperception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 66-74.
31.
LevesqueM. J.KennyD. A. (1993). Accuracy of behavioral predictions at zero acquaintance: A social relations analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1178-1187.
32.
LoewensteinG.FrederickS. (1997). Predicting reactions to environmental change. In Environment, ethics, and behavior (pp. 52-72). San Francisco, CA: The New Lexington Press.
33.
LoewensteinG.O’DonoghueT.RabinM. (2003). Projection bias in predicting future utility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 1209-1248.
34.
MorewedgeC. K.TodorovA. (2012). The Least Likely Act: Overweighting atypical past behavior in behavioral predictions. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 3, 760-766.
35.
MurrayS. L.HolmesJ. G. (1997). A leap of faith? Positive illusions in romantic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 586-604.
36.
MurrayS. L.HolmesJ. G.CollinsN. L. (2006). Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 641-666.
37.
NisbettR. E.PengK.ChoiI.NorenzayanA. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108, 291-310.
38.
NussbaumS.TropeY.LibermanN. (2003). Creeping dispositionism: The temporal dynamics of behavior prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 485-497.
39.
PierroA.KruglanskiA. W. (2005). Revised Need for Cognitive Closure Scale (NfCS). Unpublished manuscript. Universita di Roma, “La Sapienza,”Italy.
40.
ReadD.LoewensteinG. (1999). Enduring pain for money: Decisions based on the perception and memory of pain. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 1-17.
41.
ReadD.Van LeeuwenB. (1998). Predicting hunger: The effects of appetite and delay on choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 189-205.
42.
ReisH. T.ClarkM. S.HolmesJ. G. (2004). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing construct in the study of intimacy and closeness. In MashekD. J.AronA. P. (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 201-225). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
43.
RusbultC. E.BuunkB. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 175-204.
44.
RusbultC. E.MartzJ. M.AgnewC. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357-391.
45.
RusbultC. E.Van LangeP. A. M.WildschutT.YovetichN. A.VeretteJ. (2000). Perceived superiority in close relationships: Why it exists and persists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 521-545.
46.
RusbultC. E.VeretteJ.WhitneyG. A.SlovikL. F.LipkusI. (1991). Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 53-78.
47.
ShiotaM. N.CamposB.KeltnerD.HertensteinM. J. (2004). Positive emotion and the regulation of interpersonal relationships. In PhilippotP.FeldmanR. S. (Eds.), The regulation of emotion (pp. 127-155). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48.
SnijdersT.BoskerR. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
49.
SrivastavaS.McGonigalK. M.RichardsJ. M.ButlerE. A.GrossJ. J. (2006). Optimism in close relationships: How seeing things in a positive light makes them so. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 143-153.
50.
TotterdellP.ParkinsonB.BrinerR. B.ReynoldsS. (1997). Forecasting feelings: The accuracy and effects of self-predictions of mood. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 631-650.
51.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
52.
Van BovenL.LoewensteinG. (2003). Social projection of transient drive states. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1159-1168.
53.
Van BovenL.LoewensteinG.DunningD. (2005). The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 130-141.
54.
Van LangeP. A. M.RusbultC. E.DrigotasS. M.ArriagaX. B.WitcherB. S.CoxC. L. (1997). Willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1373-1395.
55.
WebsterD. M.KruglanskiA. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062.
56.
WilsonT. D.GilbertD. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 345-411.
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.
