Clark and Mills (2012) proposed that communal norms characterize “healthy marriages,” whereas exchange norms indicate “troubled” ones. Using the actor–partner interdependence model, we consider this proposal. Heterosexual married partners’ exchange and communal strength are examined with several relational features including trust, commitment, relational satisfaction, and control mutuality, as well as partner-specific tendencies toward forgiveness. The findings indicate that one’s communal strength is associated with positive relational features for both oneself and one’s spouse, as well as a greater propensity to forgive and lesser tendencies toward negative forgiveness (retaliation). Exchange strength was generally associated with negative forgiveness. However, the relationship between exchange strength and relational features is more complicated. Lesser communal strength was generally associated with lower levels of the relational characteristics. Yet, exchange and communal strength interacted, indicating exchange may play a protective function by buffering against the ill effects of a lack of communal strength for some relational characteristics.
AikenL. S.WestS. G.RenoR. R.(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
ArbuckleJ. L. (2017). Amos (Version 25.0). Chicago: IBM SPSS.
3.
BuunkB. P.Van YperenN. W. (1991). Referential comparisons, relational comparisons, and exchange orientation: Their relation to marital satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(6), 709–717.
4.
CanaryD. J.CupachW. R. (1988). Relational and episodic characteristics associated with conflict tactics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5(3), 305–325. doi:10.1177/0265407588053003
5.
CanaryD. J.SpitzbergB. H. (1989). A model of the perceived competence of conflict strategies. Human Communication Research, 15(4), 630–649.
6.
CanaryD. J.StaffordL. (1994). Maintaining relationships through strategic and routine interaction. In Communication and relational maintenance (pp. 3–22). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
7.
CanaryD. J.StaffordL. (2007). People want-and maintain-fair marriages: Reply to Ragsdale and Brandau-Brown. Journal of Family Communication, 7(1), 61–68. doi:10.1080/15267430709336669
8.
CarrèreS.BuehlmanK. T.GottmanJ. M.CoanJ. A.RuckstuhlL. (2000). Predicting marital stability and divorce in newlywed couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 14(1), 42–58. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.14.1.42
9.
ClarkM. S.ArmentanoL. A.BoothbyE. J.HirschJ. L. (2017). Communal relational context (or lack thereof) shapes emotional lives. Current Opinion in Psychology, 17, 176–183. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.07.023
10.
ClarkM. S.GroteN. K. (1998). Why aren’t indices of relationship costs always negatively related to indices of relationship quality?Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 2–17. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0201_1
11.
ClarkM. S.LemayE. P.GrahamS. M.PatakiS. P.FinkelE. J. (2010). Ways of giving benefits in marriage: Norm use, relationship satisfaction, and attachment-related variability. Psychological Science, 21(7), 944–951. doi:10.1177/0956797610373882
12.
ClarkM. S.MillsJ. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 12–24. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.12
13.
ClarkM. S.MillsJ. R. (2012). A theory of communal (and exchange) relationships. In Van LangeP. A. M.KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 232–250). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
14.
ClarkM. S.MillsJ.PowellM. C. (1986). Keeping track of needs in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(2), 333–338. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.333
15.
ClarkM. S.MilsJ. (1993). The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(6), 684–691. doi:10.1177/0146167293196003
16.
ClarkM. S.OulletteR.PowellM. C.MilbergS. (1987). Recipient’s mood, relationship type, and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 94–103. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.94
17.
ClarkM. S.WaddellB. (1985). Perceptions of exploitation in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2(4), 403–418. doi:10.1177/0265407585024002
18.
CookW. L.KennyD. A. (2005). The actor-partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(2), 101–109. doi:10.1080/01650250444000405
19.
DawsonJ. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1), 1–19.
20.
FinchamF. D. (2000). The kiss of the porcupines: From attributing responsibility to forgiving. Personal Relationships, 7(1), 1–23. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2000.tb00001.x
21.
FinchamF. D.BeachS. R. H. (2002). Forgiveness in marriage: Implications for psychological aggression and constructive communication. Personal Relationships, 9(3), 239–251. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00016
22.
FinchamF. D.HallJ.BeachS. R. H. (2006). Forgiveness in marriage: Current status and future directions. Family Relations, 55(4), 415–427. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2005.callf.x-i1
23.
FinchamF. D.PaleariF. G.RegaliaC. (2002). Forgiveness in marriage: The role of relationship quality, attributions, and empathy. Personal Relationships, 9(1), 27–37. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00002
24.
FritzH. L.HelgesonV. S. (1998). Distinctions of unmitigated communion from communion: Self-neglect and overinvolvement with others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 121–140. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.121
25.
GroteN. K.ClarkM. S. (1998). Distributive justice norms and family work: What is perceived as ideal, what is applied, and what predicts perceived fairness?Social Justice Research, 11(3), 243–269. doi:10.1023/A:1023234732556
26.
HatfieldE.RapsonR. L. (2011). Equity theory in close relationships. In Van LangeP. A. M.KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 200–217). London: Glyph International.
27.
JarvisS. N.McClureM. J.BolgerN. (2019). Exploring how exchange orientation affects conflict and intimacy in the daily life of romantic couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(11-12), 3575–3587. doi:10.1177/0265407519826743
28.
JohnsonM. P. (1999). Personal, moral, and structural commitment to relationships: Experiences of choice and constraint. In AdamsJ. M.JonesW. H. (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal commitment and relationship stability (pp. 63–88). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
29.
KelleyH. H.ThibautJ. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.
30.
KnoblochL. K.SolomonD. H. (2004). Interference and facilitation from partners in the development of interdependence within romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 11(1), 115–130.
31.
LarzelereR. E.HustonT. L. (1980). The dyadic trust scale: Toward understanding interpersonal trust in close relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42(3), 595–604. doi:10.2307/351903
32.
LeeH. (2021). Toward a culturally robust measure to assess marital relationships. Journal of Family Issues, 42(1), 201–225. doi:10.1177/0192513x20926202
33.
LeB. M.ImpettE. A.LemayE. P.MuiseA.TskhayK. O. (2018). Communal motivation and well-being in interpersonal relationships: An integrative review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 1–25. doi:10.1037/bul0000133
34.
LiT.FungH. H. (2019). Communal one day, exchange the next: Daily relationship orientation mediates the influence of perceived stress on constructive interactions in close relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(7), 2096–2115. doi:10.1177/0265407518779747
35.
McCulloughM. E.WorthingtonE. L.RachalK. C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(2), 321–336. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.321
36.
McNultyJ. KDugasA. (2020). Attributions, forgiveness and gratitude as relationship maintenance processes. In OlgolskyB. G.MonkJ. K. (Eds.), Relationship maintenance: Theory, process, and context (pp. 134–151). Retrieved fromCambridge University Press.
37.
MillsJ. R.ClarkM. S. (1994). Communal and exchange relationships: New research and old controversies. In GilmourR.ErberR. (Eds.), Theoretical approaches to personal relationships (pp. 29–42). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38.
MillsJ. R.ClarkM. S. (2001). Viewing close romantic relationships as communal relationships: Implications for maintenance and enhancement. In HarveyJ. H.WenzelA. (Eds.), Close romantic relationships: Maintenance and enhancement (pp. 13–25). Retrieved fromPsychology Press.
39.
MillsJ.ClarkM. S.FordT. E.JohnsonM. (2004). Measurement of communal strength. Personal Relationships, 11(2), 213–230. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00079.x
40.
MortonT. C.AlexanderJ. F.AltmanI. (1976). Communication and relationship definition. In MillerG. R. (Ed.), Explorations in interpersonal communication (pp. 105–126). Beverly Hills: Sage.
41.
MursteinB. I.CerretoM.DonaldM. G. M. (1977). A theory and investigation of the effect of exchange-orientation on marriage and friendship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 39(3), 543–548. doi:10.2307/350908
42.
RusbultC. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 101–117. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.101
43.
RusbultC. E.BuunkB. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10(2), 175–204. doi:10.1177/026540759301000202
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(4), 357–387. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x
45.
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(1), 53–78. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.1.53
46.
SabatelliR. M. (1984). The marital comparison level index: A measure for assessing outcomes relative to expectations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46(3), 651–662. doi:10.2307/352606
47.
SprecherS. (1988). Investment model, equity, and social support determinants of relationship commitment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51(4), 318–328. doi:10.2307/2786759
48.
StaffordL. (2020a). Communal strength, exchange orientation, equity, and relational maintenance. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37, 2345–2365. doi:10.1177/0265407520923741
49.
StaffordL. (2020b). Communication and relationship maintenance. In OlgolskyB. G.MonkJ. K. (Eds.), Relationship maintenance: Theory, process, and context (pp. 109–134). Retrieved fromCambridge University Press.
50.
StaffordL.CanaryD. J. (1991). Maintenance strategies and romantic relationship type, gender and relational characteristics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8(2), 217–242. doi:10.1177/0265407591082004
51.
StaffordL.CanaryD. J. (2006). Equity and interdependence as predictors of relational maintenance strategies. Journal of Family Communication, 6(4), 227–254.
52.
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(6), 1373–1395. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1373
53.
VanderDriftL. E.AgnewC. R. (2020). Interdependence perspectives on relationship maintenance. In OgolskyB. G.MonkJ. K. (Eds.), Relationship maintenance: Theory, process, and context (pp. 15–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54.
WaldronV. R.KellyD. L. (2008). Communicating forgiveness. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
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.
