Two studies apply Fiske’s Relational Model Theory (RMT) to interpersonal relationships and indicate that rather than being models of relationships, relational models are models of relating that are used differently across interpersonal relationship domains. Study 1 (n = 145) investigated the use of relational models in three relationship types (mother, friend, and acquaintance). Results showed that even though relationship type predicted relational model use, model use varied significantly across relationship domains. Study 2 (n = 282) provides a cross-cultural replication of these findings (US and Singapore). Results of both studies suggest that Relational Model Theory is a particularly fruitful approach to relationship research when individual relationship domains are considered in addition to relationship types.
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information . Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461-484 .
2.
Baldwin, M. W. (1994). Primed relational schemas as a source of self-evaluative reactions . Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 380-403 .
3.
Berscheid, E. (1995). Help wanted: A grand theorist of interpersonal relationships, sociologist or anthropologist preferred . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 529-533 .
4.
Clark, M. S. , & Mills, J. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships . Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 37, 12-24 .
5.
Fiske, A. P. (1991). Structures of social life: The four elementary forms of human relations: Communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching, market pricing. New York: Free Press .
6.
Fiske, A. P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations . Psychological Review, 99, 689-723 .
7.
Fiske, A. P. (1993). Social errors in four cultures: Evidence about universal forms of social relations . Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 24, 463-494 .
8.
Fiske, A. P. (2004). Relational models theory 2.0. In N. Haslam (Ed.), Relational models theory: A contemporary overview (pp. 3-25). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
9.
Fiske, A. P. , & Haslam, N. (1996). Social cognition is thinking about relationships . Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 137-142 .
10.
Fiske, A. P. , & Haslam, N. (1997). The structure of social substitutions: A test of relational models theory . European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 725-729 .
11.
Fiske, A. P. , & Haslam, N. (2006). The four basic social bonds: Structures for coordinating interaction. In Mark Baldwin (Ed.), Interpersonal cognition (pp. 267-298). New York: Guilford .
12.
Fiske, A. P. , Haslam, N. , & Fiske, S. T. (1991). Confusing one person with another: What errors reveal about the elementary forms of social relations . Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 60, 656-674 .
13.
Fiske, A. P. , Kitayama, S. , Markus, H. R. , & Nisbett, R. E. (1998). The cultural matrix of social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert , S. T. Fiske , & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., vol. 2, pp. 915-981). New York: Oxford University Press .
14.
Fiske, S. T. , & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill .
15.
Fletcher, G. J. O. (1993). Cognition in close relationships . New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 22, 69-81 .
16.
Fletcher, G. J. O. , & Fincham, F. D. (Eds.). (1991). Cognition in close relationships. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
17.
Fletcher, G. J. O. , & Fitness, J. (1993). Knowledge structures and explanations in intimate relationships. In S. Duck (Ed.), Individuals in relationships: Understanding relationship processes series (pp. 121-143). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications .
18.
Goodnow, J. J. (2004). The domain of work in households: A relational models approach. In N. Haslam (Ed.), Relational models theory: A contemporary overview (pp. 167-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
19.
Haslam, N. (1994a). Categories of social relationship . Cognition, 53, 59-90 .
20.
Haslam, N. (1994b). Mental representation of social relationships: Dimensions, laws, or categories?Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 67, 575-584 .
21.
Haslam, N. (1995). Factor structure of social relationships: An examination of relational models and resource exchange theories . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 217-227 .
22.
Haslam, N. (1997). Four grammars for primate social relations. In J. A. Simpson & D. T. Kenrick (Eds.), Evolutionary social psychology. (pp. 297-316). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
23.
Haslam, N. , & Fiske, A. P. (1992). Implicit relationship prototypes: Investigating five theories of the cognitive organization of social relationships . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 441-474 .
24.
Haslam, N. , & Fiske, A. P. (1999). Relational models theory: A confirmatory factor analysis . Personal Relationships, 6, 241-250 .
25.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications .
26.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich .
27.
Koerner, A. F. , & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (2002). Toward a theory of family communication . Communication Theory, 12, 70-91 .
28.
Marin, G. (1985). The preference for equity when judging the attractiveness and fairness of an allocator: The role of familiarity and culture . Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 543-549 .
29.
Mills, J. , & Clark, M. S. (1982). Exchange and communal relationships. In L. Wheeler (Ed.). Review of personality and social psychology (vol. 3, pp. 121-144). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications .
30.
Oyserman, D. , Coon, H. M. , & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses . Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72 .
31.
Roloff, M. (1981). Interpersonal communication: The social exchange approach. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications .
32.
Roloff, M. (1987). Communication and reciprocity within intimate relationships. In M. E. Roloff and G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (pp. 11-38). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications .
33.
Rusbult, C. E. , & Buunk, B. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An interdependence analysis . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 175-204 .
34.
Singelis, T. M. , Triandis, H. C. , Bhawuk, D. P. S. , & Gelfand, M. J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement . Cross-cultural Research, 29, 240-275 .
35.
Soh, S. , & Leong, F. T. L. (2002). Validity of vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism in Singapore: Relationships with values and interests . Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 33, 3-15 .
36.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press .
37.
Triandis, H. C. , & Gelfand, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 118-128 .
