The ubiquitous and omnipresent smartphone has dramatically altered how people communicate. The present research investigates how partner phubbing (phone snubbing) among romantic partners impacts relationship satisfaction. Study 1 experimentally manipulates partner phubbing and finds it drives romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction. Study 2 uses an alternative manipulation of partner phubbing and explores the moderating role of interpersonal attachment anxiety in the relationship between partner phubbing, romantic jealousy, and relationship satisfaction. Study 2 finds that partner phubbing and attachment anxiety have an interactive effect on jealousy, which then leads to relationship satisfaction. Study 3 employs a survey and finds that partner phubbing has downstream negative effects on well-being through romantic jealousy, but only among anxiously attached individuals. The heavy use of technology, especially smartphones, in the presence of one’s romantic partner, and the negative outcomes associated with partner phubbing, establishes the importance of research in this area. Directions for future research and study limitations are discussed.
AhlstromM.LundbergN. R.ZabriskeR.EggettD.LindsayG. B. (2012). Me, my spouse, and my avatar. Journal of Leisure Research, 44(91), 1–22.
2.
AinsworthM. D.SalterM. C.BleharE. W.WallS. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation (pp. 1–385). Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
BjornsenC. (2018). Social media use and emerging adulthood. In ZupancicM.Pukek LevpuscekM. (Eds.), Emerging adulthood: Current trends and research, Ljublijana: Znanstvena zalozba Filozofske fakultete, pp. 223–261.
4.
BowlbyJ. (1969). Attachment and loss. Basic Books.
5.
ChotpitayasunondhV.DouglasK. M. (2016). How ‘phubbing’ becomes the norm: The antecedents and consequences of snubbing via smartphone. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 9–18.
6.
ChotpitayasunondhV.DouglasK. M. (2018a). The effects of “phubbing” on social interaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(6), 304–316.
7.
ChotpitayasunondhV.DouglasK. M. (2018b). Measuring phone snubbing behavior: Development and validation of the Generic Scale of Phubbing (GSP) and the Generic Scale of Being Phubbed (GSBP). Computers in Human Behavior, 88, 5–17.
8.
CizmeciE. (2017a). Both sides of the coin: Smartphones in romantic relationships of youth. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 16(63), 1400–1415.
9.
CizmeciE. (2017b). Disconnected, though satisfied: Pphubbing behavior and relationship satisfaction. The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication, 7(2), 364–375.
10.
CollinsN. L. (1996). Working models of attachment: Implications for explanation, emotion and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 810–832.
11.
CollinsN. L.FeeneyB. C. (2004). Working models of attachment shape perceptions of social support: Evidence from experimental and observational studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 363–383.
12.
CollinsN. L.ReadS. J., (1990). Adult attachment, working models and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(4), 644–663.
13.
CrowleyJ. P.AllredR. J.FollonJ.VolkmerC. (2018). Replication of the mere presence hypothesis: The effects of cell phones on face-to-face conversations. Communication Studies, 69(3), 283–293.
14.
DavidM. E.BeardenW. O. (2017). The role of interpersonal attachment styles in shaping consumer preferences for products shown in relational advertisements. Personality and Individual Differences, 109, 44–50.
15.
DavidM. E.RobertsJ. A. (2017). Phubbed and alone: Phone snubbing, social exclusion, and attachment to social media. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(2), 155–163.
16.
DavidM. E.RobertsJ. A. (2020). Developing and testing a scale designed to measure perceived phubbing. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8152. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218152
17.
DavidM. E.RobertsJ. A.ChristensonB. (2018). Too much of a good thing: Investigating the association between actual smartphone use and individual wellbeing. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(3), 265–275.
18.
DwyerR. J.KushlevK.DunnE. W. (2018). Smartphone use undermines enjoyment of face-to-face social interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, 233–239.
19.
ElphinstonR. A.FeeneyJ. A.NollerP. (2011). Measuring romantic jealousy: Validation of the Multidimensional Jealousy Scale in Australian samples. Australian Journal of Psychology, 63(4), 243–251.
20.
FeeneyJ. A. (2008). Adult romantic attachments: Developments in the study of couple relationships. In CassidyJ.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 456–481). Guilford Press.
21.
GabrielS.KawakamiK.BartakC.KangS.MannN. (2010). Negative self-synchronization: Will I change to be like you when it is bad for me?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 857–871.
22.
GriffithsM. D. (2000). Does Internet and computer “addiction” exist? Some case study evidence. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(2), 211–218.
23.
GrossmannK. EGrossmannK.WatersE. (Eds.) (2005). Attachment from infancy to adulthood: The major longitudinal studies. Guilford Press.
24.
HalesA.DvirM.WesselmannE.KrugerD. J.FinkenauerC. (2018). Cell phone-induced ostracism threatens fundamental needs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 158(4), 460–473.
25.
HazanC.ShaverP. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.
26.
HuelsnitzC. O.FarrellA. K.SimpsonJ. A.GriskeviciusV.SzepsenwolO. (2018). Attachment and jealousy: Understanding the dynamic experience of jealousy using the response escalation paradigm. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(12), 1664–1680.
27.
JohnsonA.WhelanJ.ThomsonM. (2012). Why brands should fear fearful consumers: How attachment style predicts retaliation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(2), 289–298.
28.
KellyL.Miller-OttA. E.DuranR. L. (2017). Sports scores and intimate moments: An expectancy violations theory approach to partner cell phone behaviors in adult romantic relationships. Western Journal of Communication, 81(5), 619–640.
29.
KellyL.Miller-OttA. E.DuranR. L. (2019). Phubbing friends: Understanding face threats from, and responses to, friends’ cell phone usage through the lens of politeness theory. Communication Quarterly, 67(5), 540–559.
30.
KimK.FeeneyB. C.JakubiakB. K. (2018). Touch reduces romantic jealousy in the anxiously attached. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35, 1019–1041.
31.
KrasnovaH.AbramovaO.NotterI.BaumannA. (2016June 12–15). Why phubbing is toxic for your relationship: Understanding the role of smartphone jealousy among ‘Generation Y’ users[Conference session]. Twenty Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Istanbul, Turkey.
32.
KroenkeK.SpitzerR. L.WilliamsJ. B. W.LoweB. (2009). An ultra-brief screening scale for anxiety and depression: The PHQ-4. Psychosomatics, 50(6), 613–621.
LeggettC.RossouwP. J. (2014). The impact of technology use on couple relationships: A neuropsychological perspective. International Journal of Neuropsychotherapy, 2(1), 44–99.
35.
Lopez–FernandezO.KussD. J.GriffithsM. D.BillieuxJ. (2015). The conceptualization and assessment of problematic mobile phone use. In YanZ. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mobile phone behavior (Vol. II, Category: Effects and Impacts). Information Science Reference.
36.
Marin-DiazV.Munoz-GonzalezJ. M.Samperdo-RequenaB. E. (2020). Problematic relationships with smartphones of Spanish and Colombian university students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(15), 1–18.
37.
McDanielB. T. (2015). “Technoference”: Everyday intrusions and interruptions of technology in couple and family relationships. In BruessC. J. (Ed.), Family communication in the age of digital and social media. Peter Lang Publishing.
38.
McDanielB. T.CoyneS. M. (2016). “Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5, 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000065
39.
McDanielB. T.DrouinM. (2019). Daily technology interruptions and emotional and relational well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 1–8.
40.
McDanielB. T.GalovanA. M.DrouinM. (2020). Daily technoference, technology use during couple time, and relationship quality. Media Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2020.1783561
41.
MickD. G.FournierS. (1998). Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions, and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 123–143.
42.
MikulincerM.NachshonO., (1991). Attachment styles and patterns of self-disclosure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 321–331.
43.
MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 53–152.
44.
Miller-OttA.KellyL. (2015). The presence of cell phones in romantic partner face-to-face interactions: An Expectancy Violation Theory approach. Southern Communication Journal, 80(4), 253–270.
45.
MisraS.ChengL.GenevieJ.YuanM. (2016). The iPhone effect: The quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environment and Behavior, 48(2), 275–298.
46.
MuiseA.ChristofidesE.DesmaraisS. (2009). More information that you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy?CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 441–444.
47.
MurrayS. L.HolmesJ. G.GriffinD. W.DerrickJ. L. (2015). The equilibrium model of relationship maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(1), 93–113.
48.
NeckaE. A.CacioppoS.NormanG. J.CacioppoJ. T. (2016). Measuring the prevalence of problematic respondent behaviors among MTurk, campus, and community participants. PLoS One, 11(6), 1–19.
49.
NeffL. A.KarneyB. R. (2009). Stress and reactivity to daily relationship experiences: How stress hinders adaptive processes in marriage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(3), 435–450.
50.
PelegO. (2008). The relationship between differentiation of self and marital satisfaction: What can be learned from married people over the course of life?The American Journal of Family Therapy, 36, 388–401.
51.
PfeifferS. M.WongP. T. P. (1989). Multidimensional jealousy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 181–196.
52.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
53.
PrzybylskiA. K.WeinsteinN. (2013). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 237–246.
54.
RobertsJ. A.DavidM. E. (2016). My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone: Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 134–141.
55.
RobertsJ. A.Petnji YaYaL. H.ManolisC. (2014). The invisible addiction: Cell-phone activities and addiction among male and female college students. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(4), 254–265.
56.
RobertsJ. A.PirogS. F. (2013). A preliminary investigation of materialism and impulsiveness as predictors of technological addictions among young adults. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 2(1), 56–62.
ShaverP. R.SchachnerD. A.MikulincerM. (2005). Attachment style, excessive reassurance seeking, relationship processes, and depression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 343–359.
59.
SimpsonJ. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 971–980. DOI: 10.1037/022-3514.59.5.971.
60.
SimpsonJ. A.RholesW. S., (2010). Attachment and relationships: Milestones and future directions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 173–180.
61.
SprecherS.HamptonA. J.HeinzelH. J.FelmleeD. (2016). Can I connect with both you and my social network? Access to network-salient communication technology and get-acquainted interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 423–432.
62.
StaffelbachMSempolinskiPHachenDKareemAKijewski-CorreaTThainDWeiDMadeyG. (2014). Lessons learned from an experiment in crowdsourcing complex citizen engineering tasks with Amazon Mechanical Turk[Conference session]. Collective Intelligence Conference (MIT), Cambridge, MA, United States.
63.
UtzS.MuscanellN.KhalidC. (2015). Snapchat elicits more jealousy than Facebook: A comparison of Snapchat and Facebook use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 18(3), 141–146.
64.
Vanden AbeeleM. M. P. (2020). The social consequences of phubbing: A framework and research agenda. In LingR.GogginG.FortunatiL.LimS. S.LiY. (Eds.), Handbook of mobile communication, culture, and information, section 4.3, Oxford Press.
65.
Vanden AbeeleM. M. P.AntheunisM. L.SchoutenA. P. (2016). The effect of mobile messaging during a conversation on impression formation and interaction quality. Computers in Human Behavior, 62(C), 562–569.
66.
Vanden AbeeleM. M. P.HendricksonA. T.PollmanM. M. H.LingR. (2019). Phubbing behavior in conversations and its relation to perceived conversation intimacy and distraction: An exploratory observation study. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 35–47.
67.
VicaryA. M.FraleyR. C. (2007). Choose your own adventure: Attachment dynamics in a simulated relationship. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1279–1291.
68.
WilliamsK. D. (2009). Ostracism: A temporal need-threat model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 275–314.
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.
