When is accurately reading other people’s emotions costly and when is it beneficial? We aimed to identify whether the association between empathic accuracy and both relationship quality and motivation to change varies depending on the type of emotion being detected: appeasement (e.g., embarrassment) or dominance (e.g., anger). Romantic partners (couples: N = 111; individuals: N = 222) discussed a characteristic they wanted their partner to change and rated their own emotions and perceptions of their partner’s emotions. Relationship quality was self-reported and objectively coded. Using multilevel response-surface analysis, we tested preregistered hypotheses about whether empathic accuracy for appeasement and dominance emotions was differentially associated with relationship quality and motivation to change. For appeasement emotions, empathic accuracy predicted higher relationship quality. For dominance emotions, higher intensity of felt emotions—not empathic accuracy—predicted lower relationship quality. Empathic accuracy did not predict the motivation to change. These results suggest that the benefits of empathic accuracy can depend on the emotion type.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1). doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01
2.
BlieseP. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In KleinK. J.KozlowskiS. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
DriverJ.TabaresA.ShapiroA.NahmE. Y.GottmanJ. M. (2003). Interactional patterns in marital success and failure: Gottman laboratory studies. In WalshF. (Ed.), Normal family processes: Growing diversity and complexity (pp. 493–513). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
4.
EdwardsJ. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58(1), 51–100. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1029
5.
FeinbergM.WillerR.KeltnerD. (2012). Flustered and faithful: Embarrassment as a signal of prosociality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 81–97. doi:10.1037/a0025403
6.
FischerA. H.MansteadA. S. R. (2016). Social functions of emotion and emotion regulation. In BarrettL F.LewisM.Haviland-JonesJ. M. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (4th ed., pp. 424–439).New York, NY: Guilford Press.
7.
FischerA. H.RosemanI. J. (2007). Beat them or ban them: The characteristics and social functions of anger and contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 103–115. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.103
8.
FritzH. L.NagurneyA. J.HelgesonV. S. (2003). Social interactions and cardiovascular reactivity during problem disclosure among friends. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 713–725. doi:10.1177/0146167203251520
9.
HeerdinkM. W.Van KleefG. A.HomanA. C.FischerA. H. (2014). Emotional expressions as social signals of rejection and acceptance: Evidence from the Affect Misattribution Paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 56, 60–68. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.09.004
10.
HodgesS. D.LewisK. L.IckesW. (2015). The matter of other minds: Empathic accuracy and the factors that influence it. In ShaverP.MikulincerM.SimpsonJ. A.DovidioJ. (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology. Vol. 3: Interpersonal relations (pp. 319–348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14344-012
11.
Holt-LunstadJ.SmithT. B.LaytonJ. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLOS Medicine, 7(7), Article e1000316. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316
12.
HutchersonC. A.GrossJ. J. (2011). The moral emotions: A social-functionalist account of anger, disgust, and contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 719–737. doi:10.1037/a0022408
13.
IckesW. (2011). Everyday mind reading is driven by motives and goals. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 200–206. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2011.561133
14.
IckesW.HodgesS. D. (2013). Empathic accuracy in close relationships. In SimpsonJ.CampbellL. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 373–846). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398694.013.0016
15.
ImpettE. A.GordonA. M.KoganA.OveisC.GableS. L.KeltnerD. (2010). Moving toward more perfect unions: Daily and long-term consequences of approach and avoidance goals in romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 948–963. doi:10.1037/a0020271
16.
ImpettE. A.JavamL.LeB. M.Asyabi-EshghiB.KoganA. (2013). The joys of genuine giving: Approach and avoidance sacrifice motivation and authenticity. Personal Relationships, 20, 740–754. doi:10.1111/pere.12012
17.
KeltnerD.BuswellB. N. (1997). Embarrassment: Its distinct form and appeasement functions. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 250–270. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.122.3.250
18.
KeltnerD.HaidtJ. (1999). Social functions of emotions at four levels of analysis. Cognition & Emotion, 13, 505–522. doi:10.1080/026999399379168
19.
KubanyE. S.BauerG. B.MuraokaM. Y.RichardD. C.ReadP. (1995). Impact of labeled anger and blame in intimate relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 53–60. doi:10.1521/jscp.1995.14.1.53
20.
KuznetsovaA.BrockhoffP. B.ChristensenR. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13). doi:10.18637/jss.v082.i13
21.
LaurenceauJ. P.BarrettL. F.PietromonacoP. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1238–1251. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238
22.
LemayE. P.OverallN. C.ClarkM. S. (2012). Experiences and interpersonal consequences of hurt feelings and anger. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 982–1006. doi:10.1037/a0030064
23.
MaasC. J. M.HoxJ. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1, 86–92. doi:10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86
24.
MayerJ. D.SaloveyP.CarusoD. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits?American Psychologist, 63, 503–517. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.6.503
25.
McNultyJ. K. (2016). Should spouses be demanding less from marriage? A contextual perspective on the implications of interpersonal standards. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 444–457. doi:10.1177/0146167216634050
26.
NestlerS.HumbergS.SchönbrodtF. D. (2018, September3). Multilevel response surface analysis. Retrieved from osf.io/jhyu9
27.
NestlerS.HumbergS.SchönbrodtF. D. (2019). Response surface analysis with multilevel data: Illustration for the case of congruence hypotheses. Psychological Methods, 24, 291–308. doi:10.1037/met0000199
28.
OverallN. C.FletcherG. J. O.SimpsonJ. A. (2006). Regulation processes in intimate relationships: The role of ideal standards. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 662–685. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.662
29.
OverallN. C.FletcherG. J. O.SimpsonJ. A.SibleyC. G. (2009). Regulating partners in intimate relationships: The costs and benefits of different communication strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 620–639. doi:10.1037/a0012961
30.
OverallN. C.McNultyJ. K. (2017). What type of communication during conflict is beneficial for intimate relationships?Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 1–5. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.002
31.
R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/
SenedH.LavidorM.LazarusG.Bar-KalifaE.RafaeliE.IckesW. (2017). Empathic accuracy and relationship satisfaction: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Family Psychology, 31, 742–752. doi:10.1037/fam0000320
34.
SimpsonJ. A.OriñaM. M.IckesW. (2003). When accuracy hurts, and when it helps: A test of the empathic accuracy model in marital interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 881–893. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.881
35.
SteegenS.TuerlinckxF.GelmanA.VanpaemelW. (2016). Increasing transparency through a multiverse analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 702–712. doi:10.1177/1745691616658637
36.
StoraasliR. D.MarkmanH. J. (1990). Relationship problems in the early stages of marriage. A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Family Psychology, 4(1), 80–98. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.4.1.80
37.
SznycerD. (2019). Forms and functions of the self-conscious emotions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23, 143–157. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2018.11.007
38.
TangneyJ. P. (1999). The self-conscious emotions: Shame, guilt, embarrassment and pride. In DalgleishT.PowerM. J. (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 541–568). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. doi:10.1002/0470013494.ch26
39.
Van KleefG. A. (2016). Social effects of emotions in close relationships. In OatleyK.MansteadA. (Eds.), The interpersonal dynamics of emotion: Toward an integrative theory of emotions as social information (pp. 81–100). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9781107261396.006
40.
Van KleefG. A.De DreuC. K. W.MansteadA. S. R. (2010). An interpersonal approach to emotion in social decision making: The emotions as social information model. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 42, pp. 45–96). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42002-X
41.
WeidmannR.SchönbrodtF. D.LedermannT.GrobA. (2017). Concurrent and longitudinal dyadic polynomial regression analyses of Big Five traits and relationship satisfaction: Does similarity matter?Journal of Research in Personality, 70, 6–15. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2017.04.003
42.
ZouC.SchimmackU.GereJ. (2013). The validity of well-being measures: A multiple-indicator-multiple-rater model. Psychological Assessment, 25, 1247–1254. doi:10.1037/a0033902
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.
