When Forecasting Mutually Supportive Matches Will Be Practically Impossible

Abstract

Forecasting which dyads will develop mutually supportive relationships is an important applied and basic research question. Applying psychometric theory to the design of forecasting studies shows that agreement between dyad members about their relationship (relational reciprocity) sets an upper limit for forecasting accuracy by determining the reliability of measurement. To test this, we estimated relational reciprocity in Study 1. Participants in seven samples (six student and one military; N = 504; N_dyads = 766) rated each other on support-related constructs in round-robin designs. Relational reciprocity was very low, undermining reliability. Formulas from psychometric theory predicted that forecasting supportive dyads would be practically impossible. To test this, we had participants in Study 2 complete a measure for matching dyads derived from recent theory. As predicted, supportive matches could not be forecast with acceptable precision. Theoretically, this falsifies some predictions of recent social-support theory. Practically, it remains unclear how to translate basic social-support research into effective interventions.

Keywords

perceived support relational-regulation theory social-relations model affect online dating open data

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barrera

Jr. (1986). Distinctions between social support concepts, measures and models. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 413–445. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00922627

Bernieri

F. J.

Zuckerman

Koestner

Rosenthal

(1994). Measuring person perception accuracy: Another look at self-other agreement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 367–378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294204004

Bonito

J. A.

Kenny

D. A.

(2010). The measurement of reliability of social relations components from round-robin designs. Personal Relationships, 17, 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01274.x

Cohen

Wills

T. A.

(1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310

Cook

W. L.

Dezangré

De Mol

(2018). Sources of perceived responsiveness in family relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 32, 743–752.

Cronbach

L. J.

(1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555

Cronbach

L. J.

Gleser

G. C.

Nanda

Rajaratnam

(1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. Wiley.

Cutrona

C. E.

Russell

D. W.

(1987). The provisions of social relationships and adaptation to stress. In Jones

W. H.

Perlman

(Eds.), Advances in Personal Relationships: Vol. 1 (pp. 37–67). JAI Press.

Eastwick

P. W.

Finkel

E. J.

Simpson

J. A.

(2019). Best practices for testing the predictive validity of ideal partner preference-matching. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218780689

10.

Finkel

E. J.

Eastwick

P. W.

Karney

B. R.

Reis

H. T.

Sprecher

(2012). Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 3–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436522

11.

Goldberg

L. R.

Johnson

J. A.

Eber

H. W.

Hogan

Ashton

M. C.

Cloninger

C. R.

Gough

H. C.

(2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007

12.

Gross

Lakey

Rhodes

LaCross

Plotkowski

A. R.

Winegard

(2015). Forecasting the student−professor matches that result in unusually effective teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12049

13.

Helgeson

V. S.

Gottlieb

B. H.

(2000). Support groups. In Cohen

Underwood

L. G.

Gottlieb

B. H.

(Eds.), Social support measurement and intervention (pp. 221–245). Oxford University Press.

14.

Hogan

B. E.

Linden

Najarian

(2002). Social support interventions: Do they work? Clinical Psychology Review, 22, 381–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7358(01)00102-7

15.

Joel

Eastwick

P. W.

Finkel

E. J.

(2017). Is romantic desire predictable? Machine learning applied to initial romantic attraction. Psychological Science, 28, 1478–1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617714580

16.

Kenny

D. A.

(1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. Guilford Press.

17.

Kenny

D. A.

(1998). SOREMO (Version 2) [Computer software]. University of Connecticut.

18.

Kenny

D. A.

(2020). Interpersonal perception (2nd ed.): The foundation of social relationships. Guilford Press.

19.

Kenny

D. A.

Kashy

D. A.

Cook

W. L.

(2006). The analysis of dyadic data. Guilford Press.

20.

Kosinski

Stillwell

Graepel

(2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 110, 5802–5805.

21.

Kovacs

Kleinbaum

A. M.

(2020). Language-style similarity and social networks. Psychological Science, 31, 202–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619894557

22.

Lakey

Cooper

Cronin

Whitaker

(2014). Symbolic providers help people regulate affect relationally: Implications for perceived support. Personal Relationships, 21, 404–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12038

23.

Lakey

Orehek

(2011). Relational regulation theory: A new approach to explain the link between perceived support and mental health. Psychological Review, 118, 482–495. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0023477

24.

Lakey

Vander Molen

R. J.

Fles

Andrews

(2016). Ordinary social interaction and the main effect between perceived support and affect. Journal of Personality, 84, 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12190

25.

Malloy

T. E.

(2018). Social relations modeling of behavior in dyads and groups. Academic Press.

26.

Nunally

J. C.

(1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

27.

Pierce

G. R.

Sarason

I. G.

Sarason

B. R.

(1991). General and relationship-based perceptions of social support: Are two constructs better than one? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 1028–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.6.1028

28.

Spearman

(1910). Correlation calculated from faulty data. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 271–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1910.tb00206.x

29.

Veenstra

Lakey

Cohen

J. C.

Neely

L. C.

Orehek

Barry

Abeare

C. A.

(2011). Forecasting the specific providers that recipients will perceive as unusually supportive. Personal Relationships, 18, 677–696. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01340.x

30.

Watson

Clark

L. A.

Tellegen

(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063

31.

Woods

W. C.

Lakey

Sain

(2016). The role of ordinary conversation and shared activity in the main effect between perceived support and affect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 356–368. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2149

32.

Youyou

Stillwell

Schwartz

H. A.

Kosinski

(2017). Birds of a feather do flock together: Behavior-based personality-assessment method reveals personality similarity among couples and friends. Psychological Science, 28, 276–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616678187