Lower power during marital interactions predicts greater aggression by men, but no research has identified women’s response to lower power. We tested whether women who experienced lower situational power during conflict exhibited greater submission, especially if they held traditional gender role beliefs and thus accepted structural gender differences in power. Newlywed couples (Time 1, N = 204 couples) completed questionnaires and discussed an area of conflict 3 times over 3 years. Individuals who perceived lower power during couples’ discussions evidenced greater submission, but this effect was more pronounced for wives, especially wives who held traditional gender role beliefs. Among those with traditional gender role beliefs, greater submission together with lower power predicted lower marital adjustment over time. These results highlight that the low power–submission link, and associated implications for marital adjustment, need to be evaluated in the context of power-relevant situations, gender, and broader power-related beliefs about gender roles.
AidaY.FalboT. (1991). Relationships between marital satisfaction, resources, and power strategies. Sex Roles, 24, 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288702
AltschulerJ.RheeS. (2015). Relationship power, sexual decision making, and HIV risk among midlife and older women. Journal of Women & Aging, 27, 290–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/08952841.2014.954499
4.
AndersonC.BerdahlJ. L. (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 83, 1362–1377. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.83.6.1362
5.
BeckL. A.PietromonacoP. R.DeBuseC. J.PowersS. I.SayerA. G. (2013). Spouses’ attachment pairings predict neuroendocrine, behavioral, and psychological responses to marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 388–424. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033056.supp
6.
BentleyC. G.GalliherR. V.FergusonT. J. (2007). Associations among aspects of interpersonal power and relationship functioning in adolescent romantic couples. Sex Roles, 57, 483–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9280-7
7.
BolgerN.LaurenceauJ. P. (2013). Intensive longitudinal methods: An introduction to diary and experience sampling research. NY: Guilford Press.
8.
BossonJ. K.VandelloJ. A. (2011). Precarious manhood and its links to action and aggression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 82–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411402669
9.
CameronL. D.OverallN. C. (2017). Suppression and expression as distinct emotion-regulation processes in daily interactions: Longitudinal and meta-analyses. Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000334
10.
CarpenterC. J. (2017). A relative commitment approach to understanding power in romantic relationships. Communication Studies, 68, 115–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2016.1268639
11.
CarverC. S.WhiteT. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319
12.
CattersonA. D.EldesoukyL.JohnO. P. (2017). An experience sampling approach to emotion regulation: Situational suppression use and social hierarchy. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.04.004
13.
ChenS.Lee-ChaiA. Y.BarghJ. A. (2001). Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.2.173
14.
ChervonskyE.HuntC. (2017). Suppression and expression of emotion in social and interpersonal outcomes: A meta-analysis. Emotion, 17, 669–683. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000270
15.
ChristensenA.HeaveyC. L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand/withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.1.73
16.
ConnorR. A.GlickP.FiskeS. T. (2017). Ambivalent sexism in the twenty-first century. In SibleyC. G.BarlowF. K.SibleyC. G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of the psychology of prejudice (pp. 295–320). ORCID: 0000-0001-9533-1256. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316161579.013
17.
CrossE. J.OverallN. C.LowR. S. T.McNultyJ. K. (2018). An interdependence account of sexism and power: Men’s hostile sexism, biased perceptions of low power, and relationship aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000167
FalboT.PeplauL. A. (1980). Power strategies in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 618–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.618
21.
FarrellA. K.SimpsonJ. A.RothmanA. J. (2015). The relationship power inventory: Development and validation. Personal Relationships, 22, 387–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12072
22.
GilbertP. (2000). Varieties of submissive behavior as forms of social defense: Their evolution and role in depression. In SlomanL.GilbertP. (Eds.), Subordination and defeat: An evolutionary approach to mood disorders and their therapy (pp. 3–45). Lawrence Erlbaum. (2000-07594-001).
23.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1999). Gender, power dynamics, and social interaction. In FerreeM. M.LorberJ.HessB. B.FerreeM. M. (Eds.), Revisioning gender (pp. 365–398). Sage. (1998–06518–006).
GordonA. M.ChenS. (2013). Does power help or hurt? The moderating role of self-other focus on power and perspective-taking in romantic relationships. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1097–1110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213490031
GrossJ. J.JohnO. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348
28.
HammondM. D.OverallN. C. (2017). Dynamics within intimate relationships and the causes, consequences, and functions of sexist attitudes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 120–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416686213
29.
HausmannR.TysonL. D.BekhoucheY.ZahidiS. (2014). The global gender gap report. World Economic Forum.
30.
HeymanR. E. (2001). Observation of couple conflicts: Clinical assessment applications, stubborn truths, and shaky foundations. Psychological Assessment, 13, 5–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.13.1.5
31.
ImpettE. A.KoganA.EnglishT.JohnO.OveisC.GordonA. M.KeltnerD. (2012). Suppression sours sacrifice: Emotional and relational costs of suppressing emotions in romantic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 707–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212437249
32.
JackD. C. (1991). Silencing the self: Women and depression. Harvard University Press. (1991-98431-000).
33.
JackD. C.DillD. (1992). The Silencing the Self Scale: Schemas of intimacy associated with depression in women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1992.tb00242.x
34.
KarneyB. R.BradburyT. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3
35.
KelleyH. H.CunninghamJ. D.GrishamJ. A.LefebvreL. M.SinkC. R.YablonG. (1978). Sex differences in comments made during conflict within close heterosexual pairs. Sex Roles, 4, 473–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287193
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Press. (2006–12719–000).
39.
KiferY.HellerD.PerunovicW. Q. E.GalinskyA. D. (2013). The good life of the powerful: The experience of power and authenticity enhances subjective well-being. Psychological Science, 24, 280–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612450891
40.
KuehnM. M.ChenS.GordonA. M. (2015). Having a thicker skin: Social power buffers the negative effects of social rejection. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 701–709. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615580170
41.
LemayE. P.Jr.DobushS. (2015). When do personality and emotion predict destructive behavior during relationship conflict? The role of perceived commitment asymmetry. Journal of Personality, 83, 523–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12129
42.
LovingT. J.HeffnerK. L.Kiecolt-GlaserJ. K.GlaserR.MalarkeyW. B. (2004). Stress hormone changes and marital conflict: Spouses’ relative power makes a difference. Journal of Marriage & Family, 66, 595–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00040.x
43.
LowR. S. T.OverallN. C.CrossE. J.HendersonA. M. E. (2018). Emotion regulation, conflict resolution, and spillover on subsequent family functioning. Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000519
44.
MarshallT. C. (2008). Cultural differences in intimacy: The influence of gender-role ideology and individualism—collectivism. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 25, 143–168.
45.
MorelandR. L.LevineJ. M. (1989). Newcomers and oldtimers in small groups. In PaulusP. B. (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 143–186). Lawrence Erlbaum. (1989–97877–006).
46.
MoyaM.GlickP.ExpósitoF.de LemusS.HartJ. (2007). It’s for your own good: Benevolent sexism and women’s reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1421–1434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207304790
47.
Noelle-NeumannE. (1991). The theory of public opinion: The concept of the spiral of silence. Communication Yearbook, 14, 256–287.
48.
OverallN. C. (2018). Does partners’ negative-direct communication during conflict help sustain perceived commitment and relationship quality across time?Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 481–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617712030
49.
OverallN. C.HammondM. D.McNultyJ. K.FinkelE. J. (2016). When power shapes interpersonal behavior: Low relationship power predicts men’s aggressive responses to low situational power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 195–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000059
50.
OverallN. C.McNultyJ. K. (2017). What type of communication during conflict is beneficial for intimate relationships?Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.002
51.
PetersB. J.JamiesonJ. P. (2016). The consequences of suppressing affective displays in romantic relationships: A challenge and threat perspective. Emotion, 16, 1050–1066. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000202
PowersS. I.PietromonacoP. R.GunlicksM.SayerA. G. (2006). Dating couples’ attachment styles and patterns of cortisol reactivity and recovery in response to a relationship conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 613–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.613
54.
PowersS. I.WelshD. P.WrightV. (1994). Adolescents’ affective experience of family behaviors: The role of subjective understanding. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327795jra0404_9
RollinsB. C.BahrS. J. (1976). A theory of power relationships in marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 619–627. https://doi.org/10.2307/350682
57.
RubinZ.HillC. T.PeplauL. A.Dunkel-SchetterC. (1980). Self-disclosure in dating couples: Sex roles and the ethic of openness. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 305–317. https://doi.org/10.2307/351228
58.
SagrestanoL. M.HeaveyC. L.ChristensenA. (2006). Individual differences versus social structural approaches to explaining demand-withdraw and social influence behaviors. In DindiaK.CanaryD. J.DindiaK. (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (pp. 379–395). Lawrence Erlbaum. (2006-03342-020).
59.
SimpsonJ. A.FarrellA. K.OriñaM. M.RothmanA. J. (2015). Power and social influence in relationships. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R.SimpsonJ. A.DovidioJ. F.MikulincerM. (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology, volume 3: Interpersonal relations (pp. 393–420). https://doi.org/10.1037/14344–015
60.
SnijdersT. A. B.BoskerR. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Sage.
61.
SpanierG. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/350547
ThomsonR. A.OverallN. C.CameronL. D.LowR. S. T. (2018). Perceived regard, expressive suppression during conflict, and conflict resolution. Journal of Family Psychology, 32, 722–732. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000429
64.
VanderDriftL. E.AgnewC. R.HarveyS. M.WarrenJ. T. (2013). Whose intentions predict? Power over condom use within heterosexual dyads. Health Psychology, 32, 1038–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030021
65.
VelottiP.BalzarottiS.TagliabueS.EnglishT.ZavattiniG. C.GrossJ. J. (2016). Emotional suppression in early marriage: Actor, partner, and similarity effects on marital quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33, 277–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515574466
66.
VogelD. L.MurphyM. J.Werner-WilsonR. J.CutronaC. E.SeemanJ. (2007). Sex differences in the use of demand and withdraw behavior in marriage: Examining the social structure hypothesis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.2.165
67.
WatsonL. B.GrotewielM. (2016). The protective role of commitment to social change in the relationship between women’s sexist experiences and self-silencing. Sex Roles, 75, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0594-1
68.
WelshD. P.GalliherR. V.PowersS. I. (1998). Divergent realities and perceived inequalities: Adolescents’, mothers’, and observers’ perceptions of family interactions and adolescent psychological functioning. Journal of Adolescent Research, 13, 377–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743554898134002
69.
WilliamsM. J.ChenS. (2014). When “mom’s the boss”: Control over domestic decision making reduces women’s interest in workplace power. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213497065
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.
