Understanding Parents-in-Law’s Uncertainty Management through a Relational Turbulence Lens

ABSTRACT

This study investigated parents-in-law's (PIL) relational uncertainty management, specifically, associations between PIL’s relational uncertainty, cognitions (i.e., identity goal and perceived communication efficacy), and relational uncertainty management choices (i.e., direct uncertainty communication and linchpin mediated communication) were examined. Results from an online survey of PIL revealed that relational uncertainty was negatively associated with PIL’s linchpin mediated communication, but there was no statistically significant association related to direct uncertainty communication. Additionally, mediation analyses revealed that in some instances, PIL’s cognitions were more proximal predictors of linchpin mediated communication than uncertainty. These findings corroborate and extend theorizing outlined by relational turbulence theory and inform understanding of PIL uncertainty management.

KEYWORDS:

• Family uncertainty
• in-law relationships
• linchpin mediated communication
• relational uncertainty
• relational turbulence theory
• parents-in-law’s uncertainty management

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Although previous work has confirmed theoretical and empirical distinctions between the sources of relational uncertainty (Solomon et al., 2016) and relational uncertainty and family uncertainty (Mikucki-Enyart & Caughlin, 2018), given the correlations among the uncertainty scales it was important to examine evidence of discriminant validity. As such, we tested three alternative models. First, we examined a second-order factor structure with all four scales, which did not meet our criteria for a good model: χ2/df = 2.80, CFI =.80, RMSEA =.11, 90% CI [.101,.119]. Next, given the strength of correlation and potential conceptual overlap between relationship and family uncertainty we tested (a) self and partner as separate factors and relationship and family on one factor, which was not a good fit: χ2/df = 3.05, CFI =.88, RMSEA =.12, 90% CI [.106,.124], and (b) a two-factor model with self and partner uncertainty on one factor and relationship and family on another factor, which was also a poor-fit: χ2/df = 4.34, CFI =.81, RMSEA =.15, 90% CI [.138,.155].

2. The online supplement is available at: https://osf.io/jgw35.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sylvia L. Mikucki-Enyart

Sylvia L. Mikucki-Enyart is an assistant professor of in the Department of Communication Studies at The University of Iowa.

Jaclyn M. Reed

Jaclyn M. Reed is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Communication Studies at The University of Iowa.