Attachment, Identity Gaps, and Communication and Relational Outcomes in Marital Couples’ Public Performances

REFERENCES

• Acitelli, L. K., Rogers, S., & Knee, C. R. (1999). The role of relational identity in the link between relationship thinking and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 591–618. doi:10.1177/0265407599165003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agnew, C. R., Van Lange, P. A. M., Rusbult, C. E., & Langston, C. A. (1998). Cognitive interdependence: Commitment and the mental representation of close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 939–954. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.939.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., Mashek, D., Lewandowski, G., Wright, S. C., & Aron, E. N. (2004). Including others in the self. European Review of Social Psychology, 15, 101–132. doi:10.1080/10463280440000008
   Google Scholar
• Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 147–178. doi:10.1177/0265407590072001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Ari, A., & Lavee, Y. (2005). Dyadic characteristics of individual attributes: Attachment, neuroticism, and their relation to marital quality and closeness. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75, 621–631. doi:10.1037/0002-9432.75.4.621
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgoon, J. K., Dillard, J. P., & Doran, N. E. (1983). Friendly or unfriendly persuasion: The effects of violations of expectations by males and females. Human Communication Research, 10, 283–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burleson, B. R., & Denton, W. H. (1992). A new look at similarity and attraction in marriage: Similarities in social-cognitive and communication skills as predictors of attraction and satisfaction. Communication Monographs, 59, 268–287. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01293.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cahn, D. D. (1990). Perceived understanding and interpersonal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 231–244. doi:10.1177/0265407590072005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cahn, D. D., & Shulman, G. M. (1984). The perceived understanding instrument. Communication Research Reports, 1, 122–125. doi:10.2466/pr0.1989.64.3c.1339
   Google Scholar
• Canary, D. J., & Dainton, M. (2006). Maintaining relationships. In A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 727–743). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, W. L., & Kenny, D. A. (2005). The actor-partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 101–109. doi:10.1080/01650250444000405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eagly, A. H. (2009). The his and hers of prosocial behavior: An examination of the social psychology of gender. American Psychologist, 64, 644–658. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.64.8.644
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feeney, J. A. (2003). The systemic nature of couple relationships: An attachment perspective. In P. Erdman & T. Caffery (Eds.), Attachment and family systems: Conceptual, empirical, and therapeutic relatedness (pp. 139–163). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2006). Relationship satisfaction. In A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 579–594). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Floyd, K., & Haynes, M. T. (2005). Applications of the theory of natural selection to the study of family communication. Journal of Family Communication, 5, 79–101. doi:10.1207/s15327698jfc0502_2
   Google Scholar
• Guerrero, L. K. (1996). Attachment-style differences in intimacy and involvement: A test of the four-category model. Communication Monographs, 63, 269–292. doi:10.1080/03637759609376395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerrero, L. K., Farinelli, L., & McEwan, B. (2009). Attachment and relational satisfaction: The mediating effect of emotional communication. Communication Monographs, 76, 487–514. doi:10.1080/03637750903300254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerrero, L. K., & Jones, S. M. (2005). Differences in conversational skills as a function of attachment style: A follow-up study. Communication Quarterly, 53, 305–321. doi:0.1080/01463370500101014
   Google Scholar
• Hall, J. (2006). How big are nonverbal sex differences? The case of smiling and nonverbal sensitivity. In K. Dinida & D. Canary (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed., pp. 59–81). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Hecht, M. L. (1978). The conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication satisfaction. Human Communication Research, 4, 253–264. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1978.tb00614.x
   Google Scholar
• Hecht, M. L., Warren, J. R., Jung, E., & Krieger, J. L. (2005). A communication theory of identity: Development, theoretical perspective, and future directions. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 257–278). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. P., Caughlin, J. P., & Huston, T. L. (1999). The tripartite nature of marital commitment: Personal, moral, and structural reasons to stay married. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 160–177. doi:10.2307/353891
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, S. M. (2005). Attachment style differences and similarities in evaluations of affective communication skills and person-centered comforting messages. Western Journal of Communication, 69, 233–249. doi:10.1080/10570310500202405
   Google Scholar
• Jung, E., & Hecht, M. L. (2004). Elaborating the communication theory of identity: Identity gaps and communication outcomes. Communication Quarterly, 52, 265–283. doi:10.1080/01463370409370197
   Google Scholar
• Jung, E., & Hecht, M. L. (2008). Identity gaps and level of depression among Korean immigrants. Health Communication, 23, 313–325. doi:10.1080/10410230802229688
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, J. A., & Hecht, M. L. (2009). Investigating the role of identity gaps among communicative and relational outcomes within the grandparent-grandchild relationship: The young-adult grandchildren’s perspective. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 456–480. doi:10.1080/10570310903279067
   Google Scholar
• Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• McBride, M. C., & Toller, P. (2011). Negotiation of face between bereaved parents and their social networks. Southern Communication Journal, 76, 210–229. doi:10.1080/10417940903477647
   Google Scholar
• Monsour, M. (2002). Women and men as friends: Relationships across the life span in the 21^st century. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Montgomery, B. M., & Baxter, L. A. (1998). Dialectical approaches to studying personal relationships. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Parks, M. R. (2000). Communication networks and relationship life cycles. In K. Dindia & S. Duck (Eds.), Communication and personal relationships (pp. 55–75). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357–391. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sillars, A. L., Pike, G. R., Jones, T. S., & Murphy, M. A. (1984). Communication and understanding in marriage. Human Communication Research, 10, 317–350. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1984.tb00022.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spanier, G. 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. doi:10.2307/350547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stafford, L., Dainton, M., & Haas, S. (2000). Measuring routine and strategic relational maintenance: Scale development, sex versus gender roles, and the prediction of relational characteristics. Communication Monographs, 67, 306–323. doi:10.1080/03637750009376512
   Google Scholar
• Titus, S. L. (1980). A function of friendship: Social comparisons as a frame of reference for marriage. Human Relations, 33, 409–431. doi:10.1177/001872678003300605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Lear, C., Jr. (1991). Testing a cyclical model of communicative openness in relationship development: Two longitudinal studies. Communication Monographs, 58, 337–361. doi:10.1080/03637759109376235
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weger, H., Jr. (2005). Disconfirming communication and self-verification in marriage: Associations among the demand/withdraw interaction pattern, feeling understood, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 19–31. doi:10.1177/0265407505047835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witt, M. G., & Wood, W. (2010). Self-regulation of gendered behavior in everyday life. Sex Roles, 62, 635–646. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9761-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, J. T. (1982). Communication and relational culture: Bases for studying human relationships. Communication Quarterly, 30, 75–83. doi:10.1080/01463378209369432
   Google Scholar
• Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2009). Gender identity. In M. Leary & R. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences (pp. 109–128). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar