Other-serving double standards: People show moral hypercrisy in close relationships

2021 ◽  
pp. 026540752110228
Author(s):  
Alexa Weiss ◽  
Pascal Burgmer
Keyword(s):  
Close Relationships ◽  
Romantic Partners ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Moral Standards ◽  
Reverse Pattern ◽  
Relationship Partners ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Zero Sum ◽  
The Relationship

Extending research on self-serving double moral standards (hypocrisy), we examine the reverse pattern of other-serving hypercrisy toward close relationship partners. In three studies ( N = 1,019), for various imagined transgressions, people made more lenient moral judgments for their close friends (Studies 1 & 2) and romantic partners (Study 3) compared to themselves. This hypercrisy effect emerged both for transgressions toward third parties (Study 1) and toward each other (i.e., within the relationship; Studies 2 & 3). Moreover, it was moderated by perceptions of the relationship: Participants who more strongly believed their relationship to be a zero-sum game (i.e., needs can only be met competitively) showed greater leniency for themselves and attenuated hypercrisy for mutual transgressions (Studies 2 & 3). Investigating people’s close others rather than strangers as targets of moral judgment thus suggests that other-serving hypercrisy is more prevalent than previously thought, but sensitive to people’s conceptualizations of their relationships.

scholarly journals Perceptions of close relationship through the Machiavellians´ dark glasses: Negativity, distrust, self-protection against risk and dissatisfaction

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 806-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamás Ináncsi ◽  
Attila Pilinszki ◽  
Tünde Paál ◽  
András Láng
Keyword(s):  
Relationship Satisfaction ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Romantic Partners ◽  
Heterosexual Couples ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Actor Partner Interdependence Model ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Self Protection ◽  
The Relationship

It is commonly known from the literature that Machiavellian individuals have negative attitudes towards people and in general towards the world´s affairs. They are distrustful of the intentions of others, and they get cautiously involved into interpersonal interactions and take risks only if that may not have any severe negative consequence. It is also a fact that there are few ventures in life that potentially involve as much insecurity and personal vulnerability as the establishment and maintenance of close relationships. In our study, we were seeking the answer to the question: do people with high levels of Machiavellianism show a generally negative, distrustful and cautious attitude in their intimate relationships, as well? What effect their pessimistic approaches have on the other consequences of the relationship (satisfaction, commitment, investment, quality of alternatives)? This question was investigated on a dyadic sample of heterosexual couples (N = 101 pairs) with Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM). The results of the correlations and actor effects show that men with high levels of Machiavellianism perceive in a negative way not just people in general, but their romantic partners and relationships as well and they experience an increased level of distrust, risk, and dissatisfaction into their close relationships. Women with high levels of Machiavellianism are less negativistic and feel less discontent towards their intimate partner and relationship, but even they are unable to put their distrust and precaution aside. The results of partner effects have revealed that women's Machiavellianism undermines men's trust, while men's Machiavellianism has the effect of minimizing women's investment into their relationship.

Minding the Close Relationship

1997 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 224-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Harvey ◽  
Julia Omarzu
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Relationship Satisfaction ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Empathic Accuracy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Self Disclosure ◽  
Long Period ◽  
Social Penetration ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
The Relationship

In this theoretical analysis, we argue that a process referred to as minding is essential for a couple to feel mutually close and satisfied in a close relationship overa long period. Minding represents a package of mutual self-disclosure, other forms of goal-oriented behavior aimed at facilitating the relationship, and attributions about self's and other's motivations, intentions, and effort in the relationship. Self-disclosure and attribution activities in minding are aimed at getting to know the other, trying to understand the other's motivations and deeper dispositions as they pertain to the relationship, and showing respect and acceptance for knowledge gained about other. We link the concept of minding to other major ideas and literatures about how couples achieve closeness: self-disclosure and social penetration, intimacy, empathy and empathic accuracy, and love and self-expansion. We argue that the minding process articulated here has not previously been delineated and that it is a useful composite notion about essential steps in bonding among humans. We also argue that the minding concept stretches our understanding of the interface of attribution and close relationships. We present research possibilities and implications and consider possible alternative positions and counterarguments about the merits of the minding idea for close relationship satisfaction.

scholarly journals Machiavellianism and Adult Attachment in General Interpersonal Relationships and Close Relationships

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamás Ináncsi ◽  
András Láng ◽  
Tamás Bereczkei
Keyword(s):  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Attachment Style ◽  
Adult Attachment ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Significant Others ◽  
Attachment Anxiety ◽  
Avoidant Attachment ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Distance Regulation ◽  
The Relationship

Up to the present, the relationship between Machiavellianism and adult attachment has remained a question to be answered in the psychological literature. That is why this study focused on the relationship between Machiavellianism and attachment towards significant others in general interpersonal relationships and in intimate-close relationships. Two attachment tests (Relationship Questionnaire and long-form of Experiences in Close Relationship) and the Mach-IV test were conducted on a sample consisting of 185 subjects. Results have revealed that Machiavellian subjects show a dismissing-avoidant attachment style in their general interpersonal relationships, while avoidance is further accompanied by some characteristics of attachment anxiety in their intimate-close relationships. Our findings further refine the relationship between Machiavellianism and dismissing-avoidant attachment. Machiavellian individuals not only have a negative representation of significant others, but they also tend to seek symbiotic closeness in order to exploit their partners. This ambitendency in distance regulation might be particularly important in understanding the vulnerability of Machiavellian individuals.

Responses to dissatisfaction in friendships and romantic relationships: An interpersonal script analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 1651-1670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheryl Harasymchuk ◽  
Beverley Fehr
Keyword(s):  
Romantic Relationships ◽  
Romantic Relationship ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Romantic Partners ◽  
Close Friend ◽  
Romantic Partner ◽  
Main Hypothesis ◽  
Relationship Context ◽  
Script Analysis ◽  
The Relationship

According to interpersonal script models, people’s responses to relational events are shaped by the reaction they expect from a close other. We analyzed responses to dissatisfaction in close relationships from an interpersonal script perspective. Participants reported on how a close friend or romantic partner would react to their expressions of dissatisfaction (using the exit-voice-loyalty-neglect typology). They were also asked to forecast whether the issue would be resolved (i.e., anticipated outcomes). Our main hypothesis was that people’s expectations for how a close other would respond to dissatisfaction would be dependent on their own self response. Further, we predicted that passive responses would be more common and viewed as less deleterious to a friendship than a romantic relationship. Results indicated that the responses that were expected from close others were contingent on how self responded. Moreover, as predicted, these contingencies followed different tracks depending on the type of relationship. Friends were more likely to expect passive responses to self’s expression of dissatisfaction, especially if self responded with neglect, whereas romantic partners expected more active responses. Furthermore, people anticipated that the issue would be more likely to be resolved if their friend (vs. romantic partner) responded passively and less actively (especially for destructive responses). It was concluded that people hold complex, nuanced interpersonal scripts for dissatisfaction and that these scripts vary, depending on the relationship context.

Love, Morality, and Alienation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Driver
Keyword(s):  
Close Relationships ◽  
Moral Reasons ◽  
Kantian Ethics ◽  
Moral Theories ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Moral Nature ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Susan Wolf ◽  
Reasons Of Love

Is love incompatible with morality? A popular criticism of standard moral theories such as consequentialist theories and Kantian ethics—any theory that holds that the reasons of morality are impartial—is that such theories cannot accommodate the reasons of love. Either the reasons of love are not moral reasons, yet outweigh moral reasons in many situations, or they are moral reasons that are partial, not impartial. Many moral theorists try to retain both impartiality and the special moral nature of partial reasons for close relationships by presenting approaches that justify partial norms on the basis of impartial reasons. These writers are divided on the issue of whether or not such approaches need to be self-effacing. For those who argue that the indirection need not be self-effacing, and that people should be able to step back and evaluate all of their normative commitments, a problem is raised by writers such as Susan Wolf who argue that even considering the possibility of violating a close relationship norm for the sake of morality is problematic to the relationship in question. This article challenges this view of Wolf’s, arguing that, in effect, we can provide justifications for “silencing” when it really is practically appropriate in standard moral theories that do not threaten good relationships.

When the Ones We Love Misbehave: Exploring Moral Processes within Intimate Bonds

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Chubak Forbes ◽  
Jennifer Ellen Stellar
Keyword(s):  
American Psychological Association ◽  
Romantic Partners ◽  
The Self ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
Behavior Study ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Unethical Behaviors ◽  
Underlying Mechanisms ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

How do we react when our romantic partners, friends, or family members behave unethically? When close others misbehave, it generates a powerful conflict between observers’ moral values and their cherished relationships. Previous research has almost exclusively studied moral perception in a social vacuum by investigating responses to the transgressions of strangers; therefore, little is known about how these responses unfold in the context of intimate bonds. Here we systematically examine the impact of having a close relationship with a transgressor on perceptions of that transgressor, the relationship, and the self. We predicted less negative emotional and evaluative responses to transgressors and smaller consequences for the relationship, yet more negative emotional and evaluative responses to the self when close others, compared to strangers or acquaintances, transgress. Participants read hypothetical wrongdoings (Study 1), recalled unethical events (Study 2), reported daily transgressions (Study 3; pre-registered), and learned of novel immoral behavior (Study 4) committed by close others or comparison groups. Participants reported less other-critical emotions, more lenient moral evaluations, a reduced desire to punish/criticize, and a smaller impact on the relationship (compared to acquaintances) when close others versus strangers or acquaintances transgressed. Simultaneously, participants reported more self-conscious emotions and showed some evidence of harsher moral self-evaluations when close others transgressed. Underlying mechanisms of this process were examined. Our findings demonstrate the deep ambivalence in reacting to close others’ unethical behaviors, revealing a surprising irony—in protecting close others, the self may bear some of the burden of their misbehavior. © 2021, American Psychological Association. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article will be available, upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000272

scholarly journals Partner Commitment in Close Relationships Mitigates Social Class Differences in Subjective Well-Being

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacinth J. X. Tan ◽  
Michael W. Kraus ◽  
Emily A. Impett ◽  
Dacher Keltner
Keyword(s):  
Close Relationships ◽  
Lower Class ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Upper Class ◽  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Subjective Well Being ◽  
Romantic Couples ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
The Relationship

The present exploratory research examined the possibility that commitment in close relationships among lower class individuals, despite greater strains on those relationships, buffers them from poorer subjective well-being (SWB). In two samples of close relationship dyads, we found that when partners reported high commitment to the relationship, the typical deficits in relatively lower class individuals’ well-being compared to their upper-class counterparts, assessed as life satisfaction among romantic couples (Study 1) and negative affect linked to depression among ethnically diverse close friendships (Study 2), were mitigated. Conversely, when partners reported low commitment to the relationship, relatively lower class individuals reported poorer well-being than their upper-class counterparts. These patterns were not found with actors’ commitment. Implications of these findings for upending the class divide in SWB are discussed.

Balancing Closeness and Individuality in Adolescent Close Relationships

1997 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 687-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shmuel Shulman ◽  
Danielle Knafo
Keyword(s):  
Romantic Relationships ◽  
Developmental Stage ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Romantic Partners ◽  
Developmental Model ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Relationship Partners ◽  
Close Friendships ◽  
Adolescent Friendship

A systemic perspective is adapted in this account of close friendships and romantic relationships in adolescence. Data from a series of studies conducted on dyads of close friends and romantic partners illustrate how, in each relationship, partners simultaneously negotiate closeness and the expression of individual needs. Two relational types—interdependent and disengaged—were consistently found across all adolescent age groups. Interdependent partners were clearly capable of co-operation. Disengaged partners, although they identified each other as closest friends, appeared incapable of restraining competition to act co-operatively. Differences between the two friendship types were evident at each developmental stage. A three-stage developmental model of adolescent friendship is proposed based on age-related issues as reflected in the two relational types.

Implicit Theories of Relationships and Close Relationship Violence

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca A. Cobb ◽  
C. Nathan DeWall ◽  
Nathaniel M. Lambert ◽  
Frank D. Fincham
Keyword(s):  
Close Relationships ◽  
Implicit Theories ◽  
Current Work ◽  
Relationship Violence ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Implicit Theories Of Relationships

People differ in what they think makes for a successful relationship, but it is unclear how these beliefs relate to the perpetration of violence. Four studies ( N = 2,591) examined the relationship between growth beliefs and the perpetration of violence in close relationships. Specifically, the current work tested the hypothesis that growth beliefs mitigate against close relationship violence, possibly due to increased satisfaction with sacrificing one’s own self-interest for the betterment of the relationship. Studies 1 and 2 provided cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence that growth beliefs predicted less perpetration of close relationship violence. Studies 3 and 4 showed that the relationship between growth beliefs and lower perpetration of violence was mediated by satisfaction with sacrifice within one’s relationship. All effects of growth beliefs remained significant after controlling for destiny beliefs. Discussion centers on the importance of implicit theories of relationships for understanding the perpetration of violence in close relationships.

Attachment and Field Dependence: Individual Differences in Information Processing

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Vermigli ◽  
Alessandro Toni
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Field Dependence ◽  
Attachment Styles ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Adult Age ◽  
Males And Females ◽  
Figure Test ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Measure Field

The present research analyzes the relationship between attachment styles at an adult age and field dependence in order to identify possible individual differences in information processing. The “Experience in Close Relationships” test of Brennan et al. was administered to a sample of 380 individuals (160 males, 220 females), while a subsample of 122 subjects was given the Embedded Figure Test to measure field dependence. Confirming the starting hypothesis, the results have shown that individuals with different attachment styles have a different way of perceiving the figure against the background. Ambivalent and avoidant individuals lie at the two extremes of the same dimension while secure individuals occupy the central part. Significant differences also emerged between males and females.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document