An Evolutionary, Life History Theory Perspective on Relationship Maintenance

doi:10.1017/9781108304320.003

3 - An Evolutionary, Life History Theory Perspective on Relationship Maintenance

from Part II - Theories of Relationship Maintenance

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2019

Ethan S. Young and

Jeffry A. Simpson

Edited by

Brian G. Ogolsky and

J. Kale Monk

Show author details

Brian G. Ogolsky: Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
J. Kale Monk: Affiliation:
University of Missouri

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Relationship maintenance is a central topic in relationship science. Most relationship scholars examine relationship maintenance at the proximate level of causation by examining how variables such as immediate threats to a relationship or an individual’s degree of commitment elicit the motivation to maintain it. Far less attention has been granted to distal factors, such as each partner’s developmental history or the possible evolutionary origins of relationship maintenance tendencies. The primary goal of this chapter is to shed clarifying light on these understudied levels of analysis by viewing relationship maintenance processes from an evolutionary-developmental perspective. We first review two central evolutionary frameworks (the Strategic Pluralism Model and Life History Theory) and integrate them within a single model called Developmental Strategic Pluralism. Drawing from this novel framework, we derive a set of testable predictions regarding relationship maintenance processes with the ultimate goals of contextualizing proximate relationship processes within evolutionary thinking and stimulating new avenues for future research in this rapidly growing area of relationship science.

Keywords

relationship maintenance mating strategies life history theory development evolution

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Relationship Maintenance
Theory, Process, and Context
, pp. 29 - 46
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108304320.003 [Opens in a new window]
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agnew, C. R., & VanderDrift, L. W. (2015). Relationship maintenance and dissolution. In Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Simpson, J. A., & Dovidio, J. F. (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Interpersonal relations (Vol. 3, pp. 581–604). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Belsky, J. (1997). Attachment, mating, and parenting: An evolutionary interpretation. Human Nature, 8, 361–381.Google Scholar

Belsky, J., & Jaffee, S. (2006). The multiple determinants of parenting. In Cicchetti, D. & Cohen, D. (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 3. Risk, disorder, and adaptation (2nd ed., pp. 38–85). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Belsky, J., Steinberg, L., & Draper, P. (1991). Childhood experience, interpersonal development, and reproductive strategy: An evolutionary theory of socialization. Child Development, 62, 647–670.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bradbury, T. N., & Fincham, F. D. (1990). Attributions in marriage: Review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 3–33.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: A contextual evolutionary analysis of human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar

Del Giudice, M., Gangestad, S. W., & Kaplan, H. S. (2016). Life history theory and evolutionary psychology. In Buss, D. M. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (2nd ed., pp. 88–114). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Ellis, B. J., Bianchi, J., Griskevicius, V., & Frankenhuis, W. E. (2017). Beyond risk and protective factors: An adaptation-based approach to resilience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 561–587.Google Scholar

Ellis, B. J., Figueredo, A. J., Brumbach, B. H., & Schlomer, G. L. (2009). Fundamental dimensions of environmental risk: The impact of harsh versus unpredictable environments on the evolution and development of life history strategies. Human Nature, 20, 204–268.Google Scholar

Fletcher, G. J. O., & Fincham, F. D. (1991). Attribution processes in close relationships. In Fletcher, G. J. O. & Fincham, F. D. (Eds.), Cognition in close relationships (pp. 7–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–587.Google Scholar

Geary, D. C. (2005). Evolution of paternal investment. In Buss, D. M. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 483–505). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Gonzaga, G. C., Haselton, M. G., Smurda, J., Davies, M. S., & Poore, J. C. (2008). Love, desire, and the suppression of thoughts of romantic alternatives. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 119–126.Google Scholar

Griskevicius, V., Ackerman, J. M., Cantú, S. M., Delton, A. W., Robertson, T. E., Simpson, J. A., … Tybur, J. M. (2013). When the economy falters do people spend or save? Responses to resource scarcity depend on childhood environments. Psychological Science, 24, 197–205. doi:10.1177/0956797612451471CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Holmes, J. G., & Rempel, J. K. (1989). Trust in close relationships. In Hendrick, C. (Ed.), Close relationships (pp. 187–220). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar

Impett, E. A., Gable, S. L., & Peplau, L. A. (2005). Giving up and giving in: The costs and benefits of daily sacrifice in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 327–344.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. J., & Rusbult, C. E. (1989). Resisting temptation: Devaluation of alternative partners as a means of maintaining commitment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 967–980.Google Scholar

Kaplan, H. S., & Gangestad, S. W. (2005). Life history theory and evolutionary psychology. In Buss, D. M. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 68–95). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Karremans, J. C., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2008). Forgiveness in personal relationships: Its malleability and powerful consequences. European Review of Social Psychology, 19, 202–241.Google Scholar

Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Levinger, G. (1983). Development and change. In Kelley, H. H., Berscheid, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J. H., Huston, T. L., Levinger, G., McClintock, E., Peplau, L. A., & Peterson, D. R. (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 315–359). San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar

Lydon, J. E., & Quinn, S. K. (2013). Relationship maintenance processes. In Simpson, J. A. & Campbell, L. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 573–588). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Maner, J. K., Rouby, D. A., & Gonzaga, G. C. (2008). Automatic inattention to attractive alternatives: The evolved psychology of relationship maintenance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 343–349.Google Scholar

Miller, R. J. (1997). Inattentive and contented: Relationship commitment and attention to alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 758–766.Google Scholar

Mittal, C., & Griskevicius, V. (2014). Sense of control under uncertainty depends on people’s childhood environment: A life history theory approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 621–637.Google Scholar

Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. W. (1996). The benefits of positive illusions: Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 79–98.Google Scholar

Promislow, D., & Harvey, P. (1990). Living fast and dying young: A comparative analysis of life-history variation among mammals. Journal of the Zoological Society of London, 220, 417–437.Google Scholar

Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172–186.Google Scholar

Rusbult, C. E., & Buunk, B. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 175–204.Google Scholar

Rusbult, C. E., Verette, J., Whitney, G. A., Slovik, L. F., & Lipkus, I. (1991). Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 53–78.CrossRef Google Scholar

Simpson, J. A., & Belsky, J. (2016). Attachment theory within a modern evolutionary framework. In Cassidy, J. & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (3rd ed., pp. 91–116). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Stearns, S. (1992). The evolution of life histories. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Szepsenwol, O., Simpson, J. A., Griskevicius, V., & Raby, K. L. (2015). The effect of unpredictable early childhood environments on parenting in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 1045–1067.Google Scholar

Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.Google Scholar

Van Lange, P. A. M., Rusbult, C. E., Drigotas, S. M., Arriaga, X. B., Witcher, B. S., & Cox, C. L. (1997). Willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1373–1395.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.