Elsevier

Journal of Research in Personality

Volume 65, December 2016, Pages 130-139
Journal of Research in Personality

Self-determined self-other overlap: Interacting effects on partners’ perceptions of support and well-being in close relationships

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.10.011Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Here we integrate work on self-other overlap and self-determination.

  • Three studies tested reciprocal dyadic relationships in cross-sectional and longitudinal data.

  • Only partners of self-determined individuals benefited from self-other overlap.

  • Findings inform motivation and relationship literatures.

Abstract

Self-other overlap, an important dimension of interpersonal closeness, is linked to positive interpersonal and well-being outcomes in relationships with romantic partners and friends. Three studies applied principles from self-determination theory to examine whether individual differences in self-determined motivation moderate the effects of higher self-other overlap on partner outcomes. Studies were cross-sectional and longitudinal, and examined personality and relationship-specific self-determination in friends (Study 1) and romantic partners (all studies); all were comprised of dyads to examine partner effects. Results suggested that as self-determined individuals reported greater self-other overlap, their partners also reported receiving more positive motivational support as well as enhanced commitment. On the other hand, when individuals were low in self-determination, partners did not benefit from greater self-other overlap.

Introduction

In the present paper, we integrate self-determination theory (SDT; Deci and Ryan, 1985, Deci and Ryan, 2008, Ryan and Deci, 2000) with self-expansion theory to better understand and predict relational and well-being outcomes for one’s partner, assuming that healthy relational processes translate to more positive partner outcomes.

Research informed by self-expansion theory (Aron et al., 1991, Aron and Fraley, 1999) has shown that individuals in close relationships such as those with romantic partners or best friends tend to experience higher cognitive interdependence with partners, reflecting a blending of identity from “I” to “we”; many studies cite this as one important aspect of interpersonal closeness that is partly responsible for shared intimacy (e.g., Aron and Fraley, 1999, Oriña et al., 2002, Weidler and Clark, 2011). Such intimacy encourages a way of relating to partners that is more closely connected to one’s own self-views and self-expectations. For example, individuals allocate resources to a close other as they would to themselves, and tend to cognitively process information about close others as if it were about themselves (Aron et al., 1991). In addition, under conditions of high self-other overlap, individuals tend to treat others’ identities, behaviors, goals, and resources as if these were their own (Mashek, Aron, & Boncimino, 2003). Thus, self-other overlap promotes a more invested and intensely personal way of relating (e.g., in both friendships and romantic relationships; Mashek et al., 2003). While such intimacy is thought to promote more positive relational outcomes, such as complex understanding of partners (Waugh & Fredrickson, 2006), more empathy-induced helping (Batson et al., 1997), and less social comparison (Gardner, Gabriel, & Hochschild, 2002), more complex and potentially conflictual relational outcomes have also been identified, for example, responding to another’s mistakes as if they were your own (Kang, Hirsh, & Chasteen, 2010). As an important component of relationships, this self-other overlap has also been linked to generally positive outcomes for the relationship, impacting both self and partner (Amodio and Showers, 2005, Murray et al., 2002, Murray et al., 2000), yet individuals may find high self-other overlap to be undesirable at times (Frost and Forrester, 2013, Mashek et al., 2011). Although the literature largely identifies positive outcomes of self-other overlap, we reasoned that the associations between increases in self-other overlap and relational outcomes depend on self-determination, or the degree to which partners are motivated by a sense of choice and personal valuing.

While those who are self-determined might be inclined to embrace and invest in those with whom they experience high self-other overlap – becoming more emotionally available, responsive, and attuned to partners – those who are low in self-determination are more defensive in close relationships, particularly during important or emotional interactions (e.g., Knee et al., 2013, Knee et al., 2002). This work suggests that self-determined individuals engage partners in more relationally and motivationally supportive ways, and here we explore, for the first time, the idea that this might affect the consequences for partners as closeness increases. This body of literature also suggests that, as closeness increases, individuals low in self-determination respond with defensive behaviors, and their partners may experience relationships in more negative ways. In this paper, we test the expectation that increasing closeness benefits partners of self-determined individuals only, in these cases leading to more experiences of support and greater relationship commitment.

Section snippets

Self-determination

A key aspect of SDT is the distinction made between parts of the self that are regulated by extrinsic incentives, inner pressures, expectations, and demands and those that are regulated by intrinsic interests, awareness of needs, and genuine core-self involvement. According to SDT, being self-determined means that one’s actions are relatively volitional, freely chosen, and fully endorsed by the individual. This definition stresses authenticity of choices and behaviors that are congruent with

Levels of self-determination

Self-determination has been defined at levels of generality vertically organized from global to context-specific (Vallerand, 1997, Vallerand, 2007, Vallerand and Ratelle, 2002). The most global level reflects an individual difference that is broadly transferred across domains and relationships, including close relationships. More context-specific are motivational qualities that drive individuals to engage a given relationship. Individuals who are generally more self-determined are more likely

Motivational supports in a relationship

In testing our expectation that self-determination would moderate the effects of self-other overlap across these levels of measurement, we focus in two of our studies on predicting the most proximal outcomes of self-determination in relationships; namely, motivational supports. When in relationships, individuals may use motivational strategies with their partners that likely influence their partners’ relational and personal experiences. Autonomy support is one relational process recognized to

Present study: integrating motivation and self-other overlap

Self-other overlap has been interpreted as an index of interconnectedness between one’s self and a close other, which is usually associated with positive relationship outcomes. Although self-expansion theory suggests that people desire to expand their self-concept, it does not distinguish between more and less self-determined expansion (Knee et al., 2013). The present paper employed an SDT perspective to understand the implications for partners as individuals experience higher self-other

Study 1

Study 1 tested the extent to which individuals’ personality-level self-determination and self-other overlap interacted in predicting partners’ perceived autonomy support and conditional regard. To do this, we conducted a dyadic study focused on two types of reciprocal close relationships: friends and romantic partners. This approach allowed a test of generalizability across relationship types, and by obtaining data from both partners in a dyad, we were able to discriminate between actor and

Participants and procedure

Participants included 78 romantic dyads who were in committed romantic relationships for at least three months. At least one participant was a psychology student, but no students were excluded from the study or analyses providing they were in a committed romantic relationship. Participants ranged in age from 21 to 55 years (M = 25.02 years, SD = 5.88 years), and average relationship length was 3.38 years (SD = 4.08 years). Data were collected through the school semester; we did not recruit for a second

Participants and procedure

Participants were both partners of romantic couples who took part in a five-wave longitudinal study. To take part, couples were required to have begun cohabitating, become engaged or married within the previous year, or be planning to do so during the upcoming year; Providing they met these criteria, no couples were excluded from participating in this study. At Time 1, 187 couples took part in the project (183 heterosexual couples, 4 lesbian couples), with the number of couples dropping to 160,

General discussion

This research is among the first to apply self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) to understanding interpersonal closeness through the lens of self-expansion theory (e.g., Aron and Fraley, 1999, Aron et al., 1991). Based on these two literatures, we expected that those who experience greater self-other overlap would be recognized by partners to be providing more relationally enriching and motivationally supportive climates, but only when self-determined. Results across three studies

References (74)

  • A. Aron et al.

    Close relationships as including other in the self

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1991)
  • A. Aron et al.

    Relationship closeness as including others in the self: Cognitive underpinnings and measures

    Social Cognition

    (1999)
  • A. Assor et al.

    The harmful effects of parental conditional regard

    Scientific Annals of the psychological Society of Northern Greece

    (2005)
  • A. Assor et al.

    The emotional costs of perceived parental conditional regard: A self-determination theory analysis

    Journal of Personality

    (2004)
  • C.D. Batson et al.

    Is empathy-induced helping due to self–other merging?

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1997)
  • M.R. Blais et al.

    Toward a motivational model of couple happiness

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1990)
  • P. Blow

    The adolescent passage

    (1979)
  • A.S. Bryk et al.

    Hierarchical linear models in social and behavioral research: Applications and data analysis methods

    (1992)
  • M.S. Clark et al.

    Interpersonal processes in close relationships

    Annual Review of Psychology

    (1988)
  • D. Cramer

    Facilitativeness, conflict, demand for approval, self-esteem, and satisfaction with romantic relationships

    Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

    (2003)
  • G. Cummings

    The new statistics: Why and how

    Psychological Science

    (2014)
  • W. Damon

    Social and personality development: Infancy through adolescence

    (1983)
  • E.L. Deci et al.

    Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective

    Journal of Personality

    (1994)
  • E.L. Deci et al.

    Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior

    (1985)
  • E.L. Deci et al.

    Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life’s domains

    Canadian Psychology

    (2008)
  • R. Domingue et al.

    Attachment and conflict communication in adult romantic relationships

    Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

    (2009)
  • D.M. Frost et al.

    Closeness discrepancies in romantic relationships: Implications for relational well-being, stability, and mental health

    Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin

    (2013)
  • G.S. Gaine et al.

    The unique contributions of motivations to maintain a relationship and motivations toward relational activities to relationship well-being

    Motivation and Emotion

    (2009)
  • W.L. Gardner et al.

    When you and I are “we,” you are not threatening: The role of self-expansion in social comparison

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2002)
  • W.S. Grolnick et al.

    Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1987)
  • W.S. Grolnick et al.

    Parent styles associated with children’s self-regulation and competence in school

    Journal of Educational Psychology

    (1989)
  • Hodgins, H. S., Yacko, H. A., Gottlieb, E., Goodwin, G., & Rath, P. (2002). Autonomy and engaging versus defending...
  • H.S. Hodgins et al.

    On the compatibility of autonomy and relatedness

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (1996)
  • H.S. Hodgins et al.

    Apology versus defense: Antecedents and consequences

    Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

    (2003)
  • H.S. Hodgins et al.

    Getting out of hot water: Facework in social predicaments

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1996)
  • H.S. Hodgins et al.

    The cost of self-protection: Threat response and performance as a function of autonomous and controlled motivations

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (2010)
  • B.C. Ilardi et al.

    Employee and supervisor ratings of motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and adjustment in a factory setting

    Journal of Applied Social Psychology

    (1993)
  • Cited by (12)

    • Empirically distinguishing interpersonal styles within romantic relationships: What is helpful or harmful when having a goal for your romantic partner?

      2022, Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee
      Citation Excerpt :

      As a second indicator of relationship functioning we assessed closeness which is conceptualized as the feeling that one's identity is intertwined with the partners. Often measured using the inclusion of the other in the self (Aron et al., 1992), it has been positively associated with autonomy support (e.g., Deci et al., 2006), directive support (Chua, 2015) and mutual support between partners (Le et al., 2019), as well as negatively associated with conditional regard (Weinstein et al., 2016b). It should be noted, however, that the association with directive support was studied in a priming context, which likely made the relation stronger than it really was.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text