Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Embedded in a theoretically founded process model (termed Dynamics of Motive Satisfaction, ‘DynaMoS’), the present study examined the links between the implicit dispositional communion motive, everyday motivational dynamics, and relationship outcomes in couples. Within–subject processes are proposed to explain between–subject associations of dispositional motives and relationship satisfaction. For an empirical test of the model, data on the dispositional partner–related need for communion and global relationship satisfaction were obtained from 152 individuals in heterosexual relationships. In an extensive experience sampling spanning 2 weeks, a subsample of 130 individuals answered questions about their current motivational states, mood, state relationship satisfaction, and experiences with their partner five times a day. The results were largely consistent with the DynaMoS model: (1) individuals with a strong dispositional implicit communion motive reported more often to be in a communal motivational state; (2) communally motivated individuals were more likely to engage in subsequent instrumental behaviour; and (3) relationship experiences that potentially satisfy communion motivation led to more positive relationship outcomes when individuals were motivated before compared with when they were not. It is discussed how these results and the experience sampling method can foster our understanding of how dispositional characteristics translate into everyday processes and shape relationship outcomes. Copyright © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Keywords

implicit communion motives traits states relationship satisfaction experience sampling

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arslan

and Tata

(2016). formr.org survey software (version v0.16.12).

Augustine

A. A.

, & Larsen

R. J.

(2012). Is a trait really the mean of states? Similarities and differences between traditional and aggregate assessments of personality. Journal of Individual Differences, 33, 131–137. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614–0001/a000083.

Back

M. D.

, Baumert

, Denissen

J. J. A.

, Hartung

F. M.

, Penke

, Schmukle

S. C.

, Schönbrodt

F. D.

, … Wrzus

(2011). Persoc: A unified framework for understanding the dynamic interplay of personality and social relationships. European Journal of Personality, 25, 90–107.

Back

M. D.

, & Vazire

(2015). The social consequences of personality: Six suggestions for future research. European Journal of Personality, 29, 296–307.

Bakan

(1966). The duality of human existence. Boston, IL: Beacon Press.

Barr

D. J.

, Levy

, Scheepers

, & Tily

H. J.

(2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 1–43.

Barton

(2016). MuMIn: Multi–model inference. R package version 1.15.6.

Bates

, Mächler

, Bolker

, & Walker

(2015). Fitting linear mixed–effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.

Bischof

(1975). A systems approach toward the functional connections of attachment and fear. Child Development, 46, 801–817. https://doi.org/10.2307/1128384.

10.

Bischof

(1995). Struktur und Bedeutung: Eine Einführung in die Systemtheorie. Bern: Huber.

11.

Bischof

(2008). Psychologie: Ein Grundkurs für Anspruchsvolle. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

12.

Bolger

, Davis

, & Rafaeli

(2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579–616. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030.

13.

Bolger

, & Laurenceau

J.–P.

(2013). Intensive longitudinal methods. New York, NY: Guilford.

14.

Brunstein

J. C.

, Schultheiss

O. C.

, & Grassmann

(1998). Personal goals and emotional well–being: The moderating role of motive dispositions. Jorunal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.75.2.494.

15.

Collins

L. M.

, & Graham

J. W.

(2002). The effect of the timing and spacing of observations in longitudinal studies of tobacco and other drug use: Temporal design considerations. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 68, 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376–8716(02)00217–X.

16.

Csikszentmihalyi

, & Larson

(1987). Validity and reliability of the experience–sampling method. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 526–536. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053–198709000–00004.

17.

Curran

P. J.

, & Bauer

D. J.

(2011). The disaggregation of within–person and between–person effects in longitudinal models of change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 583–619. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100356.

18.

Deaton

, & Cartwright

(2017). Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials. Social Science & Medicine.

19.

Debrot

, Schoebi

, Perrez

, & Horn

A. B.

(2013). Touch as an interpersonal emotion regulation process in couples’ daily lives: The mediating role of psychological intimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1373–1385. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213497592.

20.

Dufner

, Arslan

R. C.

, Hagemeyer

, Schönbrodt

F. D.

, & Denissen

J. J. A.

(2015). Affective contingencies in the affiliative domain: Physiological assessment, associations with the affiliation motive, and prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 662–676. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000025.

21.

Finnigan

K. M.

, & Vazire

(2017). The incremental validity of average state self–reports over global self–reports of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000136.

22.

Fleeson

(2001). Toward a structure–and process–integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 1011–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.80.6.1011.

23.

Fleeson

, & Gallagher

(2009). The implications of big five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience–sampling studies and a meta–analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1097–1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016786.

24.

Fodor

E. M.

, & Wick

D. P.

(2009). Need for power and affective response to negative audience reaction to an extemporaneous speech. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 721–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.06.007.

25.

Funk

J. L.

, & Rogge

R. D.

(2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the couples satisfaction index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893–3200.21.4.572.

26.

Gable

S. L.

, & Poore

(2008). Which thoughts count? Algorithms for evaluating satisfaction in relationships. Psychological Science, 19, 1030–1036. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9280.2008.02195.x.

27.

Gollob

H. F.

, & Reichardt

C. S.

(1987). Taking account of time lags in causal models. Child Development, 58, 80–92. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130293.

28.

Hagemeyer

, Dufner

, & Denissen

J. J. A.

(2016). Double dissociation between implicit and explicit affiliative motives: A closer look at socializing behavior in dyadic interactions. Journal of Research in Personality, 65, 89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.08.003.

29.

Hagemeyer

, & Neyer

F. J.

(2012). Assessing implicit motivational orientations in couple relationships: The partner–related agency and communion test (PACT). Psychological Assessment, 24, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024822.

30.

Hagemeyer

, Neberich

, Asendorpf

J. B.

, & Neyer

F. J.

(2013). (In)Congruence of implicit and explicit communal motives predicts the quality and stability of couple relationships. Journal of Personality, 81(4), 390–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12016.

31.

Hagemeyer

, Neyer

F. J.

, Neberich

, & Asendorpf

J. B.

(2013). The ABC of social desires: Affiliation, being alone, and closeness to partner. European Journal of Personality, 27, 442–457.

32.

Hagemeyer

, Schönbrodt

F. D.

, Neyer

F. J.

, Neberich

, & Asendorpf

J. B.

(2015). When “together” means “too close”: Agency motives and relationship functioning in coresident and living–apart–together couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 813–835. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000031.

33.

Hamaker

E. L.

(2012). Why researchers should think “within–person”: A paradigmatic rationale (pp. 43–61). Guilford.

34.

Hamaker

E. L.

, & Grasman Raoul

P. P. P.

(2015a). To center or not to center? Investigating inertia with a multilevel autoregressive model. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(January), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01492.

35.

Hamaker

E. L.

, Kuiper

R. M.

, & Grasman

R. P. P. P.

(2015b). A critique of the cross–lagged panel model. Psychological Methods, 20, 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038889.

36.

Harari

G. M.

, Gosling

S. D.

, Wang

R. U. I.

, & Campbell

A. T.

(2015). Comment capturing situational information with smartphones and mobile sensing methods. European Journal of Personality, 29, 509–511. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2032.

37.

Heckhausen

, & Heckhausen

(2008). Motivation and action (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499821.

38.

Heller

, Watson

, & Ilies

(2004). The role of person versus situation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 574–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–2909.130.4.574.

39.

Heyman

R. E.

, Sayers

S. L.

, & Bellack

A. S.

(1994). Global marital satisfaction versus marital adjustment: An empirical comparison of three measures. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 432–446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893–3200.8.4.432.

40.

Hofer

, & Busch

(2011a). Satisfying one's needs for competence and relatedness: Consequent domain–specific well–being depends on strength of implicit motives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1147–1158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211408329.

41.

Hofer

, & Busch

(2011b). When the needs for affiliation and intimacy are frustrated: Envy and indirect aggression among German and Cameroonian adults. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.003.

42.

Hofer

, & Hagemeyer

(in press). Social bonding: Affiliation motivation and intimacy motivation. In Heckhausen

, & Heckhausen

(Eds.), Motivation and action (3rd ed.). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

43.

Hofmann

, Baumeister

R. F.

, Förster

, & Vohs

K. D.

(2012). Everyday temptations: An experience sampling study of desire, conflict, and self–control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1318–1335. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026545.

44.

Hofmann

, Finkel

E. J.

, & Fitzsimons

G. M.

(2015). Close relationships and self–regulation: How relationship satisfaction and self–regulation facilitates momentary goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 434–452. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000020.

45.

Horowitz

L. M.

, Wilson

K. R.

, Turan

, Zolotsev

, Constantino

M. J.

, & Henderson

(2006). How interpersonal motives clarify the meaning of interpersonal behavior: A revised circumplex model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1001_4.

46.

Howell

R. T.

, Ksendzova

, Nestingen

, Yerahian

, & Iyer

(2017). Your personality on a good day: How trait and state personality predict daily well–being. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.08.001.

47.

Job

, Bernecker

, & Dweck

C. S.

(2012). Are implicit motives the need to feel certain affect? Motive–affect congruence predicts relationship satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1552–1565. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212454920.

48.

Johnson

P. C.

(2014). Extension of nakagawa and schielzeth's r2glmm to random slopes models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 944–946.

49.

Kanat–Maymon

, Argaman

, & Roth

(2017). The association between conditional regard and relationship quality: A daily diary study. Personal Relationships, 24, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12164.

50.

Kelley

(2016). MBESS: The MBESS R package. R package version 4.1.0.

51.

Kenny

D. A.

, Kashy

D. A.

, & Cook

W. L.

(2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.

52.

Kurdek

L. A.

(2004). Are gay and lesbian cohabiting couples really different from heterosexual married couples? Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 880–900. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022–2445.2004.00060.x.

53.

Kuznetsova

, Brockhoff

P. B.

, and Christensen

R. H. B.

(2016). lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0–33.

54.

Laurenceau

J.–P.

, Feldman Barrett

, & Pietromonaco

P. R.

(1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self–disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1238–1251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.74.5.1238.

55.

Laurenceau

J.–P.

, Feldman Barrett

, & Rovine

(2005). The interpersonal process model of intimacy in marriage: A daily–diary and multilevel modeling approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 314–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893–3200.19.2.314.

56.

Laurenceau

J.–P.

, Troy

A. B.

, & Carver

C. S.

(2005). Two distinct emotional experiences in romantic relationships: Effects of perceptions regarding approach of intimacy and avoidance of conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(8), 1123–1133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205274447.

57.

, & Agnew

C. R.

(2001). Need fulfillment and emotional experience in interdependent romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 423–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407501183007.

58.

, & Agnew

C. R.

(2003). Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta–analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships, 10, 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475–6811.00035.

59.

Malouff

J. M.

, Thorsteinsson

E. B.

, Schutte

N. S.

, Bhullar

, & Rooke

S. E.

(2010). The five–factor model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta–analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 124–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.09.004.

60.

Markey

P. M.

, Funder

D. C.

, & Ozer

D. J.

(2003). Complementarity of interpersonal behaviors in dyadic interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1082–1090. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203253474.

61.

Mason

, & Blankenship

(1987). Power and affiliation motivation, stress, and abuse in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.52.1.203.

62.

McAdams

D. P.

, & Constantian

C. A.

(1983). Intimacy and affiliation motives in daily living: An experience sampling analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 851–861. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.45.4.851.

63.

McAdams

D. P.

, Healy

, & Krause

(1984). Social motives and patterns of friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 828–838. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.47.4.828.

64.

McAdams

D. P.

, Jackson

R. J.

, & Kirshnit

(1984). Looking, laughing, and smiling in dyads as a function of intimacy motivation and reciprocity. Journal of Personality, 52, 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–6494.1984.tb00881.x.

65.

McAdams

D. P.

, & Vaillant

G. E.

(1982). Intimacy motivation and psychosocial adjustment: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality Assessment, 46, 586–593. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4606_5.

66.

McClelland

D. C.

(1987). Human motivation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

67.

McClelland

D. C.

, Koestner

, & Weinberger

(1989). How do self–attributed and implicit motives differ? Psychological Review, 96, 690–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–295X.96.4.690.

68.

Miller

(2012). The smartphone psychology manifesto. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612441215.

69.

Molenaar

P. C. M.

(2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2, 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15366359mea0204_1.

70.

Molenaar

P. C. M.

, & Campbell

C. G.

(2009). The new person–specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–8721.2009.01619.x.

71.

Nakagawa

, & Schielzeth

(2013). A general and simple method for obtaining r2 from generalized linear mixed–effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4, 133–142.

72.

Neubauer

A. B.

, & Voss

(2016). The structure of need fulfillment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015–5759/a000326.

73.

Nezlek

J. B.

(2017). A practical guide to understanding reliability in studies of within–person variability. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.020.

74.

Nezlek

J. B.

, Newman

D. B.

, & Thrash

T. M.

(2017). A daily diary study of relationships between feelings of gratitude and well–being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12, 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1198923.

75.

Noftle

E. E.

, & Shaver

P. R.

(2006). Attachment dimensions and the big five personality traits: Associations and comparative ability to predict relationship quality. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 179–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2004.11.003.

76.

R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

77.

Reis

H. T.

, & Shaver

(1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 367–389).

78.

Revelle

(2016). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University R package version 1.6.12.

79.

Riediger

, & Freund

A. M.

(2004). Interference and facilitation among personal goals: Differential associations with subjective well–being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1511–1523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271184.

80.

Rogge

R. D.

, Fincham

F. D.

, Crasta

, & Maniaci

M. R.

(2017). Positive and negative evaluation of relationships: Development and validation of the positive – Negative relationship quality (PN–RQ) scale. Psychological Assessment, 29, 1028–1043. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000392.

81.

Rosseel

(2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.

82.

Russell

J. A.

, Weiss

, & Mendelsohn

G. A.

(1989). Affect grid: A single–item scale of pleasure and arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.57.3.493.

83.

Sadikaj

, Moskowitz

D. S.

, & Zuroff

D. C.

(2015). Felt security in daily interactions as a mediator of the effect of attachment on relationship satisfaction. European Journal of Personality, 29, 187–200.

84.

Sadikaj

, Moskowitz

D. S.

, & Zuroff

D. C.

(2016). Negative affective reaction to partner's dominant behavior influences satisfaction with romantic relationship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1–23.

85.

Schneider

(2001). Systems theory of motivational development. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 10120–10125.

86.

Schönbrodt

F. D.

, & Gerstenberg

F. X. R.

(2012). An IRT analysis of motive questionnaires: The Unified Motive Scales. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 725–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.08.010.

87.

Schultheiss

O. C.

(2001). An information processing account of implicit motive arousal. In Maehr

M. L.

, & Pintrich

(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (12th ed., pp. 1–41). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

88.

Schultheiss

O. C.

(2008). Implicit motives. In John

O. P.

, Robins

R. W.

, & Pervin

L. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 603–633). New York: Guilford.

89.

Schultheiss

O. C.

, & Brunstein

J. C.

(2010). Implicit motives. New York: Oxford University Press.

90.

Schultheiss

O. C.

, Jones

N. M.

, Davis

A. Q.

, & Kley

(2008). The role of implicit motivation in hot and cold goal pursuit: Effects on goal progress, goal rumination, and emotional well–being. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 971–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.12.009.

91.

Schultheiss

O. C.

, & Wirth

M. M.

(in press). Biopsychological aspects of motivation. In Heckhausen

(Ed.), Motivation and action (3rd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

92.

Shaver

P. R.

, & Brennan

K. A.

(1992). Attachment styles and the “big five” personality traits: Their connections with each other and with romantic relationship outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 536–545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292185003.

93.

Sheldon

K. M.

, Ryan

, & Reis

H. T.

(1996). What makes for a good day? Competence and autonomy in the day and in the person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1270–1279. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672962212007.

94.

Simmons

J. P.

, Nelson

L. D.

, and Simonsohn

(2012). A 21 word solution. SPSP Dialogue, 1–4.

95.

Stewart

A. J.

, & Rubin

(1976). The power motive in the dating couple. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 305–309. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.34.2.305.

96.

Strack

, & Deutsch

(2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 220–247.

97.

Vater

, & Schröder–Abé

(2015). Explaining the link between personality and relationship satisfaction: Emotion regulation and interpersonal behaviour in conflict discussions. European Journal of Personality, 29, 201–215.

98.

Weinberger

, Cotler

, & Fishman

(2010). The duality of affiliative motivation. In Schultheiss

O. C.

, & Brunstein

J. C.

(Eds.), Implicit motives (pp. 71–88).

99.

West

S. G.

, & Hepworth

J. T.

(1991). Statistical issues in the study of temporal data: Daily experiences. Journal of Personality, 59, 609–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–6494.1991.tb00261.x.

100.

Wickham

(2009). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer–Verlag.

101.

Wilson

R. E.

, Harris

, & Vazire

(2015). Personality and friendship satisfaction in daily life: Do everyday social interactions account for individual differences in friendship satisfaction? European Journal of Personality, 29, 173–186.

102.

Winter

D. G.

, John

O. P.

, Stewart

A. J.

, Klohnen

E. C.

, & Duncan

L. E.

(1998). Traits and motives: Toward an integration of two traditions in personality research. Psychological Review, 105, 230–250. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–295X.105.2.230.

103.

Wrzus

, & Mehl

M. R.

(2015). Lab and/or field? Measuring personality processes and their social consequences. European Journal of Personality, 29, 250–271.

104.

Zhang

, Zyphur

M. J.

, & Preacher

K. J.

(2009). Testing multilevel mediation using hierarchical linear models: Problems and solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 695–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428108327450.

105.

Zurbriggen

E. L.

(2000). Social motives and cognitive power–sex associations: Predictors of aggressive sexual behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 559–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.78.3.559.

106.

Zurbriggen

E. L.

, & Sturman

T. S.

(2002). Linking motives and emotions: A test of McClelland's hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(4), 521–535.

107.

Zygar

, Hagemeyer

, Pusch

, & Schönbrodt

F. D.

(2018). From motive dispositions to states to outcomes: Research data of an intensive experience sampling study on communal motivational dynamics in couples [Translated Title] (Version 1) [Files on CD–ROM]. Trier: Center for Research Data in Psychology: PsychData of the Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information ZPID. https://doi.org/10.5160/psychdata.zrce16dy99

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.30 MB

From Motive Dispositions to States to Outcomes: An Intensive Experience Sampling Study on Communal Motivational Dynamics in Couples

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material