4.4 Article

Neuroticism and satisfaction in romantic relationships: A systematic investigation of intra- and interpersonal processes with a longitudinal approach

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY
Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages 149-179

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/08902070211001258

Keywords

Cognitive processes; neuroticism; relationship satisfaction; Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Models; dyadic longitudinal data

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that neuroticism can reliably predict relationship satisfaction for both partners through cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes, with cognitive processes playing a particularly important role on both interpersonal and intrapersonal levels.
Relationship satisfaction-the degree to which a close relationship is perceived as rewarding and satisfying by both partners-is reliably predicted by both partners' neuroticism, but the psychological mechanisms underlying this effect are not sufficiently well understood. By analyzing several cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes simultaneously, the current longitudinal study looked at how both partners' neuroticism affects their respective (and mutual) relationship satisfaction both on an intra- and on an interpersonal level. Dyadic data from 2090 heterosexual couples from the Pairfam study were analyzed with Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Models (APIMeM). Results support the assumption that neuroticism reliably predicts cognitive, emotional, and behavioral variables, which, in turn, predict both partners' relationship satisfaction. Importantly, cognitive processes play a particularly important role both on an interpersonal as well as on an intrapersonal level. These findings help to shed light on the maladaptive cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes underlying the effect of neuroticism on relationship satisfaction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available