Doctoral Dissertations

Date of Award

5-1996

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Major

Psychology

Major Professor

Warren H. Jones

Abstract

Commitment to the development and maintenance of close personal relationships has been the focus of considerable theoretical and empirical attention over the past 30 years. During this time, scholars from such diverse areas as sociology, family studies, psychology, and anthropology have generated numerous conceptual models and have contributed to a growing empirical literature that is broadening our understanding of the forces that bind couples together. However, despite these efforts, the literature on interpersonal commitment appears to be largely non-cumulative and without clear focus or direction. Four factors seem to be responsible for these deficits. First, no attempts have been made to review this literature with an eye toward identifying its common themes, methodological limitations, and areas in need of additional development. Consequently, researchers cannot comment effectively on the "state of the field" and therefore are not in a position to pursue systematically particular lines of research that might be most beneficial to our growing knowledge base. Second, a well-validated measure of interpersonal commitment has not enjoyed widespread use among researchers. In fact, the most common practice among investigators is the creation of measures designed to satisfy the requirements of a particular study or sequence of studies. Because it is often unclear what these instruments actually measure, and because extant measures have not been compared empirically, the results of studies in which different measures were used cannot be aggregated. As a result, few clear conclusions may be drawn from the literature regarding the ways in which commitment operates in close relationships. Third, progress has been hindered by researchers' apparent reluctance to explore alternatives to social exchange theory as an explanatory model of interpersonal commitment. While the cognitive aspects of commitment are fairly well represented in social exchange theory, it is clear that humans are less than perfect processors of information, especially the kind of affect-laden information that is pervasive in most emotionally intimate relationships. Finally, insufficient empirical attention has been devoted to examining the dynamic nature of interpersonal commitment. While it clearly is important to understand commitment at the level of the construct, it is equally clear that commitment functions as a process, necessitating the exploration of the mechanisms involved in the rise and fall, or change in character, of this variable over time. The overarching goal of this dissertation was to address the four impediments to literature development described above. As a first step, the literature on interpersonal commitment was extensively reviewed. On the basis of this review, two broad conclusions were drawn. First, despite the appearance of diversity among the various definitions and conceptualizations of interpersonal commitment, three common dimensions may be identified: an attraction dimension (Commitment to the Spouse) based on feelings of devotion, dedication, and attachment to one's partner, a moral/normative dimension (Commitment to the Marriage) based on one's belief in the importance of keeping one's promises and in the sanctity of the marital relationship, and a constraining dimension (Barriers to Dissolution) based on feelings of entrapment emergent from concerns over the social, emotional, and/or financial penalties of marital dissolution. A second conclusion is that the body of empirical findings relevant to interpersonal commitment may be usefully organized according to these three dimensions. A review of the empirical literature showed, for example, that Commitment to the Spouse is associated with love, satisfaction, positive communication, effective problem-solving, and relationship maintenance behaviors, Commitment to Marriage is related to spouse's sense of obligation and duty and religious orientation, and Barriers to Dissolution is related primarily to external and normative constraints. The second limitation was addressed by implementing several empirical strategies to assess the construct fidelity of the three dimensions of commitment. The results of six studies were consistent with the preceding review of the literature and supported the idea that commitment in marriage may be usefully described in terms of three basic dimensions. The robustness of this tripartite conceptualization was demonstrated using a variety of empirical strategies. For example, a series of psychometric and factor analytic treatments of items generated to satisfy 11 different definitions of commitment found in the literature yielded three general components of commitment in marriage corresponding to Commitment to Spouse, Commitment to Marriage, and Barriers to Dissolution. Whereas Commitment to Spouse and Barriers to Dissolution are unrelated, Commitment to Marriage is related to both, although the magnitude of the correlations suggested the utility of maintaining the conceptual distinction among the three. Furthermore, scores on Commitment to Spouse and Commitment to Marriage differentiated between, on the one hand, seriously dating, engaged, and married respondents versus casually dating and divorced participants, and all three components of commitment were found to be associated with self-reported marital satisfaction. Validity comparisons showed significant correlations between Commitment to Spouse and measures of personal dedication and interpersonal orientation; Commitment to Marriage was related to indexes of morality and religiosity; and the self-report of Barriers to Dissolution was significantly associated with obstacles to relationship termination. Also, measures of these three components tended not to be related to the correlates of other components. Ratings by marital partners and other family members suggested that the commitment scores of partners are significantly related, partners' beliefs regarding the commitment of the other are significantly similar, and the ratings given by one's partner are significantly related to one's self-ratings across all three dimensions. Additionally, significant relationships were obtained in comparisons between self-ratings and ratings by other family members (e.g., one's children, one's own parents, etc.). Finally, the three dimensions of commitment were significantly related to extant measures of similar constructs with, again, little overlap in the pattern of correlates for each dimension, and items from extant measures of commitment, for the most part, reduce to the same three-component structure. The third limitation was addressed by proposing an alternative perspective from which to view interpersonal commitment. Following a description of social exchange theory, its role in models of interpersonal commitment, and its shortcomings, three studies were conducted to determine whether interpersonal commitment may be regarded as an individual difference variable. In Study 1, simple correlations were computed between the three dimensions of commitment and two indexes of normal and deviant personality traits. Results indicated that the three dimensions of interpersonal commitment are related differentially to particular personality traits and hint at the possibility that certain clusters of traits influence the way commitment is experienced by spouses. The goal of Study 2 was to explore the role of more globally defined personality profiles in the experience of commitment by examining how attachment style helps to explain variations in interpersonal commitment. Results indicated that individuals who described themselves as securely attached differed from individuals who described themselves as either anxiously or avoidantly attached on the extent to which they are committed to their spouse. Finally, Study 3 examined the extent to which commitment is consistent across a broad range of experiential domains. Results indicated that a high degree of commitment to the spouse as a valued person was positively related to goal commitment, family involvement, goal orientation, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability (among other factors), whereas commitment to the marital relationship was associated with familism, internal religiosity, and perfectionism, and the experience of entrapment in marriage was associated with external religiosity and perfectionism and inversely related to goal commitment. Together, these studies seem to support the idea that in addition to the cognitive and situational factors that have been used to explain committed behavior, commitment may be affected by particular features of one's character. The final limitation to the literature was addressed by asserting the position that viewing commitment as a dynamic process and taking note of the ways in which commitment changes throughout the course of a relationship have potentially important implications for future research and theory in this area. Further, it was argued that such a longitudinal perspective would bring into sharper focus the interplay of affective, cognitive, dispositional, and situational factors that affect, and are in tum affected by, interpersonal commitment, thereby providing a means for integrating the diverse set of findings comprising the commitment literature. On the basis of this argument, an attempt was made to outline a model of interpersonal commitment that emphasizes the changing nature of commitment and which seeks to integrate theory and research on marital satisfaction, exchange processes, personality, and the attraction, moral/ normative, and constraining dimensions of commitment. At the heart of this model is the idea that the experience of commitment as an enthusiastic pursuit, a moral imperative, or a sense of entrapment is influenced by the salience of various situational and dispositional factors to relationship partners during the course of their marital interaction. To conclude, a research agenda devoted to examining the areas in greatest need of development was advanced. Several potentially fruitful avenues for future research were identified. First, greater attention needs to be devoted to examining the ways in which the three dimensions of commitment mediate or moderate relationship enhancing or relationship weakening behaviors. Such an approach could be integrated with the rapidly growing body of research on couple interaction patterns, yielding a more complete picture of healthy and unhealthy couple functioning. Second, current knowledge of interpersonal commitment would be enhanced by employing statistical modeling techniques to explore more thoroughly the range of predictors and outcomes of interpersonal commitment. Combining these procedures with longitudinal designs would move researchers closer to an understanding of the causal pathways involved in the development, maintenance, and dissolution of intimate relationships. Third, the range of interpersonal associations in which commitment might be expected to play an important role should be broadened. For example, whereas extensive literatures currently exist for marital and organizational commitment, very little is known about the importance of commitment in the development of family relationships, friendships, or more formal relationships such as those which exist between students and teachers, doctors and patients, and therapists and clients. Moreover, it would be instructive to know whether interpersonal commitment ends with the termination of a relationship through death or divorce, or whether it is possible to demonstrate commitment toward one's enemies (i.e., for the purpose of revenge). Fourth, research which examines cross-cultural differences in interpersonal commitment is greatly needed. Such investigations would shed light on the normative processes involved in making and breaking interpersonal commitments. Finally, clinical studies are needed to examine the utility of appealing to commitment in treating distressed couples who are contemplating divorce.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS