Amy Muise

Understanding When a Partner Is Not in the Mood: Sexual Communal Strength in Couples Transitioning to Parenthood

Situations in which one partner is interested in having sex but the other partner is not “in the mood” are common in relationships. We extend previous work on sexual communal strength—the motivation to be responsive to a partner’s sexual needs—to demonstrate that in addition to the motivation to meet a partner’s need to have sex, the motivation to be understanding about a partner’s need not to engage in sex is uniquely associated with sexual and relationship satisfaction. In Study 1, we adapted a measure of sexual communal strength for having sex (SCSS) to create a new measure of sexual communal strength for not having sex (SCSN). We demonstrated that SCSN is distinct from SCSS and associated with more positive and less negative responses to an imagined situation of sexual rejection. In Study 2, both SCSS and SCSN were uniquely associated with greater sexual and relationship satisfaction in couples transitioning to parenthood—a time when many couples experience changes to their sexual relationship. Having a partner who is higher in SCSN is associated with greater sexual satisfaction and relationship quality for new mothers but not new fathers, suggesting that during the transition to parenthood, it might be more important for women to have a partner who is understanding about their need not to engage in sex. The results suggest that the motivation to be understanding about a partner’s need not to engage in sex may be an additional way that partners can show communal care in their sexual relationships.

What Theories and Methods From Relationship Research Can Contribute to Sex Research

Sexual and relationship satisfaction tend to be closely linked in the context of romantic relationships. Understanding how sexual processes influence relationships and how aspects of the relationship influence a couple’s sex life can provide insight into the maintenance of sexual desire and satisfaction over time. In this article, we review how theories and methods that form the foundation for relationship research have made—and will continue to make—sexuality research a stronger, more theoretical, and methodologically sophisticated science. We discuss the key theories that have been used to advance our understanding of who is more likely to be sexually satisfied in relationships, when sex is most satisfying, and how couples can have more satisfying sex lives and relationships. We then provide an overview of dyadic and repeated-measures designs and demonstrate how the use of these types of research methods allows relationship and sexuality researchers to answer novel and nuanced questions about how romantic partners influence each other, as well as how sexual processes unfold in couples’ daily lives and over time. Throughout the review, we highlight what we see as fruitful directions for future research at the intersection of sexuality and relationships.

Degree and Direction of Sexual Desire Discrepancy are Linked to Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction in Couples Transitioning to Parenthood

Many new parents are concerned that they have different levels of interest in sex than their partner. Understanding the role of desire discrepancies in their sexual and relationship satisfaction could help promote adjustment. In community couples, larger desire discrepancies have been inconsistently linked to lower sexual and relationship satisfaction. However, these studies rarely accounted for both the degree and direction (e.g., which partner has higher desire) of the discrepancy. We surveyed 255 mixed-sex new parent couples to assess their sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction. Using polynomial regression with response surface analysis (RSA), we found that desire discrepancies between partners (i.e., when partners were more mismatched as opposed to matched on their levels of sexual desire) were associated with lower sexual (but not relationship) satisfaction for both partners. However, the direction of desire discrepancy mattered: Parents felt less satisfied when mothers were the higher-desire partner compared to when fathers were the higher-desire partner. In addition, when partners’ level of sexual desire was in agreement, they were more sexually and relationally satisfied if both partners reported higher compared to lower desire. Results demonstrate the important role of both the magnitude and direction of desire discrepancies in new parent couples.

To “See” Is to Feel Grateful? A Quasi-Signal Detection Analysis of Romantic Partners’ Sacrifices

Although gratitude plays a central role in the quality of relationships, little is known about how gratitude emerges, such as in response to partners’ sacrifices. Do people need to accurately see these acts to feel grateful? In two daily experience studies of romantic couples (total N = 426), we used a quasi-signal detection paradigm to examine the prevalence and consequences of (in)accurately “seeing” and missing partners’ sacrifices. Findings consistently showed that sacrifices are equally likely to be missed as they are to be accurately detected, and about half of the time people “see” a sacrifice when the partner declares none. Importantly, “seeing” partners’ sacrifices—accurately or inaccurately—is crucial for boosting gratitude. In contrast, missed sacrifices fail to elicit gratitude, and the lack of appreciation negatively colors the partner’s satisfaction with the relationship when having sacrificed. Thus, these findings illustrate the power that perception holds in romantic couples’ daily lives.

The sexing of relationship science: Impetus for the special issue on sex and relationships

Two decades ago, in an award address given at the American Psychological Association conference and a corresponding article in American Psychologist, Ellen Berscheid documented the emergence or greening of relationship science—a science which she argued held enormous potential for understanding “the very best thing in life” (Berscheid, 1999, p. 260). Indeed, when asked to consider what makes their lives meaningful, no other factor emerges more consistently and prominently than close, satisfying relationships (Berscheid & Reis, 1998), and meta-analyses have documented that having high quality, supportive relationships is an equal or stronger predictor of mortality than other known health risk factors such as smoking, physical activity, and body mass index (Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Layton, 2010). One decade ago, Harry Reis argued that in order for relationship science to ripen, the field had to demonstrate how, why and through what processes relationships predict health and well-being (Reis, 2007). Since this time, relationship researchers have accepted this challenge. A growing body of research now shows that supportive, close relationships promote health and well-being because they help people cope with stress and enable them to fulfill basic needs for social connection, intimacy, and companionship (see review by Pietromonaco & Collins, 2017). One factor which has been surprisingly absent from the growing literature on how romantic relationships influence health and well-being is the role of sexuality. This omission is striking given that sexuality is arguably a key factor that distinguishes romantic relationships from other

The relationship implications of rejecting a partner for sex kindly versus having sex reluctantly

Romantic partners often have differing levels of sexual interest. In these situations, lower desire partners may engage in sex for avoidance goals (e.g., to avoid disappointing their partner), which are associated with negative relational outcomes. An alternative strategy to sustain relationship quality may be to decline a partner’s sexual advances in positive ways. In two experimental studies and a dyadic daily experience study with a longitudinal follow-up, we examined the relationship outcomes of positive rejection compared to avoidance-motivated sex. Across studies, when people engaged in positive rejection, both they and their partner did not experience lower levels of relationship satisfaction compared to when they had sex for avoidance goals, although this was not true for sexual satisfaction. Chronic pursuit of sex for avoidance goals did, however, have detrimental consequences over time, whereas positive rejection helped sustain relationship satisfaction. Results suggest positive rejection behaviors may be a viable alternative to avoidance-motivated sex.

Sexual need fulfillment and satisfaction in consensually nonmonogamous relationships

Consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships allow individuals to fulfill their sexual needs with multiple partners, but research has yet to investigate how having one’s sexual needs met in one relationship is associated with satisfaction in another relationship. We draw on models of need fulfillment in CNM relationships and theories of sexual communal motivation to test how sexual need fulfillment in one relationship is associated with satisfaction in another, concurrent relationship. Across two studies, individuals in CNM relationships (N = 1,054) who were more sexually fulfilled in their primary relationship reported greater relationship satisfaction with their secondary partner. In Study 2, men who were more sexually fulfilled in their secondary relationship reported greater relationship satisfaction with their primary partner, but women who were more sexually fulfilled with their secondary partner reported lower sexual satisfaction in their primary relationship. Implications for communal relationships and need fulfillment are discussed.

Giving in the bedroom: The costs and benefits of responding to a partner’s sexual needs in daily life

A common reason why people in ongoing romantic relationships report engaging in sex with their partner—in addition to pursuing their own pleasure—is to meet their partner’s sexual needs. While meeting a partner’s needs with responsiveness and care is crucial in romantic relationships, it is important, especially in the domain of sexuality, that people do not neglect their own needs when meeting the needs of their partner. In a 21-day daily experience study of both members of 122 romantic couples recruited from the community, we tested whether being responsive to a partner’s sexual needs (i.e., high sexual communal strength) and focusing on a partner’s needs while neglecting one’s own needs (i.e., high unmitigated sexual communion) were associated with both partners’ daily sexual and relationship satisfaction. We also tested attention to positive partner-focused and negative self-focused cues during the sexual experience as novel mechanisms of these effects. The results generally showed that on days when people (or their romantic partner) reported higher sexual communal strength, they reported greater attention to positive partner-focused sexual cues and, in turn, both partners experienced greater daily sexual and relationship satisfaction. In contrast, on days when people reported higher unmitigated sexual communion, they reported greater attention to negative self-focused sexual cues and, in turn, experienced lower relationship and sexual satisfaction, although these effects did not extend to their romantic partner. Implications of the results for promoting higher quality sexual experiences and relationships are discussed.