Beverley Fehr

Compassionate love for close others and humanity

A compassionate love scale was developed that can be used, in alternative forms, to assess compassionate or altruistic love for different targets (e.g., close others and all of humankind). Using three samples (total N= 529), the Compassionate Love scale was developed and piloted. Three studies (total N = 700) were then conducted to provide validation of the scale and to examine correlates of compassionate love. In support of our predictions, compassionate love was found to be associated positively with prosocial behavior, as directed both to close others and to all of humanity. Those who were more religious or spiritual experienced more compassionate love than those who were less religious or spiritual. Evidence was found that compassionate love is distinct from empathy. In the final study, we introduced a relationship-specific version of the Compassionate Love scale, and found that compassionate love for a specific close other was associated with the provision of social support for that person.

An Exploration of the Relational Schemata Underlying Attachment Styles: Self-Report and Lexical Decision Approaches

It is proposed that the cognitive mechanisms underlying attachment styles are expectations about interaction with significant others. Two studies are described that assessed these relational schemata. The first study revealed that individuals of different attachment styles do have different expectations about likely patterns of interaction with a romantic partner in various interpersonal domains. The second study demonstrated the utility of the lexical decision task for examining interpersonal expectancies. When given a related context, secure subjects were quicker to identify words representing positive interpersonal outcomes, whereas insecure subjects were quicker to identify negative outcome words. Methodological and conceptual implications of a relational schema approach to attachment styles are discussed.

Fuzzy Concepts in a Fuzzy Hierarchy: Varieties of Anger

This article argues that the concept of anger is not well characterized from the classical perspective. Instead, its membership is graded, its borders are fuzzy, and its subcategories fail to form a true class-inclusion hierarchy. Ss rated potential anger subcategories (fury, jealousy, annoyance, etc.) and remembered instances of their own anger as varying in degree of membership in anger. Degree of membership (prototypicality) predicted each subcategorys availability from memory given the category name, reaction time to verify its status as a subcategory, and its substitutability within naturally generated sentences about anger. Two predictions of a true class-inclusion hierarchy failed: that Ss would agree in adjudicating the membership of potential subcategories of anger and that all instances of a subcategory of anger would also be instances of anger. As an alternative to the classical view, emotion concepts are hypothesized to vary in their degree of breadth and overlap and to be mentally represented as scripts that allow different instantiations in different contexts.

Intimacy expectations in same-sex friendships: a prototype interaction-pattern model.

A prototype interaction-pattern model of intimacy expectations was proposed. The central tenet of this model was that people develop knowledge of the patterns of relating that are likely to produce intimacy in a same-sex friendship. Further, it was posited that these interaction patterns are structured as prototypes, such that some patterns of relating are regarded as more likely to create a sense of intimacy than others. Support for this model was found in 6 studies. Interaction patterns depicting self-disclosure, emotional support, and the like were considered more prototypical of intimacy expectations than patterns depicting shared activities and practical support. Regarding gender, women rated intimacy interaction patterns higher than did men, particularly prototypical patterns. However, women and men agreed that prototypical interaction patterns were more indicative of intimacy in a friendship than nonprototypical patterns. Implications for the controversy over whether womens friendships are more intimate than mens are discussed.

Dimensions of Relationship Quality

Four studies examined the dimensions of relationship quality. In Study 1, based on a principal components analysis, four dimensions underlying the prototype of relationship quality were identified: intimacy, agreement, independence, and sexuality. The four–factorial structure was replicated both with a German sample (Study 2) and a Canadian sample (Study 3). Study 4 tested the validity of scales based on the four–factorial structure of relationship quality with German and Canadian samples. Relationship satisfaction was predicted well by the four scales, with intimacy contributing most, and sexuality least, to overall relationship satisfaction. The four scales correlated as predicted with other constructs relevant to close relationships, such as commitment, trust, love, and the like. Consequences for the measurement of relationship quality are discussed.

Anger in Close Relationships: An Interpersonal Script Analysis

The authors conducted an analysis of anger scripts in close relationships from a relational schema perspective focusing on the interpersonal experience of anger and on the sequencing of anger events. The amount of anger elicited by various instigating events was found to differ for women and men. More important, there was evidence of an interpersonal script for anger. Reactions of angry people were predicated on anticipated partner responses. Gender differences in interpersonal scripts were found only when the angered person chose to react in a negative way (e.g., aggression). Women and men held similar scripts for anger when the angered person reacted in a prosocial manner. Implications of these findings for script analyses of emotion and for close relationships are discussed.

Laypeople's conceptions of commitment

The author conducted 8 studies to elucidate the content and structure of lay conceptions of commitment. Studies 1 to 5 revealed that laypeople regard commitment to close relationships (e.g., friends, family, spouse) as central to the concept, whereas they consider nonclose (e.g., commitment to a neighbor) and noninterpersonal varieties (e.g., ones occupation) peripheral. This prototype structure influenced information processing in predictable ways. Studies 6 to 8 focused on the vertical structure of commitment categories. Results suggest that types of commitment are organized as fuzzy rather than true class-inclusion hierarchies. Study 8 also examined relationship implications of conceptions of commitment. People who held a relational conception of commitment had more positive perceptions, thoughts, and feelings about their dating relationship than did those who held a nonrelational conception.

Dispositional attachment and relationship-specific attachment as predictors of compassionate love for a partner

This study examined attachment security as a possible contributor to compassionate love for a romantic partner among young adults. Attachment was assessed dispositionally and to a specific romantic partner. A secure dispositional attachment style was associated positively with compassionate love for partner, whereas an avoidant— dismissing attachment style was associated negatively with compassionate love. In addition, relationship-specific attachment avoidance was strongly (negatively) associated with compassionate love and mediated the association between dispositional attachment avoidance and compassionate love. Although relationship-specific attachment anxiety was not associated with compassionate love in the total sample or for the subsample in a serious relationship, it was a positive predictor of compassionate love for those in a casual relationship. Attachment may play a role in compassionate love by activating the caregiving system.

Stability and Commitment in Friendships

“Everywhere and in all ages people have formed this very same tie with each other—this tie that is not based on the binding forces of kinship, marriage, or romance” (Brenton, 1974, p. 14). The tie to which Brenton refers is friendship. Friendship has been described as the most voluntary relationship (e.g., Brenton, 1974; Rose, 1984; Wiseman, 1986). Unlike husbands and wives, friends are not under societal or contractual obligations to one another. Nor do friends encounter the social pressures inherent in dating and familial relationships. Friendships also differ from work or team relationships, where a common task or goal ensures the continuation of the relationship. Yet many friendships endure. According to (Wiseman (1986)), “A major and unique aspect of friendship is the absence of formal bonds during maintenance of an intimate stable relationship” (p. 191).

Compassionate love in romantic relationships A review and some new findings

Compassionate love has been identified as one of the major types of love experienced in relationships (Berscheid, 2010), but one that has been overshadowed by the study of romantic love. In this article, we review research on compassionate love, a relative newcomer to the close relationships field, and present findings that more fully flesh-out the nature of the experience of this kind of love. We begin by discussing conceptions and measurement of compassionate love. We then present a study on the relation between compassionate love and love styles, with a focus on distinguishing between compassionate love and the agape (altruistic) love style. The literature on individual differences in compassionate love is discussed next. The spotlight then shifts to research on the link between compassionate love and prosocial relationship behaviors, relationship quality, and relationship stability. Differences between compassionate love given versus received also are highlighted. We end with a discussion of what compassionate love “looks like” in the context of a romantic relationship and recommend directions for future research.