Paul A. M. Van Lange

Cognitive Interdependence: Commitment and the Mental Representation of Close Relationships

On the basis of an interdependence analysis, it is proposed that commitment to a close relationship is associated with cognitive interdependence—a mental state characterized by a pluralistic, collective representation of the self-in-relationship. A cross-sectiona l survey study and a 2-wave longitudinal study revealed that strong commitment to a romantic relationship is associated with greater spontaneous plural pronoun usage, greater perceived unity of self and partner, and greater reported relationship centrality. Commitment and cognitive interdependence operate in a cycle of mutual influence, such that earlier commitment predicts change over time in cognitive interdependence, and earlier cognitive interdependence predicts change over time in commitment. Links between commitment and cognitive interdependence were weak or nonsignifican t for relationships among best friends, suggesting that this phenomenon may be unique to romantic relationships. Involvement in a close relationship can change individuals in fundamental ways. For example, close involvement can produce changes in everyday activity preferences, arising from attempts to coordinate activities with those of a significant other (cf. Berscheid, Snyder, & Omoto, 1989; Van Lange et al., 1997). Close involvement can also change the ways in which we communicate; for instance, increasing commitment is associated with enhanced tendencies to accommodate, or to diminish negative reciprocity during the course of interaction (cf. Gottman, 1979; Rusbult, Verette, Whitney, Slovik, & Lipkus, 1991). Does close involvement modify mental representations of the self or change the manner in which we think about ourselves in relation to our partners? The present work asserts that increasing relationship commitment is accompanied by a restructuring of selfin-relationship mental representations, including tendencies to perceive ourselves less as individuals and more as part of a

When Forgiving Enhances Psychological Well-Being: The Role of Interpersonal Commitment

The present research addresses the question of when and why forgiving might enhance psychological well-being. The authors predict that forgiving is associated with enhanced well-being but that this association should be more pronounced in relationships of strong rather than weak commitment. This hypothesis received good support in Studies 1-3. Studies 2 and 3 addressed the issue of why forgiving might be associated with psychological well-being, revealing that this association was reduced after controlling for psychological tension (i.e., a psychological state of discomfort due to conflicting cognitions and feelings). Study 4 revealed that in the context of marital relationships, tendencies toward forgiving ones spouse exhibited a more pronounced association with psychological well-being than did tendencies to forgive others in general.

Why prosocials exhibit greater cooperation than proselfs: the roles of social responsibility and reciprocity

Two studies examined the choice differences between prosocials and proselfs by examining the influence of norms of social responsibility and reciprocity. In line with the integrative model of social value orientation, it was expected that prosocials differ from proselfs in their level of cooperation because they wish to maximize own and others outcomes (i.e. paralleling the norm of social responsibility) and enhance equality in outcomes (i.e. paralleling the norm of reciprocity). Study 1 revealed that prosocials felt more responsible to further the groups interest than proselfs did and this social responsibility feeling appeared to account for choice differences. Study 2 revealed that prosocials were more likely to reciprocate their partners actions than were proselfs. Also, feelings of social responsibility did not account for this observation, suggesting that enhancing joint outcomes and equality in outcomes constitute two relatively independent dimensions. The findings are discussed in light of the integrative model of social value orientation. Copyright

Beyond Self-interest: A Set of Propositions Relevant to Interpersonal Orientations

After describing limitations of the assumption of rational self-interest, which has dominated considerable theory in the social and behavioral sciences, I advance six propositions relevant to our understanding of interpersonal orientations. Based on empirical research, as well as principles of interdependence theory, it is argued that the power of individualistic orientation, while important, tends to be overestimated (Proposition 1), and that this orientation needs to be complemented by the orientations of cooperation (enhancement of joint outcomes), egalitarianism (enhancement of equality in outcomes), generosity (enhancement of others outcomes), and competition (enhancement of relative advantage over others outcomes) (Proposition 2). Three further propositions focus on the inter-relatedness of prosocial orientations (Proposition 3), the social development of prosocial orientation (Propositions 4 and 5), and situational and dispositional views of interpersonal orientations (Proposition 6). Evidence in...After describing limitations of the assumption of rational self-interest, which has dominated considerable theory in the social and behavioral sciences, I advance six propositions relevant to our understanding of interpersonal orientations. Based on empirical research, as well as principles of interdependence theory, it is argued that the power of individualistic orientation, while important, tends to be overestimated (Proposition 1), and that this orientation needs to be complemented by the orientations of cooperation (enhancement of joint outcomes), egalitarianism (enhancement of equality in outcomes), generosity (enhancement of others outcomes), and competition (enhancement of relative advantage over others outcomes) (Proposition 2). Three further propositions focus on the inter-relatedness of prosocial orientations (Proposition 3), the social development of prosocial orientation (Propositions 4 and 5), and situational and dispositional views of interpersonal orientations (Proposition 6). Evidence in support of these propositions, especially the latter three propositions, is evaluated by classic and/or recent research. I close by outlining four lines of research that are important for understanding the implications of the propositions discussed in this chapter.

How to overcome the detrimental effects of noise in social interaction: The benefits of generosity

Interpersonal misunderstanding is often rooted in noise, or discrepancies between intended and actual outcomes for an interaction partner due to unintended errors (e.g., not being able to respond to an E-mail because of a local network breakdown). How can one effectively cope with noise in social dilemmas, situations in which self-interest and collective interests are conflicting? Consistent with hypotheses, the present research revealed that incidents of noise exert a detrimental effect on level of cooperation when a partner follows strict reciprocity (i.e., tit for tat) but that this effect can be overcome if a partner behaves somewhat more cooperatively than the actor did in the previous interaction (i.e., tit for tat plus 1). Also, when noise was present, tit for tat plus 1 elicited greater levels of cooperation than did tit for tat, thereby underscoring the benefits of adding generosity to reciprocity in coping with noise in social dilemmas. The Discussion outlines implications of the present work for theories focusing on self-presentation and attribution, communication, and trust and prorelationship behavior.

Impression formation and cooperative behavior

Two studies investigated how behavioral information about the morality or intelligence of another person influences impressions, expectations of cooperative behavior, and own cooperation in a mixed-motive interdependence situation. Consistent with the morality-importance hypothesis results revealed that morality information influenced impressions, expectations of others cooperative behavior, as well as own cooperation more strongly than intelligence information, and led to greater confidence in expectations and better recall. Consistent with the negativity effect hypothesis negative information about morality and intelligence had more impact on impressions and interaction-relevant measures than positive information. An additional finding was that people overall expected more cooperation from others than they were willing to display themselves, and that this difference was especially pronounced for unintelligent and moral targets. Explanations and implications are discussed from a behavioral-adaptive perspective on impression formation. Copyright

The boundaries of reciprocal cooperation

The current research examines the role of social value orientation in determining the extent to which individuals are inclined to reciprocate cooperation exhibited by others perceived as either honest, intelligent, or unintelligent. Results revealed that individuals with prosocial orientation reciprocated high levels of cooperation regardless of others characteristics. Individuals with proself orientation (i.e. individualists and competitors) exhibited some reciprocal cooperation toward others perceived as honest, yet took advantage of others perceived as intelligent or unintelligent. These results suggest that proselfs can be motivated to reciprocate cooperation by others if they have faith in others benign intentions and trustworthiness.

Confidence in expectations : a test of the triangle hypothesis

Kelley and Stahelskis (1970) triangle hypothesis states that competitors hold homogeneous views of others by assuming that most others are competitive, whereas cooperators or pro‐social people hold more heterogeneous views by assuming that others are either cooperative or competitive. To evaluate the triangle hypothesis, this study examines differences between pro‐socials, individualists, and competitors not only in their expectations about others choice behaviour, but also in the confidence with which such expectations are held. It was found that pro‐social subjects expected more cooperation than individualists and competitors. More importantly, as predicted on the basis of the triangle hypothesis, pro‐socials were less confident about their expectations than competitors, with individualists holding intermediate levels of confidence.

How to cope with "noise" in social dilemmas: the benefits of communication.

Interactions in social life may be seriously affected by negative noise, whereby actual or perceived behavior is less cooperative than was intended (e.g., arriving late due to an unforeseen traffic jam). The present research examines whether negative noise exerts detrimental effects on impressions and cooperation and whether such effects could be reduced by communication. Consistent with hypotheses, Study 1 revealed that negative noise exerts detrimental effects on both impressions of partners benign intent and cooperation and that these detrimental effects could be effectively reduced by communication about noise. Study 2 replicated both findings but only for individuals with low trust. Mediation analysis revealed that impressions of benign intent and prosocial interaction goals underlie the positive effects of communication on cooperation.

The Influence of Other's Morality and Own Social Value Orientation on Cooperation in the Netherlands and the U.S.A.

Abstract The present study examines a two-person social dilemma characterised by the conflict between the pursuit of own benefits and collective benefits. The main purpose is twofold: (1) to examine the effect of perceptions of one persons morality (e.g. honesty) on expected cooperation from another and own cooperation, and (2) to examine whether pre-existing differences between individuals in their social value orientation, or preferences for certain patterns of outcomes to self and others (McClintock, 1978), would modify these effects of others morality. As predicted on the basis of the Might over Morality hypothesis (Liebrand. Jansen et al., 1986), it was found that considerably more cooperation was expected from one perceived as highly moral than from another perceived as low on morality. Contrary to a second Might over Morality prediction, however, this effect was not moderated by individual differences in social value orientation. In addition, it was found that subjects with pro-social value orien...