1. Research Methods for Relationship Science
Workshop hosted by Sabanci University, Istanbul, Turkey
Lorne Campbell
University of Western Ontario

2. What *IS* a Relationship?
Kelley et al. (1983)
“A prominent feature of a ‘relationship’ is that events associated with one person are causally connected to those associated with the other person. Indeed, this is a necessary feature of ‘relationship’ as we define it.” (p. 24)

3. P-O Interaction Person P Person O Affect Thought Action Action Thought
Time

4. Reis and Shaver, 1988: Intimacy Process Model
A`s motives, needs, goals and fears
B`s interpretive filter
A`s disclosure
B`s response
A`s reaction to B`s response
A`s interpretive filter
B`s motives, needs, goals and fears

5. Challenges for Researchers
Definition implies that researchers should study partners people influence each other, over time
Challenges exist in the analysis of data where N ≥ 2 per unit
Non-independence of data-points
Resources

6. Ellen Berscheid (1999)
“Reflecting psychology’s individualistic orientation, virtually all of our methodologies and statistics are predicated on the individual as the unit of analysis. As a consequence, relationship scholars often find themselves jerry-rigging old methodologies and statistics to accommodate the dyadic unit of analysis, but some, such as David Kenny and his associates (e.g., Kenny & La Voie, 1984), are creatively creating new ones.” (p. 261)

7. Advances in Data Analyses
A number of advances in data analysis have turned the first challenge into an opportunity
E.g., SEM, HLM, pooled regression
To what degree is it being taken advantage of?

8. Survey of Literature
Looked at all articles in 5 journals that focused on close relationships
JPSP, PSPB, PR, JSPR, and JM&F
Looked at 2 time periods to detect any major shifts in the type of data collected, and the types of analyses employed
Major question: how is interdependence as discussed by Kelley et al being tested in modern relationships research?

9. Frequency and Percentage of Studies Collecting Different Data Types in 5 Journals in 1994 and 2002
Indiv
Dyad
Group PR
22(76)
5(17)
2(7)
28(74)
10(26)
0(0)
JSPR
22(63)
13(37)
19(66)
10(34)
JM&F
59(82)
10(14)
3(4)
53(78)
11(16)
4(6)
JPSP
8(47)
7(41)
2(12)
19(79)
5(21)
PSPB
3(75)
1(25)
14(64)
8(36)
Totals
114
(73) 36
(23) 7
(4)
133
(74) 44
(24) 4
(2)

10. Frequency and Percentage of Studies Collecting Different Data Types in 5 Journals in 1994 and 2002
Indiv
Dyad
Group PR
22(76)
5(17)
2(7)
28(74)
10(26)
0(0)
JSPR
22(63)
13(37)
19(66)
10(34)
JM&F
59(82)
10(14)
3(4)
53(78)
11(16)
4(6)
JPSP
8(47)
7(41)
2(12)
19(79)
5(21)
PSPB
3(75)
1(25)
14(64)
8(36)
Totals
114
(73) 36
(23) 7
(4)
133
(74) 44
(24) 4
(2)

11. Frequency and Percentage of Studies Collecting Different Data Types in 5 Journals in 1994 and 2002
Indiv
Dyad
Group PR
22(76)
5(17)
2(7)
28(74)
10(26)
0(0)
JSPR
22(63)
13(37)
19(66)
10(34)
JM&F
59(82)
10(14)
3(4)
53(78)
11(16)
4(6)
JPSP
8(47)
7(41)
2(12)
19(79)
5(21)
PSPB
3(75)
1(25)
14(64)
8(36)
Totals
114
(73) 36
(23) 7
(4)
133
(74) 44
(24) 4
(2)

12. Frequencies of various analytic approaches applied to dyadic and group data in 1994 and 2002
Analysis Strategy
1994
2002
Nonindependence ignored 3
Means for each dyad/group averaged 6
Separate analyses (1) 9 8
Separate analyses (2) 7 4
Standard analyses; dyad/group unit of analysis 13 15
Social Relations Model 2
Structural Equation Modeling
Actor-Partner Interdependence Model
Hierarchical Linear Modeling 1

13. Frequencies of various analytic approaches applied to dyadic and group data in 1994 and 2002
Analysis Strategy
1994
2002
Nonindependence ignored 3
Means for each dyad/group averaged 6
Separate analyses (1) 9 8
Separate analyses (2) 7 4
Standard analyses; dyad/group unit of analysis 13 15
Social Relations Model 2
Structural Equation Modeling
Actor-Partner Interdependence Model
Hierarchical Linear Modeling 1

14. Dyadic Data ≠ Studying Dyadic Processes
Not all studies with dyadic data investigate mutual influence (or partner effects)

15. Individual Data ≠ Inability to Test Dyadic Processes
Studies can invoke mental image of the partner/relationship
Perceived partner responsiveness
But, is limited—cannot assess mutual influence

16. Intermission

17. Three Goals of Research
Runkel and McGrath (1972)
A) maximize the generalizability of results across populations,
B) the precision with which variables are measured, and
C) the realism of the context in which variables are assessed.

18. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

19. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

20. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

21. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

22. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

23. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

24. Three goals cannot be
simultaneously maximized
In one study

25. What is Needed? More truly dyadic research
More longitudinal research (“over time”)
More replication
More focus on context
Particular cultural context

26. Thank you for your time