Are you tired of us Accuracy and bias

Are you tired of “us”? Accuracy and bias in couples’ perceptions of relational boredom Kiersten Dobson 1, Sarah C. E. Stanton 2, Lorne Campbell 1 1 The University of Western Ontario 2 Wayne State University https: //osf. io/emv 54/

Relational Boredom Causes • Lack of novelty • Lack of stimulation • External causes Feelings • Low arousal, low pleasure • • Unexcited Tired Depressed Lonely • High arousal, low pleasure Harasymchuk & Fehr (2010) • Frustrated • Anxious • Restless Problems • Less satisfaction • Less investment • Higher perceived quality of alternatives • Higher willingness to engage in infidelity • Relationship dissolution (Aron & Aron, 1986; Fincham & Linfield, 1997; Gigy & Kelly, 1992; Gillen, 2012; Gillen, Wohl, & Harasymchuk, 2012)

Bored Not bored

The current research • Are romantic partners accurate in their judgments of each other’s relational boredom? • Is this (in)accuracy associated with other relationship factors?

Methods • 80 heterosexual couples • 2 versions of Harasymchuk and Fehr’s (2012) Relational Boredom Scale • Whether they think the items characterize their relationship • Whether their partner thinks the items characterize their relationship • Relationship satisfaction, trust, commitment, and adult attachment questionnaires (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998; Hendrick, 1988; Rempel, Holmes, & Zanna, 1985; Rusbult, Martz, & Agnew, 1998)

Truth and Bias Model of judgment • West and Kenny (2011) ~ • Directional bias • Tracking accuracy • Assumed similarity • Moderation Perceptions of Partner’s Boredom Directional Bias Tracking Accuracy Assumed Similarity Truth and Bias Model Estimates b SE. 07+. 04. 11***. 02. 63***. 03 Note. Degrees of freedom ranged from 62. 81 to 80. 28. +p <. 10, ***p <. 001

Multilevel polynomial regression with RSA • Simultaneously examine effects of 2 predictors on one dependent variable • Plot a 3 D graph of the effects • The current research: effects of perceptions of and partner’s actual relational boredom on relationship quality

Outcome Actual Perceived

Perceiver Partner

Results • Actor (perceiver) relationship quality • As perceptions of and actual boredom are in agreement and increase, relationship quality decreases (nonlinear association; b = -. 25, SE =. 05, t = -5. 26, p <. 001)

Results • Actor (perceiver) relationship quality • Underestimation (negative DB) associated with greater relationship quality (b = -. 06, SE =. 02, t = -2. 84, p =. 005)

Results • Partner relationship quality • As perceptions of and actual boredom are in agreement and increase, relationship quality decreases (nonlinear association; b = -. 27, SE =. 05, t = -5. 58, p <. 001)

Results • Partner relationship quality • Overestimation (positive DB) associated with greater relationship quality (b =. 09, SE =. 02, t = 3. 59, p <. 001)

Directional bias: b =. 07+, SE =. 04

Summary • Romantic partners are fairly accurate in their perceptions of each other’s relational boredom • Accuracy and bias in perceptions of relational boredom are associated with relationship quality • However, what is good for the perceiver does not appear to be the same as what is good for their partner

Future directions • What are the mechanisms behind the differential effects of bias on relationship quality for perceivers and their partners? • Does the marginal overestimation found indicate that romantic partners tend to err on the side of what is good for their partner and their relationship rather than what is good for themselves? • Can romantic partners track each other’s relational boredom over time?

Thank you! • Co authors • Sarah C. E. Stanton • Lorne Campbell