Matters of the Heart?: The Role of Risk Regulation, Attachment Style, Self-Monitoring and Self-Esteem in Romantic Relationships

In the context of romantic relationships, risk regulation refers to one’s constant struggle to balance connecting with one’s partner and protecting oneself from rejection (Murray, Holmes, & Collins, 2006). As previous research failed to directly assess the interrelationships between risk regulation, self-esteem, attachment style, and selfmonitoring, the present study sought to determine how these constructs interconnect to affect patterns of connection and protection in romantic relationships. Results indicated that high and low self-monitors differ in levels of connection and protection in romantic relationships, specifically in terms of need to belong, and relationship anxiety. Attachment style also affected connection and protection patterns; specifically, preoccupied attachment was related to relationship anxiety, dependency, and need to belong, while dismissing attachment was related to relationship avoidance. Similarly, various combinations of attachment style, self-esteem, and self-monitoring predicted both connection factors (need to belong, dependency, and commitment) and protection factors (relationship anxiety and relationship avoidance). MATTERS OF THE HEART 3 Matters of the Heart? : The Role of Risk Regulation, Attachment Style, Self-Monitoring and Self-Esteem in Romantic Relationships Romantic relationships come in all shapes and sizes. Moreover, the interactions between two partners can be as unique as the two partners are themselves. Each partner brings his or her own characteristics to a relationship, and these characteristics undoubtedly affect the relationship’s core make-up. However, there are certain features of romantic relationships that are more globally reflected. Within any relationship, romantic in particular, there are patterns of give and take that tend to govern the behaviors of the partners. Considering the possible variation among all of these factors, it is easy to believe that no two relationships, much like their members, are exactly the same. Risk Regulation and Romantic Relationships In general, when making any decision, one considers his or her options. In terms of romantic relationships, one of the biggest decisions a person must make is just how vulnerable he or she is willing to become in the context of the relationship. On one hand, allowing oneself to be too vulnerable may open the door for hurt and rejection by one’s partner; on the other, not being vulnerable enough may result in being rejected by one’s partner due to a lack of felt connection. Thus, when involved in a romantic relationship, one is constantly working to maintain a comfortable balance between connection to his or her partner and the protection of oneself. Murray, Holmes, and Collins (2006) adapted the risk regulation model by modifying it to explain the patterns of behaviors observed in romantic relationships. This model is based upon the basic idea that, within a romantic relationship, the primary MATTERS OF THE HEART 4 motivating behavioral factor is to avoid getting hurt. This protection is attained by minimizing the amount of dependence placed on one’s partner and not allowing partners to gain the “upper hand” in relationships (Murray et al., 2006). However, this type of behavior is somewhat counterintuitive when one conceptualizes how those involved in a relationship ought to behave. Specifically, to create a successful relationship, partners need to risk a certain amount of dependence in order to create feelings of closeness and maintain satisfaction in their relationship (Murray et al., 2006). As such, relationshippromoting behaviors act to create a sense of relational closeness in order to promote relationship satisfaction; however, they also increase the risk associated with relationship involvement, both in terms of the likelihood and intensity of potential rejection (Murray et al., 2006). This dilemma creates the need for risk regulation in romantic relationships in order to satisfy personal needs for both connecting to one’s partner and protecting oneself from harmful rejection. According to Murray et al. (2006), the risk regulation model is formed around three contingency-based rule systems: appraisal, signaling, and dependence regulation. These rule systems allow one to gauge the risk of rejection and regulate one’s behavior accordingly. Specifically, each individual system is based upon a simple if-then statement and is meant to help one increase feelings of assurance in one’s relationship. Thus, based upon the risk of rejection, one may either increase self-protective or relationship-promoting behaviors accordingly. In the first stage of the model, the appraisal system operates on the rule “if dependent, then gauge acceptance or rejection” (Murray et al., 2006, p. 643). In the context of a romantic relationship, this system involves the individual determining the amount of his or her partner’s regard, which MATTERS OF THE HEART 5 indexes the likelihood of acceptance versus rejection. If this evaluation indicates that one’s partner is warm and receptive, then one would trust one’s romantic partner more and, as a result, may become more dependent on the partner, inadvertently increasing his/her risk of rejection while promoting the well-being of the relationship overall (Murray et al., 2006). Thus, a positive outcome of this appraisal may indicate that one’s partner perceives some features in oneself that are valuable (Murray et al., 2006). To better understand the underlying features of the first stage of the risk regulation model, it is important to note the theory of need to belong, proposed by Baumeister and Leary (1997) to reflect a basic “desire” to form various social relationships and become attached to those individuals in some form or another. Those with a higher need to belong may be those who tend to become more dependent and, as a result, connect more deeply in relationships. In contrast, people who have lower needs to belong and are unattached tend to experience more negative psychological and physical problems, highlighting the importance of creating connections with other people (Baumeister & Leary, 1997). The care and compassion one receives from others may make an extensive positive impact on one’s life, an impact that may be lacking and thereby creating some distress in the lives of those who tend to push others (in particular, specifically their romantic partners) away. As such, one’s need to belong may underlie one’s engagement in the risk regulation model with those higher in need to belong being especially sensitive to its effects. Moreover, the failure to meet one’s need to belong may result in negative intrapersonal effects, such as lowered self-esteem. This supposition is addressed by the second stage of the risk regulation model. MATTERS OF THE HEART 6 In the second stage of the model, the signaling system is based upon the rule “if accepted or rejected, then internalize” (Murray et al., 2006, p. 644). This rule indicates that acceptance or rejection from one’s partner may affect the way one feels about him or herself at any given moment (i.e., one’s self-esteem). The signaling system is similar to the concept of a sociometer (Murray et al., 2006). Leary and Downs (1995) posit that the sociometer functions to gauge how our external interactions and internal self-esteem work to regulate one another. Specifically, when one experiences rejection, one’s selfesteem is lowered and thus one changes one’s behaviors accordingly by performing approval seeking behaviors in order to try and avoid future rejection or exclusion (Leary & Downs, 1995). Greater acceptance is related to a fuller sociometer and thus higher selfesteem; while greater rejection has the inverse relationship, creating an empty sociometer and lower self-esteem. Acceptance also may signal greater feelings of being valued by one’s partner, and, in turn, promote connection. In contrast, rejection has the opposite effect, yielding higher levels of self-protection (Murray et al., 2006). Lastly, the dependence regulation system, also termed the behavioral response system, is grounded in the rule “if feeling accepted or rejected, then regulate dependence” (Murray et al., 2006, p. 644). According to this system, the experience of acceptance or rejection creates changes in dependence on one’s partner. When feeling more accepted, partners increase dependence on one another; on the other hand, when rejected, dependence decreases. This ensures that the amount of dependence placed on one’s partner is balanced with the acceptance and value exhibited by that partner (Murray et al., 2006). Dependence also may be indirectly influenced by one’s self-esteem as this may be a reflection of acceptance and rejection within the relationship. This notion is similar MATTERS OF THE HEART 7 to that of relational devaluation, or the idea that one partner may not view his or her relationship to be as valuable as the other partner would like (Leary, Springer, Negel, Ansell, & Evans, 1998). This devaluation may manifest as disassociation and could be accomplished by avoidance behaviors similar to those used to accomplish self-protection (Leary et al., 1998). The opposite may be true for connection behaviors, which manifest when one partner views the relationship as much more valuable and seeks to draw closer to his or her partner. However, more research is needed to validate this supposition. In validating their theory, Murray, Derrick, Leder, and Holmes (2008) conducted a series of studies to determine the relationship between self-esteem and the risk regulation model, specifically connective and protective behavioral patterns. In general, they discovered that those with low self-esteem tend to exhibit higher self-protection goals and behaviors, while those with high self-esteem are more likely to exhibit more connective behaviors and goals (Murray et al., 2008). Those with high self-esteem may be more open to connection because th