All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Relationship Orientation, Jealousy, and Equity: An Examination of Jealousy Evoking and Positive Communicative Responses
Unformatted Document Text:  Relationship Orientation and Jealousy 18 score of this scale was that 20 individuals had not attempted to elicit jealousy from their partner (responded 1 to each item). Communal orientation was again measured using the Clark et al. (1987) Communal Orientation Scale in which higher scores reflect a higher communal orientation (M=52.44, SD=7.24, α =.78). Positive communicative responses to jealousy again were measured via the modified Communicative Responses to Jealousy scale (Guerrero et al.; 1995), (M=36.54, SD=10.03, α =.89). Exchange orientation was again measured with the Dutch Exchange Orientation Scale (Buunk & VanYperen, ) (M=21.14, SD=6.28, α =.78). Equity was measured using two items which are regularly used in relational analyses: Hatfield’s (1979) single-item measure and Sprecher’s (1986) single item measure. Hatfield’s scale involves which partner is getting more from the relationship, considering “what you put into your relationship compared to what you get out of it, and what your partner puts into the relationship compared to what he/she get out of it.” Item responses range from (1) I am getting a much better deal than my partner to (7) My partner is getting a much better deal than I. Sprecher’s single-item measure asks that people “consider all the times when the exchange in your relationship has become unbalanced and one partner contributed more than the other for a time. When your relationship becomes unbalanced, which of you is more likely to be the one who contributes more?” Responses ranged from (1) My partner is much more likely to be the one to contribute more to (7) I am much more likely to be the one to contribute more. Higher responses on each one indicate that a person is feeling underbenefited in the realtionship, whereas lower responses to each question suggest overbenefitedness. We summed to two scales to form an equity index and divided the participants into three groups: underbenefited (2-6, N=31), equitable (7-9, N=93), and overbenefited (10-14, N=32).

Authors: Cayanus, Jacob. and Booth-Butterfield, Melanie.
first   previous   Page 18 of 27   next   last



background image
Relationship Orientation and Jealousy 18
score of this scale was that 20 individuals had not attempted to elicit jealousy from their partner
(responded 1 to each item).
Communal orientation was again measured using the Clark et al. (1987) Communal
Orientation Scale in which higher scores reflect a higher communal orientation (M=52.44,
SD=7.24,
α
=.78). Positive communicative responses to jealousy again were measured via the
modified Communicative Responses to Jealousy scale (Guerrero et al.; 1995), (M=36.54,
SD=10.03,
α
=.89). Exchange orientation was again measured with the Dutch Exchange
Orientation Scale (Buunk & VanYperen, ) (M=21.14, SD=6.28,
α
=.78).
Equity was measured using two items which are regularly used in relational analyses:
Hatfield’s (1979) single-item measure and Sprecher’s (1986) single item measure. Hatfield’s
scale involves which partner is getting more from the relationship, considering “what you put
into your relationship compared to what you get out of it, and what your partner puts into the
relationship compared to what he/she get out of it.” Item responses range from (1) I am getting a
much better deal than my partner to (7) My partner is getting a much better deal than I.
Sprecher’s single-item measure asks that people “consider all the times when the exchange in
your relationship has become unbalanced and one partner contributed more than the other for a
time. When your relationship becomes unbalanced, which of you is more likely to be the one
who contributes more?” Responses ranged from (1) My partner is much more likely to be the
one to contribute more to (7) I am much more likely to be the one to contribute more.
Higher responses on each one indicate that a person is feeling underbenefited in the
realtionship, whereas lower responses to each question suggest overbenefitedness. We summed
to two scales to form an equity index and divided the participants into three groups:
underbenefited (2-6, N=31), equitable (7-9, N=93), and overbenefited (10-14, N=32).


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 18 of 27   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.