Serial Arguing and Relational Quality

Abstract

Most research has employed methods that treat interpersonal arguments as though they occur in a single episode or that ignore their episodic nature. However, limited research suggests that a relational argument may be repeated and can be viewed as serial. The authors' perspective assumes that the perceived resolvability of a serial argument is a better predictor of relational quality than is the frequency with which the argument; the results of a survey of individuals involved in a dating relationship support this assumption. Perceived resolvability is negatively related to (a) arguments arising from violated expectations, (b) counter-complaining and partner-initiated demand-withdrawal cycles, (c) predictability of argumentative episodes, (d) mulling, (e) overall amount of discord in the relationship, and (f) withdrawal from the partner after an episode. The extent of constructive communication that occurred during the initial confrontation is positively related to perceived resolvability.