Chapter 2:
Measuring Relational Aspects of the Self:
Relational-Esteem, Relational-Depression, and
Relational-Preoccupation

         In the last two decades the literature on the self has attracted considerable attention (e.g., Christensen, 1982; Suls, 1982; Markus, 1977; Wicklund, 1975).  Like William James (1890/1963), many researchers have emphasized that an understanding of the self-concept necessitates a recognition of its multidimensional nature.  Fitts' (1965) construction of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale was one of the first attempts to actually measure multiple facets of the self (cf. Marsh & Richards, 1988).  In recent times Marsh and his colleagues (Marsh, 1986; Marsh, Barnes, & Hocevar, 1985; Marsh & O'Niell, 1984) have developed a more comprehensive measure of the self-concept, the Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ), based on Shavelson's multifaceted, hierarchical theory of the self (Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton, 1976; Shavelson & Marsh, 1986; Marsh & Shavelson, 1985).

         One aspect of the self-concept that is measured by both the TSCS and the SDQ concerns people's personal relationships.  The TSCS contains two scales designed to measure social and family aspects of the self.  By contrast, the SDQ-III (Marsh & O'Niell, 1984) has scales that measure three relational aspects of the self:  relations with members of the same and other gender, and with one's parents.  While evidence for the reliability and validity of both the TSCS (Marsh, 1986) and the SDQ-III (Marsh et al., 1985) has been demonstrated, neither of these two instruments was designed to measure more specific aspects of the self-concept that concern people's intimate, close  relationships.

         Researchers have shown that individual tendencies associated with aspects of people's self-concept do exert a strong influence on their intimate relationships.  Snyder (1974, 1987; Snyder & Simpson, 1984), for example, has found that women and men's dating relationships are related to self-monitoring, defined as the tendency to monitor the public appearances which people display in social situations and interpersonal relationships.  Compared to high self-monitors, low self-monitors invest themselves more in their dating relationships by adopting both a more committed orientation toward their partners and a more restricted approach toward engaging in sexual relations with people other than their partners (Snyder & Simpson, 1987).

         Others have shown that instrumental and expressive self-perceptions also influence the ongoing nature of people's intimate relationships (Ickes, 1985; Kelley & Rolker-Dolinsky, 1987).  People who perceive themselves as possessing instrumental traits report that they tend to act in an assertive-agentic manner, while those who describe themselves as possessing expressive traits tend to behave in an interpersonal-communal fashion (cf. Bem, 1974; Spence, 1984).  In intimate relationships, instrumental and expressive self-perceptions have been found to contribute in a joint fashion to greater interactional involvement and greater involvement satisfaction (Ickes, 1985; Antill, 1983).  Dion and Dion (1973) have found that locus of control tendencies also affect people's intimate relationships.  Individuals who perceive themselves as being in control of what happens to them (i.e., those with an internal locus of control) endorse fewer idealistic, romantic beliefs about intimate relationships.

         Two other individual tendencies associated with people's self-concepts have also been studied within the context of intimacy:  interpersonal orientation and intimacy motivation.  People with a strong interpersonal orientation, those who perceive themselves as being highly interested in and responsive to others, tend to divide interpersonal rewards on the basis of equality principles regardless of who performs better or worse (Swap & Rubin, 1983; Major & Adams, 1983).  McAdams and his colleagues (McAdams, 1985; McAdams & Constantian, 1983; McAdams & Losoff, 1984) have also shown that people vary in the extent to which they perceive themselves as motivated by intimacy concerns, a tendency he labels intimacy motivation.  McAdams demonstrated that individuals with stronger intimacy motivation engage in a greater number of warm, close interpersonal behaviors.

         Among the many facets of the self that have been discussed in the context of intimate relationships, none has probably received more attention than the concept of self-esteem (Marsh, 1986).  Many investigators have speculated that the way people view themselves (i.e., positively versus negatively) exerts a tremendous impact on the development and the maintenance of their intimate relationships (see Brehm, 1985, for a review of this notion).  Early research, however, did not always find that self-esteem was associated with interpersonal attraction (Walster, 1965; Jacobs, Berscheid, & Walster, 1971; Sprecher & Hatfield, 1982; Kiesler & Baral, 1970).  Nonetheless, Dion and Dion (1975) were able to show that people high in self-esteem and  low in defensiveness report a higher frequency of being in love, whereas people low in self-esteem report being more intensely involved in their intimate relationships and as having greater idealization of their partner.

         Others have sought to study the impact of self-esteem on another aspect of personal relationships--jealousy.  A number of psychologists have argued that people who experience jealousy in their intimate relationships lack a sense of positive self-regard and adequacy.  The research evidence supporting this perspective, however, has not been impressive (Bringle & Evenbeck, 1979; Buunk, 1982; White, 1981a, 1981b); for example, the interpersonal literature has failed to demonstrate consistent evidence that self-esteem is inversely related to both jealousy and attraction.  Brehm (1985) has suggested that the contradictory nature of such findings may be due to the lack of a theoretical distinction between self-esteem and relational-esteem.  General self-esteem, she says, is based on people's overall feelings about themselves and thus may not be strongly related to such relationship issues as jealousy (cf. White, 1981a, 1981b).  Instead, Brehm argues that researchers who study intimate relationships need to focus their attention on a more important variable, one which she labels relational self-esteem--i.e., how people feel about themselves in regard to their intimate relationships.  Based on this theoretical distinction between self-esteem and relational-esteem, there was a need for an objective self-report instrument that focused directly on the measurement of relational-esteem.

         The purpose of the present investigation was to develop the Relational Assessment Questionnaire (RAQ), an objective self-report instrument designed to measure relational-esteem, and two other aspects of the self-concept that concern people's intimate relationships, relational-depression and relational-preoccupation (discussed below).  Relational-esteem was defined as the tendency to positively evaluate one's capacity to relate intimately to another person.  This concept concerns people's sense of adequacy as an intimate partner and is embodied in such questions as,  Do people feel positive about themselves as an intimate partner?  Do they feel confident and assured as an intimate partner?  Defined in this manner, relational-esteem concerns how people perceive themselves in regard to their intimate relationships (Brehm, 1985, p. 262).  Thus, one purpose of the present research project was based on the assumption that a better understanding of the desirable (e.g., love) as well as the undesirable (e.g., jealousy) aspects of intimacy might be gained if an important aspect of the self-concept, relational-esteem, could be identified and measured.

         In addition to developing a measure of relational-esteem, the present study was also concerned with the construction and validation of scales designed to measure two other important relational concepts associated with people's self-perceptions:  relational-depression and relational-preoccupation.  Some people regard themselves as lacking confidence in their ability to relate intimately to another person (cf. Beck, 1976).  Within this context, relational-depression  was defined as the chronic tendency to evaluate one's relationship potential in a negative fashion and to feel depressed about one's capability to relate in a meaningful and intimate way to a close partner (cf. Beck, 1976; Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh, 1961).  Although many studies have examined the correlates, antecedents, and consequences of clinical depression (Nolen-Hoeksema, 1987; Oatley & Bolton, 1985), little research has addressed the issue of relational-depression per se.  Thus, in order to increase our understanding of relational-depression, there was a need to develop a reliable and valid scale to measure this aspect of the self-concept.  By contrast, relational-preoccupation  was defined as the tendency to become so highly absorbed in, obsessed with, and engrossed in intimate relationships that one virtually excludes from one's mind thoughts dealing with any other issues.  Relational-preoccupation has been discussed within the context of relationship breakup and dissolution.  Glick, Weiss, and Parkes (1974), for example, commented on the obsessional tendencies typically associated with the death of a spouse.  Harvey, Wells, and Alverez (1978) also noted that people who separate from their spouses often become preoccupied with understanding that relationship.  These studies underscore the need for an objective and standardized self-report instrument that can be used to assess relational-preoccupation (cf. Collins & Clark, 1989).

Construction of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire

         The concepts of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation were studied in the present scale construction project through the development of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire (RAQ).  In order to develop this assessment instrument, a set of items was prepared and evaluated through the use of factor analysis.  Reliability analyses were then conducted on each of the RAQ scales (i.e., internal consistency and test-retest), and scale intercorrelations were also investigated.  Test-retest reliability was evaluated in the present investigation by re-administering the measures of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation to individuals at two time intervals (4 weeks and again 8 weeks after the initial administration).  In addition, a measure of social desirability (Crowne & Marlow, 1964) was administered to determine whether peoples' responses to the RAQ would be distorted by social desirability tendencies.

         To provide evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of the measures of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relationship-preoccupation, their relationship with the following concepts was examined:  self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974), self-esteem (Janis & Field, 1959), self-consciousness (Fenigstein, Scheier, & Buss, 1975), and body-consciousness (Miller, Murphy, & Buss, 1981).  Relational-esteem was expected to correlate in a positive direction with self-esteem and negatively with social anxiety.  These predictions were based on the notion that separate measures of different aspects of people's esteem should be at least modestly related, since they each measure positive evaluations of the self-concept--a global facet in the case in self-esteem and a more narrowly defined aspect in the case of relational-esteem.  Also, relational-preoccupation was predicted to correlate in a positive direction with the tendency to think about oneself (i.e., private self-consciousness), based on the fact that both concern the tendency to focus attention on aspects of oneself (internal, private and relationship aspects).  Finally, evidence for the discriminant validity of the RAQ was examined by studying the relationship between self-monitoring and the RAQ scales.  These two instruments were expected to be unrelated, since both measure distinct separate concepts.

         To further examine the validity of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire, additional analyses were conducted to study the impact of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation on people's current and past intimate relationships.  Relational-esteem, as discussed by Brehm (1985), is considered to be an important aspect of romantic love and interpersonal attraction.  According to this perspective, the greater the degree of relational-esteem, the more deeply engaged and devoted partners should be in their intimate relationships.  Therefore, individuals who regard themselves as possessing higher relational-esteem should report more of those types of love which reflect closeness and involvement with an intimate partner (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986; Rubin, 1970, 1973; Sperling, 1985, in press).  Also, individuals with greater relational-esteem were expected to report a wider variety of experiences with intimate relationships (e.g., being currently involved in a close relationship, currently dating someone), more positive interpersonal attraction for their intimate partners (i.e., love, liking), and greater relationship satisfaction (Hendrick, 1988).  Similarly, the more positive and favorable people evaluate their relationship potential (i.e., the higher their relational-esteem), the more likely they should be to approach intimate relationships from a communal rather than an exchange perspective (Clark, Ouellette, Powell, & Milberg, 1987; Clark, Taraban, Ho, & Wesner, 1989).  The analyses associated with the impact of relational-depression and relational-preoccupation on women's and men's intimate relations were exploratory in nature, and thus no specific predictions were advanced.

Method

Participants

         The participants in the present research came from three separate samples drawn from several psychology courses at a small midwestern university.  Sample I consisted of 434 participants (115 males; 316 females; 3 sex-unspecified) and was collected during the summer and fall of 1987 (age = 24.01, SD = 6.65, range = 16 - 54).  Sample II consisted of 154 participants (39 males; 114 females; 1 sex-unspecified) and was collected during the spring of 1988 (age = 23.54, SD = 6.69; range = 18 - 55).  Sample III contained 386 participants (117 males; 265 females; 4 sex-unspecified) who were assessed during the fall of 1988 and the spring of 1989 (age = 24.08; SD = 6.87; range = 17 - 60).  The participants volunteered to participate in the research projects as a way to earn extra credit counting toward their final course grade.  The number of participants in the analyses reported below will at times vary because of occasional missing data.

Procedure

         The participants were asked to volunteer to participate in research dealing with close relationships.  Those who volunteered to participate were first asked to read and sign an informed consent form.  In Sample I, only the Relational Assessment Questionnaire was administered to the participants .  In Sample II, the RAQ was administered to the subjects along with measures of social desirability (Crowne & Marlow, 1964), self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974, 1987), self-consciousness (Fenigstein et al., 1975), body-consciousness (Miller et al., 1981), liking and love (Rubin, 1970), self-esteem (Janis & Field, 1959), and several single-item questions about intimate relationships.  The subjects in Sample III completed the RAQ and the following instruments during several separate testing sessions:  the Love Attitudes Scale (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986), the Desperate Love Scale (Sperling, 1985), the Relationship Assessment Scale (Hendrick, 1988), the Exchange and Communal Orientation Scales Clark et al., 1987; Clark et al. 1989), Rubin's Liking and Loving Scale (Rubin, 1970), and several single-item questions about intimate relationships.  When the participants completed the instruments, they were completely debriefed about the purpose of the research.

Construction of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire

         A set of entirely original items was written by the author (WES) for each of the three scales on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire.  The items in each of the three groups were written in accord with the definitions of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation specified earlier.  For each item, the subjects were asked to indicate how much that statement characterized them.  A 5-point Likert scale was used, with each item being scored from 0 to 4:  (0) not at all characteristic of me, (1) slightly characteristic of me, (2) somewhat characteristic of me, (3) moderately characteristic of me, (4) very characteristic of me.  In order to create scale scores, the items assigned to each scale were summed (see the factor analysis results).  Higher scores on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire thus corresponded to greater relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation.

Other Measures

         Social Desirability.  The Crowne-Marlow Social Desirability Scale (1964) measures the extent to which people's responses to self-report instruments are influenced by the tendency to respond in a socially desirable fashion.  Higher scores correspond to a greater tendency to make socially desirable responses on instruments.

         Self-Monitoring.  The Self-Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974) measures the tendency to be aware of one's social surroundings and peoples' reactions to oneself and to modify the impressions one creates in public settings.  Higher scores on this scale indicate greater self-monitoring tendencies.

         Self-Consciousness.  The Self Consciousness Inventory (Fenigstein et al., 1975) measures three attention-related tendencies.  The private self-consciousness subscale measures the chronic tendency to focus on the private, unobservable aspects of oneself.  By contrast, the public self-consciousness subscale measures the tendency to be aware of the public impression that one is creating in the minds of others.  A third subscale on the SCI measures social anxiety, defined as the tendency to feel anxious and nervous in social situations.  Higher scores correspond to greater private self-consciousness, public self-consciousness, and social anxiety.

         Body-Consciousness.  Miller et al. (1981) developed the Body Consciousness Inventory to measure the extent to which people pay attention to the private and public aspects of their physical appearance.  The private body-consciousness subscale measures the chronic tendency to be aware of the internal aspects of one's body, whereas the public body-consciousness subscale was designed to measure the enduring tendency to pay attention to the public, observable aspects of one's physical appearance.  The third subscale, labeled the body-competence subscale, was constructed to measure how strong and graceful people believe that their bodies are.  Higher scores indicate greater private and public body-consciousness and body competence.

         Janis-Field Social Self-esteem Scale.  The Janis-Field Social Self-Esteem Scale (Janis & Field, 1959) is a brief measure of self-esteem in social situations.  Higher scores on this instrument indicate a stronger feeling of adequacy in social settings.

         Love Attitude Scale.  The Love Attitudes Scale (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986) was designed to assess attitudes toward six different love styles:  Eros (passionate love), Ludus (game-playing love), Storge (friendship love), Pragma (practical love), Mania (possessive, dependent love), and Agape (altruistic love).  Higher scores in the present investigations corresponded to greater amounts of each of these respective approaches to love.

         Desperate Love Scale.  Sperling (1985, in press) defined desperate love as marked by urgency, neediness, dependence, need for reciprocation, idealization, and affective extremes.  The Desperate Love Scale is a self-report instrument designed to measure this psychological tendency.  Higher scores corresponded to greater desperate love.

         Relationship Satisfaction.  Hendrick (1988) designed the Relationship Satisfaction Scale to measure the tendency to feel satisfied about one's relationship.  Higher scores on this inventory corresponded to greater relationship satisfaction.

         Clark's Exchange and Communal Orientation Scales.  Clark and her colleagues have developed independent measures of communal and exchange approaches to others (Clark et al., 1987; Clark et al., 1989).  An exchange relationship orientation is defined as one in which benefits are given on the assumption that a similar benefit will be reciprocated.  By contrast, a communal relationship orientation is defined as one in which benefits are given on the assumption that they are in response to some need.  In the present investigation, higher scores indicated a stronger communal and exchange approach to others, respectively.

         Rubin's Liking and Loving Scales.  The Rubin (1970) measure contains two separate scales:  the Liking Scale, which focuses on how favorable people evaluate their partner, and the Loving Scale, which is concerned with people's attachment, caring, and intimacy toward their partner (Rubin, 1973, p. 217).  Higher scores on this measure indicated greater liking and loving, respectively.

         Relationship Items.  Several additional items about the subjects' present, past, and imagined relationships were administered in Sample II and III.  Among the questions were:  (1) are you currently dating someone exclusively (that is, one person and no one else), scored yes = 1 and no = 0; (2) are you currently in a close relationship, scored yes = 1 and no = 0; (3) how many times have you been in love, scored none=0, one = 1, two = 2, three to five = 3, and more than five = 4; (4) are you in love now, scored yes = 1 and no = 0; (5) if you are currently involved in an intimate relationship, how much do you love your partner, scored 0 = do not love at all, 1 = not very much love, 2 = average amount of love, 3 = considerable love, and 4 = very intense and strong love; (6) if you found yourself wanting to find a new partner, how easy or difficult would that be, scored 4 = very easy, 3 = easy, 2 = difficult, and 1 = very difficult; and (7) if you were to find a new partner, how would the new partner compare with your present (or most recent or ideal) partner, scored 1 = worse and 0 = better.

Results

         The results are presented in several separate sections:  (a) the factor analysis results for the items on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire; (b) the results of the reliability analyses conducted on the three RAQ scales; (c) the correlations among the relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation scales; (d) the RAQ results associated with gender, (e) the convergent and discriminant validity information concerning the RAQ; and (f) additional validity information for interpersonal relationships.

Factor Analysis Results

         In order to determine whether the items written for the purpose of measuring relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation would load on three separate factor solutions, the RAQ items were submitted to factor analysis using all the subjects from Samples I, II, and III (N  = 944).  A principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation was conducted.  Since a few items cross-loaded on more than one factor, the analysis was reconducted on the same set of data with these items removed and a three factor rotation was specified (based on a Scree-Test).  As expected, the items written to measure each of the three constructs on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire loaded on their appropriate factor solution.  The factor loadings are presented in Table 1.  The ten items loading on Factor I all dealt with relational-depression (items 2, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17, 20, 22, 25, and 26; eigenvalue = 7.41; percent of variance = 28.5).  Factor II consisted of nine items pertaining to relational-preoccupation (items 3, 6, 9, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, and 30; eigenvalue = 4.59; percent of variance = 17.6).  The third and final factor contained seven items pertaining to relational-esteem (items 1, 4, 5, 13, 19, 28, and 29; eigenvalue = 2.19; percent of variance = 8.4).  Thus, factor analysis provided evidence that the items on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire form three clusters corresponding to the concepts of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation.

Reliability Analyses

         The internal consistency of the three RAQ scales was determined by calculating Cronbach alpha coefficients (all samples combined).  The reliability results are presented in Table 2.  As an inspection of this table indicates, the alpha for the relational-esteem scale was .86.  For the relational-depression scale, the alpha was .90; for the relational-preoccupation scale, the alpha was .86.

         Information on the test-retest reliability of the three RAQ scales was also collected.  The subjects in Sample III were re-administered the RAQ 4 weeks after the initial testing session and again another 4 weeks later.  An inspection of Table 2 indicates that the correlations were substantial in all cases.  In summary, the research evidence indicates that the three RAQ scales have more than adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability, thereby justifying their use in the following analyses.

Correlations Among the Subscales

         The correlations among the relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation scales are also presented in Table 2 (all samples combined).  An inspection of this table indicates that relational-esteem was correlated in a negative direction with relational-depression (r = -.57, p < .005).  Also, it can be seen that relational-preoccupation was positively associated with relational-depression (r = .15, p < .05).

Gender Comparison Results

         A two-group (females and males) MANOVA was conducted on the three RAQ scales to determine whether women and men would report unique levels of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation.  The subjects from Samples I, II, and III were combined and the results are presented in Table 2.  As an inspection of this table indicates, the overall multivariate gender effect was statistically significant, F(3, 911) = 4.99, p < .002.  Univariate analyses revealed a significant gender effect for only the relational-depression scale, F(1, 913) = 11.76, p < .001.  Table 2 reveals that males reported higher levels of relational-depression (M = 11.15) than did females (M = 9.14).  There were no significant differences in men's and women's relational-esteem or relational-preoccupation scores.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the RAQ

         The convergent and discriminant validity of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire was studied by examining the relationship between the three RAQ scales and several other instruments and variables.  (Given the number of correlations reported below and the large number of subjects in the samples, a highly conservative probability level, p < .001, was used to identify interpretable findings.)

         Social Desirability.  To determine whether the responses to the items on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire might be contaminated by the tendency to respond in a socially desirable fashion, the Crowne-Marlow Social Desirability Scale was administered to the subjects in Sample II.  Table 2 shows that none of the correlations between this measure of social desirability and the three RAQ scales were statistically significant.

         Convergent Validity of the RAQ.  Preliminary evidence for the validity of the relational-esteem and relational-preoccupation scales is also presented in Table 2.  As predicted, relational-esteem was positively correlated with self-esteem, r = .30, p < .001, and negatively associated with social anxiety, r = -.28, p < .001.  By contrast, relational-preoccupation was positively related to private self-consciousness, r = .33, p < .001.

         Discriminant Validity of the RAQ.  Table 2 also reveals that all three RAQ scales were unrelated to the measures of self-monitoring and body-competence.  Additionally it can be seen in Table 2 that relational-depression and relational-esteem were unrelated to public and private self-consciousness, as well as unrelated to public and private body-consciousness (using p < .001).  Finally, an inspection of this table also shows that relational-preoccupation was unrelated to private body-consciousness and social anxiety.  In brief, there was considerable evidence for the discriminant validity of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire.

Additional Validity Information

         To the extent that relational-esteem can be thought of as an important aspect of romantic love, then this dispositional tendency should be positively correlated with several features of people's past and current intimate relationships.  The results for several relationship variables are shown in Table 3, and as expected the prediction was generally well supported.
 

         Reported Intimate Experiences.  Relational-esteem was positively related with:  subjects' current involvement in a mutually exclusive close relationship, whether they were currently dating just one person, the number of times they had been in love, and whether they were currently in love.  A similar pattern of statistically significant correlations was also found for the measure of relational-depression, except that the coefficients were negative.

         In addition, Table 3 reveals that among subjects who were engaged in an exclusive dating relationship, relational-depression was negatively correlated with:  the degree of love felt for the partner, whether they believed they could easily find an alternative for their partner, and whether they believed that a replacement for their current partner could compare very favorably.  Among this same group of subjects, relational-esteem was also positively correlated with love for their partners.  By contrast, relational-preoccupation was unrelated to these measures of intimate experiences (using p < .001).

         Interpersonal Orientation and Attraction.  As predicted, the three RAQ scales were related in meaningful ways to the subjects' approach to their close relationships and their intimate partners.  Individuals with higher levels of relational-esteem reported having a stronger preference for a communal approach to intimate relationships and as being more satisfied with their relationships, while also reporting more of an all-giving (agape), romantic (eros) type of love for an intimate partner.  Relational-depression was associated with an opposite pattern of findings, except that individuals with greater relational-depression also reported more game-playing (ludus) and possessive-dependent (mania) love for their intimate partners.  Relational-preoccupation was also related to the subjects' relationship orientation and attraction.  Individuals who described themselves as being obsessed with intimate relationships reported a greater degree of both desperate love and dependent love (mania) for an intimate partner.

         Table 3 also indicates that, as predicted, relational-esteem and relational-depression were strongly related to Rubin's measures of interpersonal attraction for an intimate partner.  Relational-esteem was positively related and relational-depression was negatively related to the amount of love and liking that the subjects felt toward an intimate partner.  By contrast, relational-preoccupation was unrelated to liking and loving for a partner (using p < .001).

Discussion

         The purpose of the present research program was to construct and validate an objective self-report instrument, the Relational Assessment Questionnaire, designed to measure three aspects of the self-concept that are associated with women's and men's intimate relationships:  relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relationship-preoccupation.  Factor analyses confirmed that the items on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire cluster into three groups corresponding to the three a priori  defined concepts.  The findings also revealed that all three scales possess clearly acceptable levels of internal consistency and stability.  Other results showed that relational-esteem was negatively correlated with relational-depression.  This findings is consistent with the intuitive notion that esteem and depression should be inversely related, whether they are discussed within the context of human affect, human relationships, or the self-concept.  However, this negative association was quite strong and as such one has to wonder whether relational-esteem and relational-depression are separate, distinct constructs versus opposite anchors on a single conceptual continuum.  We would argue tentatively for the former view since a few unique findings for each separate scale were found in the present investigation.  Clearly, however, there is a need for additional research which addresses this issue.

         In addition to the relational-esteem and relational-depression results, the present investigation showed that relational-preoccupation was positively correlated with relational-depression.  This finding is somewhat intriguing because it suggests that when people negatively evaluate the quality of their relationship involvement, they also tend to report that their thoughts dwell on relationship issues (cf. Collins & Clark, 1989).  Perhaps this intense relationship focus occurs as they attempt to find ways of resolving relationship disappointments (cf. Harvey et al., 1978).  These ideas, however, are entirely speculative and warrant future evaluation.

         The present investigation also provided preliminary evidence for the validity for the three scales on the Relational Assessment Questionnaire.  People who perceived themselves as more self-confident and self-assured about their relationship potential (i.e., those with higher scores on the relational-esteem scale) were found to have a highly devoted and involved approach to their intimate relationships.  In particular, people with greater relational-esteem reported that they were currently in a short-term dating relationship, or else that they were currently involved in a committed relationship with only one person and that they were in love with this individual.  Moreover, those with greater relational-esteem also reported being highly satisfied with their relationships, arrangements which were based on a communal rather than an exchange orientation.  Additionally, relational-esteem was found to be positively associated with a romantic, all-giving approach to loving a partner (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986; Woll, 1989).  Overall, these results paint a picture of individuals with higher relational-esteem as clearly taking an interactive, involved, and caring approach to an intimate relationship.

         Further evidence for the validity of the Relational Assessment Questionnaire was provided in the analyses involving gender.  Several findings indicated, for example, that although women and men reported comparable amounts of relational-esteem and relational-preoccupation, men indicated that they viewed themselves as more depressed about their intimate relationships than did women.  While this finding might seem at first glance to be surprising in light of some of the gender findings related to depressive affect (Newmann, 1984, 1986; Nolen-Hoeksema, 1987), it may in fact reflect some of the relationship changes associated with contemporary males.  Perhaps more and more contemporary males are beginning to notice the relationship benefits they forsake when they choose to pursue achievement and careers in an obsessive fashion, and this in turn may be fostering an increase in feelings of depression about their relationships.  To examine some of these ideas, research is currently underway in our own research laboratory to determine whether gender-related traits and behaviors differentially predict men's and women's levels of relational-depression.

         In light of this preliminary evidence for its reliability and validity, the Relational Assessment Questionnaire would appear to be a useful instrument for future research dealing with intimate relationships (Brehm, 1985; Hendrick & Hendrick, 1983; Kelley, Berscheid, Christensen, et al., 1983).  Snell, Hampton, and McManus (1992), for example, have shown that individuals with greater relational-esteem are more willing to discuss a variety of relational topics with a male psychological counselor.  This multicomponent measure of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation could be used to investigate a variety of questions about men's and women's close relationships (cf. Hatfield, Utne, & Traupman, 1979; Perlman & Duck, 1987; Kelley, Berscheid, et al., 1983).  For example, future work might examine the influence of relational-esteem, relational-depression, and relational-preoccupation on marital intimacy and stability.  Within this context, a more insightful picture of marriage might be gained by examining whether these aspects of the self differentially relate to assessment instruments such as the Waring Intimacy Questionnaire (Waring, 1984), a measure of marital affection, cohesion, conflict resolution, compatibility, expressiveness, sexuality, autonomy, and identity.  It seems likely that relational-esteem might predict some aspects of marital adjustment.

References

Antill, J. K.  (1983).  Sex role complementarity versus similarity in married couples.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 145-155.

Beck, A. T.  (1976).  Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders.  New York:  Meridian.

Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J.  (1961).  An inventory for measuring depression.  Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561-571.

Bem. S. L.  (1974).  The measurement of psychological androgyny.  Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.

Brehm, S. S.  (1985).  Intimate relationships.  New York:  Random House.

Bringle, R. G., & Evenbeck, S.  (1979).  The state of jealousy as a dispositional characteristic.  In M. Cook & G. Wilson (Eds.), Love and attraction.  Oxford:  Pergamon Press.

Buunk, B.  (1982).  Anticipated sexual jealousy:  Its relationship to self-esteem, dependency, and reciprocity.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 310-316.

Christensen, D.  (1982).  The relationship between self-consciousness and interpersonal effectiveness and a new scale to measure individual differences in self-consciousness.  Journal of Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 177-188.

Clark, M.S., Ouellette, R., Powell, M.C., & Milberg, S.  (1987).  Recipient's mood, relationship type, and helping.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53,  94-103.

Clark, M. S., Taraban, C., Ho, J., & Wesner, K.  (1989).  A measure of exchange orientation.  Unpublished manuscript, Carnegie Mellon University.

Collins, J. E., & Clark, L. E.  (1989).  Responsibility and rumination:  The trouble with understanding the dissolution of a relationship.  Social Cognition, 7, 152-173.

Crowne, D. P., & Marlow, D.  (1964)  The approval motive:  Studies in evaluative dependence.  Hillsdale, NJ:  Erlbaum.

Dion, K. L., & Dion, K. K.  (1973).  Correlates of romantic love.  Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, 51-56.

Dion, K. L., & Dion, K. K.  (1975).  Self-esteem and romantic love.  Journal of Personality, 43, 39-57.

Duck, S., & Perlman, D.  (Eds).  (1985).  Understanding personal relationships:  An interdisciplinary approach.  London:  Sage.

Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A.  (1975).  Public and private self-consciousness:  Assessment and theory.  Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522-527.

Fitts, W. H.  (1965).  A manual for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.  Nashville, TN:  Counselor Recordings and Tests.

Glick, I. O., Weiss, R., & Parkes, C. M.  (1974).  The first year of bereavement.  New York:  Wiley.

Harvey, J. H., Wells, G. L., & Alvarez, M. D.  (1978).  Attribution in the context of conflict and separation in close relationships.  In J. H. Harvey, W. J. Ickes, & R. F. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attributional research (Vol. 2).  Hillsdale, N.J.:  Erlbaum.

Hatfield, E., Utne, M. K., & Traupmann, J.  (1979).  Equity theory and intimate relationships.  In R. L. Burgess & T. L. Huston (Eds.),  Social exchange in developing relationships.  New York:  Academic Press.

Hendrick, S.  (1988).  A generic measure of relationship satisfaction.  Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 93-98.

Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S.  (1983).  Liking, loving, and relating.  Monterey, California:  Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S.  (1986).  A theory and method of love.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 392-402.

Ickes, W.  (1985).  Sex-role influences on compatibility in relationships.  In W. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and incompatible relationships.  New York:  Springer-Verlag.

Jacobs, L. E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E.  (1971).  Self-esteem and attraction.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 84-91.

James, W.  (1963).  The principles of psychology.  New York:  Holt, Rinehart & Winston.  (Original work published in 1890)

Janis, I., & Field, P.  (1959).  Sex differences and personality factors related to persuasibility.  In C. Hovland, & I. Janis (Eds.),  Personality and persuasibility.  New Haven, CN:  Yale University Press.

Kelley, H. H., Berscheid, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J. H., Huston, T. L., Levinger, G., McClintock, E., Peplau, L. A., & Peterson, D. R.  (Eds.).  (1983).  Close relationships.  New York:  W. H. Freeman and Company.

Kelley, K., & Rolker-Dolinsky, B.  (1987).  The psychosexology of female initiation and dominance.  In D. Perlman & S. Duck  (Eds.), Intimate relationships:  Development, dynamics, and deterioration.  Newbury Park:  Sage Publication.

Kiesler, S. B., & Baral, R. L.  (1970).  The secret for a romantic partner:  The effects of self-esteem and physical attractiveness on romantic behavior.  In K. J. Gergen & D. Marlove (Eds.), Personality and social behavior.  Reading, Mass.:  Addison-Wesley.

Major, B., & Adams, J. B.  (1983).  Role of gender, interpersonal orientation, and self-presentation in distributive-justice behavior.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,  45, 598-608.

Markus, H.  (1977).  Self-schemata and processing information about the self.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.

Marsh, H. W.  (1986).  Global self-esteem:  Its relation to specific facets of self-concept and their importance.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1224-1236.

Marsh, H. W., Barnes, J., & Hocevar, D.  (1985).  Self-other agreement on multidimensional self-concept ratings:  Factor analysis and multitrait-multimethod analysis.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1360-1377.

Marsh, H. W., & O'Niell, R.  (1984).  Self-Description Questionnaire III (SDQ-III):  The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late-adolescents.  Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 153-174.

Marsh, H. W., & Richards, G. E.  (1988).  Tennessee Self Concept Scale:  Reliability, internal structure, and construct validity.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 612-624.

Marsh, H. W., & Shavelson, R. J.  (1985).  Self-concept:  Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure.  Educational Psychologist, 20, 107-125.

McAdams, D. P.  (1985).  Power, intimacy, and the life story:  Personological inquiries into identify.  Homewood, IL:  Dorsey Press.

McAdams, D. P., & Constantian, C. A.  (1983).  Intimacy and affiliation motives in daily living:  An experience sampling analysis.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 851-861.

McAdams, D. P., & Losoff, M.  (1984).  Friendship motivation in fourth and sixth graders:  A thematic analysis.  Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 11-27.

Miller, L. C., Murphy, R., & Buss, A.  (1981).  Consciousness of body:  Private and public.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 397-406.

Newmann, J. P.  (1984).  Sex differences in symptoms of depression:  Clinical disorder or normal distress.  Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 25, 136-159.

Newmann, J. P.  (1986).  Gender, life strains, and depression.  Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 27, 161-178.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S.  (1987).  Sex differences in unipolar depression:  Evidence and theory.  Psychological Bulletin, 101, 259-282.

Oatley, K., & Bolton, W.  (1985).  A social-cognitive theory of depression in reaction to life events.  Psychological Review, 92, 372-388.

Perlman, D., & Duck, S.  (1987).  Intimate relationships:  Development, dynamics, and deterioration.  Newbury Park:  Sage Publication.

Rubin, Z.  (1973).  Liking and loving.  New York:  Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Rubin, Z.  (1970).  Measurement of romantic love.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16,  265-273.

Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C.  (1976).  Validation of construct interpretations.  Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.

Shavelson, R. J., & Marsh, H. W.  (1986).  On the structure of self-concept.  In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Anxiety and cognitions  (pp. 305-330).  Hillsdale, NJ:  Erlbaum.

Snell, W. E., Jr., Hampton, B. R., & McManus, P.  (1992).  The impact of counselor and participant gender on willingness to discuss relational topics:  Development of the Relationship Disclosure Scale.  Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 409-416.

Snyder, M.  (1974).  Self-monitoring of expressive behavior.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526-537.

Snyder, M.  (1987).  Public appearances:  Private realities.  New York:  W. H. Freeman and Company.

Snyder, M., & Simpson, J. A.  (1984).  Self-monitoring and dating relationships.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1281-1291.

Snyder, M., & Simpson, J. A.  (1987).  Orientations toward romantic relationships.  In D. Perlman, & S. Duck (Eds.), Intimate relationships.  Newbury Park, CA:  Sage.

Spence, J. T.  (1984).  Masculinity, femininity, and gender-related traits:  A conceptual analysis and critique of current research.  In B. A. Maher, & W. B. Maher (Eds.), Progress in experimental personality research  (Vol. 13).  New York:  Academic Press.

Sperling, M. B.  (1985).  Discriminant measures for desperate love.  Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 324-328.

Sperling, M. B.  (in press).  Phenomenology and developmental origins of desperate love.  Psychoanalysis and Contemporary  Thought.

Sprecher, S., & Hatfield, E.  (1982).  Self-esteem and romantic attraction:  Four experiments.  Recherches de Psychologie Sociale, 4, 61-81.

Suls, J.  (Ed.)  (1982).  Psychological perspective on the self  (Vol. 1).  Hillsdale, NJ:  Erlbaum.

Swap, W. C., & Rubin, J. Z.  (1983).  Measurement of interpersonal orientation.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 635-642.

Walster, E.  (1965).  The effect of self-esteem on romantic liking.  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 184-197.

Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Traupmann, J.  (1978).  Equity and premarital sex.  Journal of Personality, 36, 82-92.

Waring, E. M.  (1984).  The measurement of marital intimacy.  Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 10, 185-192.

White, G. L.  (1981a).  A model of romantic jealousy.  Motivation and Emotion, 5, 295-310.

White, G. L.  (1981b).  Some correlates of romantic jealousy.  Journal of Personality, 49, 129-147.

Wicklund, R. A.  (1975).  Objective self-awareness.  In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology  (Vol. 8).  New York:  Academic Press.

Woll, S. B.  (1989).  Personality and relationship correlates of loving styles.  Journal of Research in Personality, 23, 480-505.